I could never understand why Tiffany killed Arthur. It was extremely cruel. He was her only friend, who really wanted to protect her (I'm not justifying the means he was using). She didn't have to help him in the shooting. But after she killed him for no reason, I could only see her as a negative character.
Just going to put this out there. The first time he "protected" her, he ignored her requests and ended up hurting a teacher. He did not listen to what she wanted. He saw her as an avatar for his own quest for revenge against his and Ben's bullies. He might have cared for her as a friend, but he DID NOT LISTEN, and more importantly, HE BLAMED HER FOR NOT REPORTING. He did not have empathy for her or her situation with her mother. He knew he f***ed up after he said it, but he seemingly didn't follow up to apologize for real or try to understand why what he said was wrong. Something I learned after I was SA'd: even if you advocate for reporting, even if you've been a staunch feminist all of your life, when something like that happens to you? And it requires publicly rehashing one of the worst experiences in your life, telling your parents, knowing that they might not be supportive? No one, and I mean NO ONE can understand what you are putting on the line by reporting. In my case, I was traumatized worse than the original event because my hearing was dragged out for so long and new Title IX rules meant I had to interact with him vis-a-vis for eight hours straight. Turns out, not even reliving the worst event in my life for months on end was enough for the hearing officers. The only reason I actually reported was because my friends reminded me that he could go on to hurt others, and that I should do it for those who could be hurt in the future. That's a noble impulse, but it ignores the person who is hurting now and doesn't even feel ready to sit down in therapy. How can you shit on that person for choosing not to expose her pain to a crowd? When Arthur walked into the room, he called her "girl with spaghetti for a spine." He doesn't apologize or empathize. He insults her. In front of her rapist. He offers her a gun, his solution to her problem. He doesn't want her to deal with her rape at her own pace; he wants her to take revenge now. When Ani takes too long, he does it himself. It wasn't about letting her choose to hurt Dean, it was always about Arthur getting revenge. He was just using Ani as justification for his own need for revenge. This isn't me trying to rage against people who want to protect their friends, but I want you all to know: if your friend has been assaulted, LET THEM DECIDE WHAT TO DO. Even if that means not reporting in the moment, even if that means "letting the person get away with it," because nothing hurts more than thinking the worst has already happened and finding out that the legal system has crueler ways to hurt you.
Interesting comment! Simply put, it disappointed people who liked the idea of revenge on the rapist, implying their was something noble in the act of terror. She actually did the right thing, but it's not what some people wanted for sure. It was a strong plot twist. In a sense, it seemed she was heroic by choice, only to be demonized.
The idea that drunk teenage boys should have total control over their actions is ridiculous, WTH do you think is going to happen in those situations where there is no adult supervision and young girls want to rebel? Absolutely no accountability whatsoever.
I think it’s ridiculous you wouldn’t agree with holding a bunch of 16 year olds accountable for gang raping a 14 year old. (Which is what happens in the reviewed film) Drunk or not it’s still a crime. If you are committing a crime (like underage drinking) doesn’t mean you don’t deserve any form of lawful protection, that’s like saying if you Jaywalk then you deserve to get killed by a car and all drivers shouldn’t take any responsibility or reasonable steps to stop anyone being hurt, and if they deliberately aim there car towards the Jaywalker to hurt them then they shouldn’t be held accountable. But going by your point if they were driving under the influence and they were teenagers they just get a free pass? Even if they hurt/kill someone on the road? Would you give a free pass to drunk teenage boys for Vandalising/ breaking into and robbing your home because they happened to walk past while there wasn’t adult supervision and they were drinking? I don’t think you would.
Wow this is brilliant and intelligent review of the film. I completely agree with all your points about it- particularly the ending!!!!
I agree, also on the last point. But I admid I really like this movie, I rarely see a woman story portrait so well.
I may destroy you had similar themes and was very well written
It was nuanced which is what makes a good ( thought and discussion provoking) film.
Excellent breakdown!
Great work with this video!
I could never understand why Tiffany killed Arthur. It was extremely cruel. He was her only friend, who really wanted to protect her (I'm not justifying the means he was using). She didn't have to help him in the shooting. But after she killed him for no reason, I could only see her as a negative character.
Just going to put this out there. The first time he "protected" her, he ignored her requests and ended up hurting a teacher. He did not listen to what she wanted. He saw her as an avatar for his own quest for revenge against his and Ben's bullies. He might have cared for her as a friend, but he DID NOT LISTEN, and more importantly, HE BLAMED HER FOR NOT REPORTING. He did not have empathy for her or her situation with her mother. He knew he f***ed up after he said it, but he seemingly didn't follow up to apologize for real or try to understand why what he said was wrong.
Something I learned after I was SA'd: even if you advocate for reporting, even if you've been a staunch feminist all of your life, when something like that happens to you? And it requires publicly rehashing one of the worst experiences in your life, telling your parents, knowing that they might not be supportive? No one, and I mean NO ONE can understand what you are putting on the line by reporting. In my case, I was traumatized worse than the original event because my hearing was dragged out for so long and new Title IX rules meant I had to interact with him vis-a-vis for eight hours straight. Turns out, not even reliving the worst event in my life for months on end was enough for the hearing officers.
The only reason I actually reported was because my friends reminded me that he could go on to hurt others, and that I should do it for those who could be hurt in the future. That's a noble impulse, but it ignores the person who is hurting now and doesn't even feel ready to sit down in therapy. How can you shit on that person for choosing not to expose her pain to a crowd?
When Arthur walked into the room, he called her "girl with spaghetti for a spine." He doesn't apologize or empathize. He insults her. In front of her rapist. He offers her a gun, his solution to her problem. He doesn't want her to deal with her rape at her own pace; he wants her to take revenge now. When Ani takes too long, he does it himself. It wasn't about letting her choose to hurt Dean, it was always about Arthur getting revenge. He was just using Ani as justification for his own need for revenge.
This isn't me trying to rage against people who want to protect their friends, but I want you all to know: if your friend has been assaulted, LET THEM DECIDE WHAT TO DO. Even if that means not reporting in the moment, even if that means "letting the person get away with it," because nothing hurts more than thinking the worst has already happened and finding out that the legal system has crueler ways to hurt you.
Interesting comment! Simply put, it disappointed people who liked the idea of revenge on the rapist, implying their was something noble in the act of terror. She actually did the right thing, but it's not what some people wanted for sure. It was a strong plot twist. In a sense, it seemed she was heroic by choice, only to be demonized.
Facts.
The idea that drunk teenage boys should have total control over their actions is ridiculous, WTH do you think is going to happen in those situations where there is no adult supervision and young girls want to rebel? Absolutely no accountability whatsoever.
I think it’s ridiculous you wouldn’t agree with holding a bunch of 16 year olds accountable for gang raping a 14 year old. (Which is what happens in the reviewed film)
Drunk or not it’s still a crime.
If you are committing a crime (like underage drinking) doesn’t mean you don’t deserve any form of lawful protection, that’s like saying if you Jaywalk then you deserve to get killed by a car and all drivers shouldn’t take any responsibility or reasonable steps to stop anyone being hurt, and if they deliberately aim there car towards the Jaywalker to hurt them then they shouldn’t be held accountable.
But going by your point if they were driving under the influence and they were teenagers they just get a free pass?
Even if they hurt/kill someone on the road?
Would you give a free pass to drunk teenage boys for Vandalising/ breaking into and robbing your home because they happened to walk past while there wasn’t adult supervision and they were drinking?
I don’t think you would.
The idea of you being so stupid is ridiculous, didn’t you see the movie? Didn’t you learn anything?