I thought this movie rocked. It was interesting the way it was put together, though. Lots and lots of dialog. Basically just 2 characters in one house. It wouldn't fly at all without good actors, but it was still interesting as a script.
What did you think of Hard Candy??? SPOILER WARNING
- Thread starter Celia Cyanide
- Start date
i haven't seen it yet, but i'm dying to. i'll have to avoid this thread now cuz i'm afraid of spoilers, but i'm glad you enjoyed it.
Freaky-co-deaky. I'm planning to watch that tonight. I rented it from Lovefilm.com and the serial number is 3285927 - no, really! I have it in my hand right now, look see!
Well... I didn't love it.
The acting was extraordinary, no doubt about it. But I didn't believe in any of it and I thought such a serious subject matter deserved something less exploitative and glossy.
I'd recommend it for the performances but I don't think it really works otherwise.
Sorry!
The acting was extraordinary, no doubt about it. But I didn't believe in any of it and I thought such a serious subject matter deserved something less exploitative and glossy.
I'd recommend it for the performances but I don't think it really works otherwise.
Sorry!
It was definitely interesting. It creeped me out, and should do for internet dating what Jaws did for swimmimg..lol
You could say it was a bit far-fetched, but with some of the things I hear everyday online and in the news, im wondering just how far-fetched it is.
You could say it was a bit far-fetched, but with some of the things I hear everyday online and in the news, im wondering just how far-fetched it is.
clock_work9 said:
I'd like to hear more about this. Can you elaborate on what you thought was exploitive and glossy?
Oh, and mods, could you put a "SPOILER WARNING" in this subject header? I'd really like to talk about this film, and how the screenplay worked, and I don't want to ruin it for anyone.
billythrilly7th
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
- Messages
- 6,965
- Reaction score
- 3,051
I saw this a while back and while I didn't love it, I didn't hate it either.
The main downside for me was the actress.
To me there is something incredibly irritating about Teenagers who think they know it all. Now this is a personal thing and I'm sure it won't detract anyone else.
Because there's essentially two characters in the whole thing the fact that one of them irritated me dragged it down in my estimation.
The other thing is the camera direction. For the most part, it's good. Nothing terribly impressive, nothing that stands out. The way camera work should be.
But there are sequences where the director seems to be trying too hard to be Artisitic. The result is stylised tracking shots that jump of the screen and scream "Look at me, I'm Avant Garde!"
The only other thing is the end, but that's mostly because I didn't like her character.
If you've read through all that rambling, I think you deserve a rep point.
The main downside for me was the actress.
To me there is something incredibly irritating about Teenagers who think they know it all. Now this is a personal thing and I'm sure it won't detract anyone else.
Because there's essentially two characters in the whole thing the fact that one of them irritated me dragged it down in my estimation.
The other thing is the camera direction. For the most part, it's good. Nothing terribly impressive, nothing that stands out. The way camera work should be.
But there are sequences where the director seems to be trying too hard to be Artisitic. The result is stylised tracking shots that jump of the screen and scream "Look at me, I'm Avant Garde!"
The only other thing is the end, but that's mostly because I didn't like her character.
If you've read through all that rambling, I think you deserve a rep point.
Bmwhtly said:
I can't say I don't agree. However, I liked the way the character was portrayed, because that is how a lot of girls that age act. The scene in which she reads that silly email she wanted to send to Jeff's ex was great, because it sounds the way most 14 year olds are usually portrayed. Of course, when you read their myspace blogs and blurbs, they may sound a bit silly, but that's because their writing skills are not developed enough to express themselves adequately. Having said that, teens who think they know it all are annoying. But neither one of the characters is supposed to be likeable. Ellen Page was excellent.
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
- Messages
- 6,965
- Reaction score
- 3,051
You are very probably quite correct, an accurate portrayal. But I can't help but wonder if another actress had played it, would she have been bearable.
It's one thing to have an accurate portrayal of an irritating character. But when that Character is literally half of the film, it needs to be carefully thought about.
But maybe it's just me,
It's one thing to have an accurate portrayal of an irritating character. But when that Character is literally half of the film, it needs to be carefully thought about.
But maybe it's just me,
I thought that was one thing that made it effective--the girl was an irritating character, and the pedophile child murderer was a nice, pleasant guy.
And dude, don't I get a rep point?
Seriously, though, that was hardly rambling. It was what I was hoping to hear from people, actually.
And dude, don't I get a rep point?
Seriously, though, that was hardly rambling. It was what I was hoping to hear from people, actually.
Major Spoilers here...
Well. I do agree that although the acting was first-rate, I'm afraid I just didn't find anyone to root for in this film. Jeff was pretty early established as a bit of a monster - nice enough but clearly into bad things and the girl... I didn't believe at all that a fourteen year old (even a super-smart one) could pull off something like this. I thought she was intolerably sanctimonious and clearly damaged goods and as Bm said, a tad annoying.
But as to the film being explotative and glossy... I just felt that such an important subject matter needed something more than a stylish revenge flick. I don't think it really said anything important about paedophilia and that it had such a thing as its central theme simply because it could. In that way, the paedophilia element could have easily been replaced with any other issue-du-jour be it infedility, terrorism, drug, alcohol or even animal abuse and the film would have been largely the same. I'm not saying the film was wrong for choosing to explore paedophilia, not at all, I think it's an issue that should get more screen-time. But I think it should initially be approached under the auspices of a considerate dialogue that says something cogent about the issues rather than using them as an excuse for the kind of devices that would be more at home in a second-rate thriller.
For all of Hayley's cutting and seemingly illimitable back-bites to anything Jeff had to say, I didn't really feel she actually said anything, do you know what I mean? I didn't feel I knew her or Jeff any better by the end of the story and the climax (Jeff's suicide) just didn't affect me in any way. I didn't feel glad he was dead, I didn't feel glad Hayley had 'won.' I was kinda just glad it was over!
I think it's well-made, I think the acting's great and as a thriller, it was certainly different. But overall I don't think the finished product justified the subject matter.
Well. I do agree that although the acting was first-rate, I'm afraid I just didn't find anyone to root for in this film. Jeff was pretty early established as a bit of a monster - nice enough but clearly into bad things and the girl... I didn't believe at all that a fourteen year old (even a super-smart one) could pull off something like this. I thought she was intolerably sanctimonious and clearly damaged goods and as Bm said, a tad annoying.
But as to the film being explotative and glossy... I just felt that such an important subject matter needed something more than a stylish revenge flick. I don't think it really said anything important about paedophilia and that it had such a thing as its central theme simply because it could. In that way, the paedophilia element could have easily been replaced with any other issue-du-jour be it infedility, terrorism, drug, alcohol or even animal abuse and the film would have been largely the same. I'm not saying the film was wrong for choosing to explore paedophilia, not at all, I think it's an issue that should get more screen-time. But I think it should initially be approached under the auspices of a considerate dialogue that says something cogent about the issues rather than using them as an excuse for the kind of devices that would be more at home in a second-rate thriller.
For all of Hayley's cutting and seemingly illimitable back-bites to anything Jeff had to say, I didn't really feel she actually said anything, do you know what I mean? I didn't feel I knew her or Jeff any better by the end of the story and the climax (Jeff's suicide) just didn't affect me in any way. I didn't feel glad he was dead, I didn't feel glad Hayley had 'won.' I was kinda just glad it was over!
I think it's well-made, I think the acting's great and as a thriller, it was certainly different. But overall I don't think the finished product justified the subject matter.
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
- Messages
- 6,965
- Reaction score
- 3,051
I'm not going to disagree Chris, mostly because it's been a while since I saw it. But I seem to remember that it did have something almost sympathetic to say about Paeodophilia. It worked to shatter the image of paedophiles as old men in dirty coats loitering around playgrounds. That, like in the film, it wasn't that he coaxed her to his flat and than had his wicked way with her. They got on well (or seemed to) and it was all natural. The point being that with the other girls he's 'photographed' if there was any sex, it could well have been consentual but because she's underage he'd be branded a paedophile.
I think that's my point. But I haven't had enough coffee to be sure
I think that's my point. But I haven't had enough coffee to be sure
Strongly disagree! Jeff groomed Hayley over the internet for a number of weeks and even if he didn't know her true age, he did find that out at the coffee shop. Despite knowing that, his language and actions were very suggestive and I saw the whole Goldfrapp mp3 thing as a clear ploy designed to attract her to his house. I have no doubt in my mind that if Hayley had been just an ordinary girl, none the wiser, Jeff would have definitely had his wicked way with her.Bmwhtly said:
Well, he was a paedophile. Even if there was doubt in our minds throughout the flm and Jeff's interest stretched only to internet pornography, by the end of the film we discover that Jeff did have a hand in Donna's death.Bmwhtly said:
My point there is that I didn't find him a sympathetic character because how could you? But similarly I didn't find sympathy in Hayley because I was a bit put off by how mental she was. I think I would have enjoyed the film more if Hayley had been an abuse victim herself and even though I think that's strongly possible as is, we don't get enough information about Hayley to determine that for sure.
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
- Messages
- 6,965
- Reaction score
- 3,051
Qualify our terms. Sex? sure, if she'd been ordinary. But my point was, that paedophile is like being branded a rapist. Whereas the sex between Jeff and "Normal Hayley" would very possibly have been consensual, but Jeff would have been viewed with the same stigma as someone who drags schoolchildren into bushes.clock_work9 said:
Heaven knows I'm not defending the film, but that's the closest to a Point that I saw.
[/quote]
Bmwhtly said:
It certainly does shatter the image of pedophiles as dirty old men in trenchcoats, but I did not think the film was sympathetic toward him at all. It showed a pedophile as many of them really are--seemlingly nice guys. This is the reason why they are so successful. They don't seem like scary people to kids. But I really don't think it portrays them as sympathetic, by any means.
You might have forgotten that Jeff did confess that he watched Donna Mauer die, and that he wanted to take pictures, which would indicate that he got off on it. He may have been more of an active participant than he let on. He most certainly did have child porn in that safe. If it were legal, it would not have been in a safe.
Clock, I see your point about not sympathizing with anyone, and that doesn't work for some people. It did, however, work for me. I like the fact that Hayley's background is never explained, because I don't know if it is okay for me to sympathize with her. I believe that Hayley was abused as a very young child, and her abuser told her and everyone else that it was her fault. This is why she tells Jeff, "It's so easy to blame a kid."
People often say that pedophiles deserve the worst form of punishment possible. I love the fact that Hard Candy shows someone punishing the pedophile, and yet we aren't sure if we want to see it. If Hayley's background were revealed, it would probably be more clear cut, and she would be the sympathetic one, and we could understand the reasons for her actions. I like the ambiguity. Also, there is no opportunity for her past to be revealed, because if our assumptions about her turned out to be true, she would never tell Jeff.
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
- Messages
- 6,965
- Reaction score
- 3,051
Celia, your quite right. I had forgotten all about Donna Mauer. I don't remember him confessing it though. My memory is apparently even worse than I thought it was.Celia Cyanide said:
Bmwhtly said:
Yeah, I see what you're saying. But I don't really see a distinction between a guy who has sex with fourteen year odls and a monster who drags kids into bushes. The net result - an abused kid and a destroyed life - is almost always the same.
Celia, get what you're saying too. I can totally see how the ambiguity would work for some people and to be honest that was really the least of my problems. I think my dislike just boiled down to straight believability of the piece, you know? That's a real dealbreaker for me.
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2006
- Messages
- 6,965
- Reaction score
- 3,051
Bmwhtly said:
Hey, you're right! We shouldn't be arguing amongst ourselves - we should be ganging up on Celia!
Bmwhtly said:
I don't think that was really the point, either. So he has "consensual" sex with a girl too young to consent. Then he looks at so kiddie porn on his computer, well he's just looking...and then Donna Mauer...he didn't kill her, he just watched...and wanted to take pictures...
Even if he only had consensual sex with 14 year olds, there is still something very wrong with him, because he goes online looking for 14 year olds, and not adult women. Hayley spoke to him under several names, and as soon as she let on that she was an adult, he stopped talking to her.
Pedophiles, and in this case ephebophiles, try to justify their behavior by telling themselves, "Well, I was only...I wasn't really...it wasn't my idea..." I thought The character of Jeff showed that rather well.
I found it hard to believe, at first, that Hayley could have done all of this. Until I remembered that there was a girl only a year older than Hayley who caught a man who brutally raped her classmate by chatting with him online. Unlike Hayley, she went to the police.