We, The Infected

metoo wrote:I happened to come across this movie, which has some relevance to the discussion:

That in turns reminds me of a piece of dialogue spoken by Charlotte Gainsborough's character in "The Cement Garden: ETA: It's "Cement Garden", not "Concrete Garden". Gettin' old...

gymmy64 wrote:

metoo wrote:I happened to come across this movie, which has some relevance to the discussion:

That in turns reminds me of a piece of dialogue spoken by Charlotte Gainsborough's character in "The Concrete Garden:

Another great clip.

Is the movie it's from good?

Alice?Maybe wrote:In LMI I find the use gratuitous as misogyny, attitudes about girls, is not a theme that is being furthered.

I don't understand this sentence.

sauvin wrote:

Alice?Maybe wrote:In LMI I find the use gratuitous as misogyny, attitudes about girls, is not a theme that is being furthered.

I don't understand this sentence.

Fair enough. I'll try again and try to be a bit clearer, if I don't succeed that's my fault.

The boys taunting Owen, Kenny, the tree with "little girl" indicates a negative view of girls as compared to boys. This attitude is misogynistic of them. Misogyny, negative attitude/view of girls, is not a theme Reeves is developing. So, the use of "little girl" as a taunt, slur does not further an anti misogyny theme. It appears, to me, to only be used to make the bullies all the more vile. This could have been accomplished by any number of other taunts, insults. Therefore the use of "little girl" as a taunt is gratuitous as it does nothing to further the themes of the film in and of itself, IMO.

Hope I did better this time. If not my apologies. I am repeating myself and not furthering the conversation, I'd like to avoid that. I can be trying enough without endless repetition

Alice?Maybe wrote:The boys taunting Owen, Kenny, the tree with "little girl" indicates a negative view of girls as compared to boys. This attitude is misogynistic of them. Misogyny, negative attitude/view of girls, is not a theme Reeves is developing. So, the use of "little girl" as a taunt, slur does not further an anti misogyny theme. It appears, to me, to only be used to make the bullies all the more vile. This could have been accomplished by any number of other taunts, insults. Therefore the use of "little girl" as a taunt is gratuitous as it does nothing to further the themes of the film in and of itself, IMO.

From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 [gcide]:

Misogyny \Mi*sog"y*ny\ (m[i^]*s[o^]j"[i^]*n[y^]; 277), n. [Gr.
misogyni`a: cf. F. misogynie.]
Hatred of women. Contrast {misandry}. --Johnson.
[1913 Webster]

From WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) [wn]:

misogyny
n 1: hatred of women [syn: {misogyny}, {misogynism}] [ant:
{philogyny}]

Do you really think calling a boy a girl constitutes or is indicative of a hatred of women?

Alice?Maybe wrote:Fair enough. I'll try again and try to be a bit clearer, if I don't succeed that's my fault.

The boys taunting Owen, Kenny, the tree with "little girl" indicates a negative view of girls as compared to boys. This attitude is misogynistic of them. Misogyny, negative attitude/view of girls, is not a theme Reeves is developing. So, the use of "little girl" as a taunt, slur does not further an anti misogyny theme.

It appears, to me, to only be used to make the bullies all the more vile. This could have been accomplished by any number of other taunts, insults.

Therefore the use of "little girl" as a taunt is gratuitous as it does nothing to further the themes of the film in and of itself, IMO.

Hope I did better this time. If not my apologies. I am repeating myself and not furthering the conversation, I'd like to avoid that. I can be trying enough without endless repetition

I think you've made your point quite logically. And I agree with you. I'm also a bit ashamed that I didn't pick up on this without your help.

PeteMork wrote:
I think you've made your point quite logically. And I agree with you. I'm also a bit ashamed that I didn't pick up on this without your help.

No need to be ashamed. I have a tendency to write long, convoluted sentences.

Alice?Maybe wrote:

gymmy64 wrote: That in turns reminds me of a piece of dialogue spoken by Charlotte Gainsborough's character in "The Concrete Garden:

Another great clip.

Is the movie it's from good?

It was generally well reviewed at the time. Some have found the film disturbing and/or slow, but I think it's worth a look.

gymmy64 wrote:

Alice?Maybe wrote:

gymmy64 wrote: That in turns reminds me of a piece of dialogue spoken by Charlotte Gainsborough's character in "The Concrete Garden:

Another great clip.

Is the movie it's from good?

It was generally well reviewed at the time. Some have found the film disturbing and/or slow, but I think it's worth a look.

I like disturbing, it challenges my thinking and understanding. I found LMI quite disturbing on several levels. The very fact of a 12 year old vampire, for one. The relationship between Abby and Thomas and by extension Abby's relationship with Owen has disturbing elements. It disturbs me and I loved it for it.

Your list almost matches mine. Under 'disturbing' I have to add what I think is an absolute horror of the nights - uncountable - of her sitting there awake by herself. To my mind that is a chasm which I cannot understand. I've only been around for a handful of decades. She's been around for potentially much longer than that. I spend my day interacting with all sorts. She gets a few hours with Thomas, and now a couple hours with Owen. But after that, they're asleep and she is left alone, alone with her daemon, her thoughts, her memories, ... for a 12 yr old I cannot imagine the torment.

And another disturbing element is that she dispatches Thomas. That leaves me very unsettled and worried about Owen and the outcome of his future with her. In my many attempts to pry aspects of 'Who Is Abby' from the clues in the movie, this is one that leaves my worried.