Night thought

[DubiousComforts]

:he's the guy who discovered that the state an object is in depends largely upon the observer. I have to wonder what his thoughts would be on Helen Cooper just lying there to be stabbed by her undead daughter without defending herself. Well, I specifically said originally that Ben was too strong for suicide..... I know. These thread too often become easily sidetracked. I'm shocked it hasn't been mentioned that Ben would have called the suicide prevention hotline except for the phone being "dead out."

[SymphonicX]

you have missed the point entirely. let me lay this out for you again: people draw their own conclusions from the motivations of characters. those conclusions are independent from the original intent of the presenter of the work nor do they, in many cases, reflect the key intent of the presenter because in most cases, we don't know what that intent is/was. therefore, and again, the conclusion of any one viewer will be independent from the conclusion drawn by another because the original meaning or intent of the presenter isn't known. in other words: you and i could both view the same movie, at the same time and arrive at totally different conclusions as to the motivations of the characters because we do not know what the intent of the presenter is. our observations would be totally independent of one another and would neither confirm nor deny anything about the characters because the intent of the presenter is unknown. therein lies the fallacy of applying fictional conclusions to outside situations. You're right but I think it's a bit cynical. We can still apply these thoughts simply for the enjoyment of assessing and comparing our humanity to the situation that was presented in this film and seeing how that ascribes to the character's actions - no matter how scripted or false they may be - the very fact that people take the actions of the characters as believable in a real context is testament to the strong writing of Romero/Russo in Night.

[Mike70]

You're right but I think it's a bit cynical. me, cynical? perish the thought.

[Trin]

Yeah, Mike, where does that leave us? We watch movies and cannot hope to understand why characters take the actions they do because their motivations are scripted and the intent of the artist is unknown to us? The characters still have to be plausible, with actions that stem from motivations, and with motivations that are at least somewhat discernible. I'm not giving the storyteller that out. The setting is scripted too - so what? We still expect the world to remain plausible within the suspension of disbelief. @dubious - I'm cool with watching documentaries to get a better understanding of movies, but I have to apply some harsh thinking here. If I *have* to watch a documentatary to *get* the movie then that's a fail. And, for the record, I don't think Night has that failing. @philly - I was not being sarcastic so much as I was pointing out that the same set of wild assumptions could apply to Cooper in the cellar and his overall mindset. I also seriously question the assuption that Ben could hear what the posse was saying. The man was in a cellar a reasonable distance away. Hearing gunshots yes. Dog barks, okay. Voices yelling, sure. But individual words? Things said between the sheriff and possse members? Hmmmmm.... I doubt it.

[Philly_SWAT]

I also seriously question the assuption that Ben could hear what the posse was saying. The man was in a cellar a reasonable distance away. Hearing gunshots yes. Dog barks, okay. Voices yelling, sure. But individual words? Things said between the sheriff and possse members? Hmmmmm.... I doubt it. Well, I think it is safe to say that Ben was being pretty quiet inside the house. Yet Vince (the guy who actually shoots Ben) says to the Sheriff "There's something in there, I heard a noise". It seems pretty evident that the posse outside was MUCH louder than Ben inside, yet someone heard Ben inside. Therefore it only makes sense that Ben could hear them.

[SymphonicX]

I think that's just an error really....look at the physics of where they were and it doesn't add up...Ben would'nt have heard them and they wouldn't have heard ben unless he started re-hammering the doors and windows shut...

[jded]

That all sounds like a fancy way of saying that character motivations don't have to make sense if the greater artistic vision of the director/storyteller is upheld. This is what I felt in a way, that it was left up to us on purpose to share the responsibility in molding our definitions of some characters. This is fine because as a viewer I like to make my own decision as to why. I don't have to have a 100% fleshed out character description on everything from birth to present, but when it comes to how this or that affected them I need some help while I'm viewing. therein lies the fallacy of applying fictional conclusions to outside situations. Don't we do this every single day in real life? Yes you can call them reality based conclusions but sometimes we have creative imaginations that lead us astray, embellish the facts, or miss the real completely. I mentioned this earlier but I'll say it again. What if Ben's attention was so engrossed by some other fascinating object outside the house that he did not notice the posse?

[octo7]

it was barbara being spit-roasted by her brother and skeletal father?

[FoodFight]

Mike nailed it. Even today I was reading on another board about women serving on U.S. submarines when someone invoked 'G.I. Jane'. I hope it was intended as a joke, but shudder to think that they were serious. that's where we differ. i like fiction to be open to interpretation, the reason why night is such a good movie for me is the moral ambiguity that goes on, same reason i am a huge fan of the likes of david lynch and kubrick. i like to interpret films my own way. for me its about the fiction and the world its based in, not the intention of its creator. Actually, we don't differ much on this subject. A story will be altered by the direction it receives from the director and the interpretation from the actors themselves. Hell, even the mood you are in has some bearing on how you view film. A recent interview with Tarantino shows that he gives a great deal of leeway in the elements that a given actor brings to their characters. Ultimately it's what the viewer sees, but it is tempered by the efforts of people that bring the film to life.

[Trin]

Well, I think it is safe to say that Ben was being pretty quiet inside the house. Yet Vince (the guy who actually shoots Ben) says to the Sheriff "There's something in there, I heard a noise". It seems pretty evident that the posse outside was MUCH louder than Ben inside, yet someone heard Ben inside. Therefore it only makes sense that Ben could hear them. I thought that the posse heard Ben as he unbarred and opened the cellar door, which did make noise and was on the same level as the posse with nothing to obstruct the sound. Whereas Ben was supposed to have heard them while still sitting on the cellar floor with the door closed, etc. And, remember, it's not in question whether Ben heard them or not. What is in question is whether he heard them well enough to assess their intent and capabilities. All character motivation and racial conjecture aside - I would've done EXACTLY what Ben did in the same situation. If I were to change what Ben did I would've been MORE cautious, not less. There's no way I'm rushing out of the cellar making any noise at all if I can help it.

[DubiousComforts]

@dubious - I'm cool with watching documentaries to get a better understanding of movies, but I have to apply some harsh thinking here. If I *have* to watch a documentatary to *get* the movie then that's a fail. And, for the record, I don't think Night has that failing. Though my suggestion wasn't purely altruistic , I never said that one need watch a documentary in order to "get" NIGHT. However, after seven pages of conjecture on this one scene that lasts under two minutes, it's safe to assume it would be at the very least interesting and quite possibly insightful to hear further comments from the folks that participated in the making of the film.