Just got back from theater night with my pals, the subject was the film Babel. The film gets a solid B- from me and a reluctant thumbs up.

There are four interconnected plots, two in Morocco, one in Mexico, and one in Japan. The timeline is non-linear, as in the film Memento, and done again with variations in Crash. That was clever and inventive the first time, but now on the third or fourth turn I'm tired of it as a plot device. IMHO these plot elements could have been related in linear form with no loss of impact.

Each one of the four stories has drama and evokes emotion. At the end of not quite two and a half hours you have been through an emotional wringer, and as the credits rolled, I found myself asking WHY was it necessary to subject the audience to such an emotional ride? No special wisdom or insight has been communicated, there is a message or two or three within the film but without exception these are trivial.

This is a well-crafted film, competently and even beautifully photographed. Unfortunately many of the scenes are shot in one bleak desert or another - so arid and barren they are almost monochromatic. All in all, I will probably never allocate the time to see this one again. However I am not wanting those two and a half hours of my life back, which is lots better than some films made today.

Perhaps the worst part is I was expecting a better film than I saw and am somewhat disappointed. Don't concern yourself about waiting for the DVD, but rent before you buy.

Gary

As nice as some of the visuals were, the only thing I experienced was 2.5 hours of dread. It wasn't a roller coaster ride of emotion, it was pervasive dread. The story set in Mexico was overly contrived to be emotionally manipulative and had me rolling my eyes. I hated this movie.

Eddie

I loved this movie. I love this type of disparate, interconnecting storyline structure. I found each of the stories very engaging -- you're so involved in the "active" storyline that it's almost a little jolting when we cut back to another.

I'm sure it will be in my Top 10 for the year.

it was a good movie, but why sooo long lol

I loved this movie. I love this type of disparate, interconnecting storyline structure. I found each of the stories very engaging -- you're so involved in the "active" storyline that it's almost a little jolting when we cut back to another.

I'm sure it will be in my Top 10 for the year.

I'm with EPlay on this one, I loved it and found it very intriguing.

Yes the timeline was non-linear and did remain me, to a certain extent, of 'Crash' (but not 'Memento') but I enjoy movies with non-linear timelines. As EPlay said you will find yourself involved with the "active" storyline and the quick transition can be a little jolting.

As the credits rolled I felt the sense of satisfaction you get from watching a thoroughly enjoyable, rewarding movie. I guess 'Babel' would fall into the "you either lover or hate it" categories.

Just saw this movie. Did anyone else sort of think this was a rip off on Crash?

Both my wife and I loved this film when we saw it at the theater. I loved the music so much I picked up the 2-disc soundtrack from the film that night.

As to the comment about putting the stories in chronological order - they happen very much out of order. The Mexico segment starts around the end of the Morocco story. The stories needed to be presented in parallel, even though they weren't going on simultaneously.

WHY was it necessary to subject the audience to such an emotional ride? No special wisdom or insight has been communicated, there is a message or two or three within the film but without exception these are trivial.

Maybe that emotional ride was the point of the film. Then again, maybe not.


With so much crap being made out there, when a provocative and moving film like Babel comes along and people (not you, Gary) dump on it, I just wonder if anything out there would actually please them.

I wasn't saying it was a bad movie. AAMOF, I thought it was the best movie I saw this year, but it is very much like crash in that a lot of strangers are connected by a series of events to tell a bunch of seperate stories.

I have come to the point where movies like this are some kind of random act of film-making that show all of the craft of cinema, but nothing of the art of entertaining story-telling.

This review sums up pretty well my thoughts on Babel
Babel has the material of greatness -- vast scope, humane vision, fine actors -- but sadly not the ability to make it all into something beyond mildly pretty and pretentious blather. In striving to recreate the chaotic din of a God-cursed global humanity, it succeeds only in making noise.
http://www.filmcritic.com/misc/emporium.nsf/ddb5490109a79f598625623d0015f1e4/674236271c99b048882572140010bdf3?OpenDocument

On the other hand, a movie like "Weeping Camel" I thoroughly enjoyed. Go figure...

b2b

I thought it was among the better movies of late, with some great performances, mostly from the unknown cast members. Some of the political "suggestions" were just simply off the mark, and weakens the story telling by inserting the director's obvious stance on those issues. However if a viewer shares those opinions, this may not be big deal for those. So YMMV.

Saw this in the theater and of course loved it. I also picked up the soundtrack to the film that night.

But I just picked up the HD-DVD version of this (with a new HD-DVD player, add-on to the Xbox 360 actually), so I'm looking forward to seeing how it looks, and what I think and notice on my second viewing.

Surprisingly NF is shipping the HD-DVD to me today. I should be able to watch it this weekend.

larry

We liked it well enough.

It's mostly a fairly interesting character study, but the storyline set in Japanis so good that it deserves its own movie. I kept looking forward to when the story would go back to it, and I wanted more. I hope Rinko Kikuchi will somehow pull the upset and win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress. Her performance was especially powerful.

As to the comment about putting the stories in chronological order - they happen very much out of order. The Mexico segment starts around the end of the Morocco story. The stories needed to be presented in parallel, even though they weren't going on simultaneously.


Really? I'll take your word for it but I sure coudn't figure out why -- and I'm a big fan of non-linear storytelling. But only if there's a reason for it. To me, this felt like the A story was originally linear and then they realized it was mindnumbingly boring so they just stuck it in the hopper and gave it a spin. Luckily, my copy is an Academy screening copy so I only wasted time not money. This was one of the few movies after which I felt like I'd just wasted 4 or 5 hours of my life.

I watched this last night. A couple times I almost turned it off, it was moving too slow for me. However, the movie was filmed and put together very well so I decided to stick with it. When it was over I wasn't disappointed that I stayed with it but I don't see myself watching it again. The stories were told very well but didn't give us anything new.

larry

Watched the movie yesterday. I agree with most of the comments on here. Good stories on thier own. Tying them together with loose stings didn't seem to take too much away from any of the plots. The Mexican story was much too over the top in my opinion.

Going into it, I wanted too see what all of the buzz about Pitt's performace was all about. Having watched it, I would have to say I'm baffled as to why he or anyone would feel he was snubbed for an Oscar. What did I miss??

Really? I'll take your word for it but I sure coudn't figure out why -- and I'm a big fan of non-linear storytelling. But only if there's a reason for it. To me, this felt like the A story was originally linear and then they realized it was mindnumbingly boring so they just stuck it in the hopper and gave it a spin. Luckily, my copy is an Academy screening copy so I only wasted time not money. This was one of the few movies after which I felt like I'd just wasted 4 or 5 hours of my life.


Have you seen Amores Perros, the director's first in this pseudo trilogy? It has three stories, slightly inter-related, but told A, then B, then C. It worked for that movie, but I don't know if Babel would have been as powerful if told in that fashion, as each of the stories in Babel are connected much more than in Amores Perros. In the latter, they simply take place in the same city and we see a few tiny bits of the other stories within the main one.

Odd that the music toward the end is also used in parts of HBO's 'Deadwood'. But Deadwood and Babel have two different composers.

This movie sucked. Interconnected stories with no point. Who cares. Oh yeah... "character development" :rolleyes:

It wasn't about character development...

Have you seen Amores Perros, the director's first in this pseudo trilogy? It has three stories, slightly inter-related, but told A, then B, then C. It worked for that movie, but I don't know if Babel would have been as powerful if told in that fashion, as each of the stories in Babel are connected much more than in Amores Perros. In the latter, they simply take place in the same city and we see a few tiny bits of the other stories within the main one.

No, I haven't seen Amores Perros. And honestly, I doubt I'll be running out to pick up a copy any time soon. Again, I don't have a bit of problem with the non-linear of it. What irritated me was the apparent lack of any reason to do it with this A story. Maybe I'm remembering it incorrectly, but I don't think Pitt's character had any knowledge of the Mexico fiasco or the jeapordy to his kids, so piling that story on top of his Middle East misadventure didn't raise the stakes for the character at all.

It wasn't about character development...

You can say that again, brother.

I liked Amores Perros much better than Babel. bibmapBP don't judge it based on Babel. Everybody's tastes are different but AP is a better movie IMO.

larry

I'll have to say that I liked this movie. I don't know how re-watchable it is though. Plus, I have to agree that the film in it's entirety ends up being quite pointless. Towards the end I was thinking there was going to be an 'anti-gun' message hitting us over the head, since the rifle was the one object that tied all of the events in the film loosely together. But that message never materialized. At least not blatantly. Film making styles aside, I think I would put this film in the same category such as 'Barry Lyndon'. They're voyeuristic stories that simply let us follows the paths of some ordinary people, through some extraordinary circumstances.

I watched the first half last nite, so far I am disappointed.

This movie feels so contrived, with the different plots forced together it begs comparisons to "Crash", and I dont mean that in a positive way. Crash I felt was Hollywood at its worst.

A tourist bus full of Americans cruising through what looks like Afghanistan. Who goes on romantic getaways in Afghanistan? And an American gets shot ACCIDENTALLY? Talk about unplausible!

And as soon as you see the maid bringing her charges across the mexican border, I just know they are going to be arrested for that. Of course their parents are living it up in Afghanistan, but they are planning on being in LA the next day as if there are direct flights from Kabul to Los Angeles. PLEASE thats about a 2 day flight-trip under the best conditions.Then theres the the fat american with the camera.

Ok I will watch the second half tonite :D

^^^^ It is somewhat contrived, but not on the order of Crash.

larry

Wouldn't the Mexican housekeeper have a hard time getting back in to U.S. no matter who was with her, let alone taking two American children who were not hers? She willing risked 16 years of being in U.S. to see son's wedding? Can illegales travel back and forth easily?

JohnR,

They were in Morocco.

Ok thats a day's flight then I guess

I thought a person named Rachel was going to watch the kids so the housekeeper could go to the wedding. I'm not so sure if Pitt and his wife Susan were suppose to make it back in time for the wedding.

OK, what's it going to be tonite?
Babel or The Departed???

How about watching the Gore-ical collect all his Oscars? :)

Oink, "The Departed" is aweessome!

I saw 21 Grams by the same director, so I won't see Babel. Enough reviewers have called it arrogant and pretentious, as 21 Grams was in spades, for me to save my 2 bucks.

IB

I thought a person named Rachel was going to watch the kids so the housekeeper could go to the wedding. I'm not so sure if Pitt and his wife Susan were suppose to make it back in time for the wedding.


I think the other person was supposed to watch the kids but couldn't - I don't remember (saw it in December in the theater). But the phone call to the housekeeper before the wedding at the beginning of that story was the phone call Pitt's character made from the hospital at the end of that story. But I was thinking maybe the couple was supposed to be home by then, but the incident kept them from getting home in time.

Whoa!

The Departed just won for Best Adapted Screenplay!!
Is this JUST the beginning????

The 2 best movies Ive seen this year are "The Departed" and "Little Miss Sunshine", so either one would make me happy

Wouldn't the Mexican housekeeper have a hard time getting back in to U.S. no matter who was with her, let alone taking two American children who were not hers? She willing risked 16 years of being in U.S. to see son's wedding? Can illegales travel back and forth easily?

That part of the story really bugged my, as well. How could she have risen to be such a trusted nanny of 16 years/5 years with the family, but suddenly display the worst sense of judgement in the course of 24 hrs? If you are illegal, what right mind do you plan a trip which involves 2 border checkpoints? Son getting married or not, something like strikes me as something that should trigger at least some moderately serious contemplation.

...and the kids? Ok, I could see the risk of bringing them along being acceptable if they were simply going to the next town over to see the son, but leaving town altogether, crossing the border to another country, hours away in some Mexican town???! Is she freakin' insane?

Then the only ride back is the guy that is barely sober and seems to have a hair trigger with the law? This nanny made some serious misjudgements which led to a wildly chaotic situation she ended up in. I have a hard time feeling sympathy for the plight of the illegal immigration situation from the crafting of the story in this movie, if that was the undertone the director was aiming for.

The Japanese girl part of the story was teh naughty! ;)

The only thing I can figure out is, the housekeeper would go back and forth when her visa expired and wait and get a new one. After awhile she just stayed and didn't go back to Mexico and her visa expired. But after 16 years you think she could have gotten a work visa or become a citizen.

I watched this with my sixteen year old daughter and she thought those Japanese girls were pretty skanky. Hooray!

Until recently the Mexican border did not require passports, but correct paperwork certainly helped.

Family is important in Mexico, and they have awesome weddings, often lasting 2-3 days. If I were the housekeeper, i would have probably done he same thing. If nothing had happened, the kids would have fond memories to tell the rest of their life.

Its the parents that didnt get home when they said they would, and didnt get the backup babysitter when they said they would, the housekeeper was doing the best should could under the circumstances. I do fault her for leaving the kids alone in the desert though.

If anything, this puts the "Mexican nanny" identity backwards, rather than promoting the message. It says, don't trust her, because she just might take your kids across the border for who knows what, if you leave her in charge long enough. There is just no good message to be had with this, and I don't think that was the director's intent with this storyline.

The best thing she could have done is simply to stay home. It's rough to miss your son's wedding, but you don't take some "white kids" out of town and across the border, just out of convenience. If you hit any kind of trouble on the trip that requires help from the authorities, you will automatically be under suspicion for abduction, even if you really are technically in charge of the kids. It was a ridiculous risk to take. I don't think there is any parents that would agree with the decision to go, if they could know about it beforehand.

I noticed something when I watched a few scenes on the HD-DVD.

When we saw the movie in the theater in December, at the night club the audio would go silent intermittently, showing what the girl was experiencing. But when I checked out the club scene at home, when it cuts to her POV, there is a low (volume and frequency) rumble or noise. Anyone else notice this? I thought this was very cool, as in the theater I thought it would be cool if there was some very low freq bass at least to simulate "feeling" the bass, and that maybe there was in the soundtrack but the system in the theater just couldn't reproduce it. I wonder if this sound was added after the theatrical release for the home version, or if the theater's system wasn't loud enough or something.

. It's rough to miss your son's wedding, but you don't take some "white kids" out of town and across the border, just out of convenience. If you hit any kind of trouble on the trip that requires help from the authorities, you will automatically be under suspicion for abduction, even if you really are technically in charge of the kids. It was a ridiculous risk to take. I don't think there is any parents that would agree with the decision to go, if they could know about it beforehand.

Why thats a very white view. And wat was she risking? Some crappy nanny job? Where she works for 2 gringos dumb enough to leave their kids half way across the world while they explored a 3rd world country? And not giving the nanny any days off. Even Anna Nicole Smith had multiple nannies, so each one actually got time off during the course of the week. The nanny basically had the kids paperwork in order for the border crossing, so "suspicion" isn't really a risk. The problem was her transportation, he was argumentative.

The nanny was obviously a trusted member of the family from the way she took care of the kids to the fact that the parents trusted her to take care of their two remaining kids after the death of the third kid (sounded like SIDS). I think the nanny knew about the shooting so those are some extraordinary circumstances to ignore and go to Mexico anyway. It would have been nice to know the deal with whoever was going to fill in for her. It is surprising there was no other family nearby or network of friends/neighbors to come to the families aid in case of an emergency. If I was going to a foreign country with my wife on vacation I would certainly make sure there were a ton of support help for the nanny and the kids.

I noticed something when I watched a few scenes on the HD-DVD.

When we saw the movie in the theater in December, at the night club the audio would go silent intermittently, showing what the girl was experiencing. But when I checked out the club scene at home, when it cuts to her POV, there is a low (volume and frequency) rumble or noise. Anyone else notice this? I thought this was very cool, as in the theater I thought it would be cool if there was some very low freq bass at least to simulate "feeling" the bass, and that maybe there was in the soundtrack but the system in the theater just couldn't reproduce it. I wonder if this sound was added after the theatrical release for the home version, or if the theater's system wasn't loud enough or something. No decent LFE at the theater I would guess. That night club scene, I thought, was exceptionally well done.

larry

The nanny was obviously a trusted member of the family from the way she took care of the kids to the fact that the parents trusted her to take care of their two remaining kids after the death of the third kid (sounded like SIDS). I think the nanny knew about the shooting so those are some extraordinary circumstances to ignore and go to Mexico anyway. It would have been nice to know the deal with whoever was going to fill in for her. It is surprising there was no other family nearby or network of friends/neighbors to come to the families aid in case of an emergency. If I was going to a foreign country with my wife on vacation I would certainly make sure there were a ton of support help for the nanny and the kids.


I don't think the nanny knew of the shooting at all. I think in the phone call the father just said something serious came up and they couldn't come how yet (at least that's how I remember it from seeing it in December). She was supposed to have the time off for her son's wedding. When I first saw this scene, I thought the parents were rich @$$#oles for being so unreasonable and doing this to her - "we decided to stay a few more days" kind of thing. I wouldn't want to miss either one of my daughter's weddings for anything.

Why thats a very white view. And wat was she risking? Some crappy nanny job? Where she works for 2 gringos dumb enough to leave their kids half way across the world while they explored a 3rd world country? And not giving the nanny any days off. Even Anna Nicole Smith had multiple nannies, so each one actually got time off during the course of the week. The nanny basically had the kids paperwork in order for the border crossing, so "suspicion" isn't really a risk. The problem was her transportation, he was argumentative.

It's not a "white view". It's a realistic view. It may not suit the latest standards of political correctness, but it will become an issue as soon as something "unexpected" occurs. This is exactly what we see happen in the movie- when something goes wrong, it can spin horribly out of control if your circumstances happen to be less than ideal at that moment.

What was she risking? Are you kidding me?! The movie clearly shows what was at risk. These are very real things that can happen, which should weigh heavily in considering a trip like that. The nanny put herself way out on a limb, and things went very wrong.

The 2 "gringos" evidently had a lot of trust in the nanny, which is a considerable step. You have to build a lot of credibility to get there, so it just seems very contrived for her to just lose all that good judgement in the course of 24 hrs (blaming this more on the writers/director for conjuring this bizarre story, not Mexican nanny's in America).

Whether she has paperwork or not is really moot. What kind of "paperwork" exists that can remove all doubt that you should or not have these kids with you, from the standpoint of some border agent watching a secluded checkpoint in the middle of nowhere??? It "looks" suspect, no matter how you look at it, so you can almost expect to be scrutinized. It's the way real life happens, not some PC ideal.

I agree that her transportation was yet another problem. You are only in as much control as the guy that is at the wheel. So you better trust they aren't going to freak out the moment the cops are doing a shakedown. Like I said before, it was a long chain of poor judgements that eventually caught up with her in the worst way. The prudent route is you don't bring someone else's kids along unless you can absolutely guarantee their safety. If somebody is driving you around, that reduces your ability to guarantee anything considerably. That guy left them out in the desert, and never came back. That guy is a real punk. The nanny displayed poor judgement of character in assessing that he would be a safe "ride", let alone not leaving them "hanging dry" when things go to $hit.

We can debate what characters should or shouldn't have done.

So what? No one is perfect. Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone has lapses in their judgment. If characters in movies always made the right choices, then we wouldn't have half the movies out there we have now.

If you go to a bar, have a few drinks, and drive home, that's a risk. You might end up getting home fine. But you could get pulled over and get arrested and lose your license, or you could end up in a car wreck. If a movie shows a guy driving home drunk and something bad happening, you can't say it's not realistic just because he should have known what was going to happen and therefore the character made a bad choice. Blah blah blah.


To err is human, and that's what makes the characters more real and more believable (in general).

I am not going to say this movie sucked, but I will say that I wish I hadn't watched it. I would rather had done something else for the 2 hrs and 23 min. that this movie took to watch.
-Rich

Well, that's really what I am arguing! ;) She erred so badly, I don't think it is believable (to the point of possibly being insulting to the viewer's intelligence), beyond anything other than a poorly contrived storyline from the writer/director. It seems the writer/director went waaaaaaaay out of their way in attempt to bring sympathy for a certain group of people that may find themselves in a similar situation, it reeks at a cheap tug at the heart strings, for no good reason as to put the nanny in an utterly bizarre (and unrealistic, imo) situation.

Now the Jpn girl part of the storyline, I am rather pleased with the boldness of the message. I'm not out to bash the film completely, honestly. That has a whole bunch of juicy ramifications behind the message.

I'm relatively Ok with the vacationing in a 3rd world country segment of the storyline, as well. It was an interesting story.

The "boys with a new toy" part of the story was interesting, as well. I'm not sure where the message stands, but certainly see it as great fodder for debate. ;)

Mr. Hanky,

Have you seen the director's previous 2 filmes (Amores Perros and 21 Grams)? I've seen Amores Perros and enjoyed it immensely. It's very different from Babel, but very similar in many ways.

Sorry, I haven't seen it. 21 grams sounds familiar. I probably saw a preview, but never caught the real movie. These kinds of movies are really on the fringe of my interest focus. It's really a thin margin that I managed to rent Babel, as it is. ;)

I would very much like to rip this film a gaping @sshole, but it would instantly result in the thread being shut down. How I detested elements of this film. The director is clearly anti-American. He makes anyone in authority who is American out to be a complete jerk. Stupidity abounds with characters doing things that are just laughable. The anti-gun message is heavy heavy handed. Might as well put a gun to our heads. :D

Anyway, the one story in this CRASH/MAGNOLIA/SHORT CUTS wannabe that worked for me was the mute/deaf girl in Japan. Powerful stuff. Should have had its own movie, as another poster said above.

In the scene at the beginning when the nanny is playing hide and seek with the kids and answers the phone she asks how is she doing, and Pitt says they are finding someone to operate and that Rachel is flying in tonight.

How did she err so badly?

By taking white kids to her home town for a day trip?

By crossing an international border with all her paperwork in order, including the kids passports?

Its not like she had much of a choice, her son was getting married. A reasonable person in that situation would often make the same choice she did. She was doing the parents a favor by watching the kids past the time she had agreed to.

Without her driver getting argumentative with the border police, there would have been no problems at all. In fact, it would have been a fond memory for all involved.

How did she err so badly?

By taking white kids to her home town for a day trip?

By crossing an international border with all her paperwork in order, including the kids passports?

Its not like she had much of a choice, her son was getting married. A reasonable person in that situation would often make the same choice she did. She was doing the parents a favor by watching the kids past the time she had agreed to.

Without her driver getting argumentative with the border police, there would have been no problems at all. In fact, it would have been a fond memory for all involved.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this. We have a different outlook as to what is acceptable and what isn't, when it comes to guarding someone else's children.


Taking someone else's kids on a day trip- maybe. Taking them across the border and apparently over 100 or so miles of desert, with somebody else driving?...not so good.

Passports or not, paperwork or not, it's not going to convince anyone that the kids were properly in her custody, and not being abducted, w/o an extra level of scrutiny. They would have attempted to contact the parents, and of course, there would be no parents to reach (because they are out of town). That just looks bad. Quite likely, they would still have been detained indefinitely, until the children could be confirmed by parents/legal guardians/etc.

Yes, she certainly did have a choice...not to go. There's no way you can argue that someone had a gun to her head that she had to leave town with the kids. It certainly sucks to miss your son's wedding and the 2 parents certainly did impose upon her due to their unexpected travel issues, but that doesn't suddenly justify throwing caution to the wind and taking the kids on a roadtrip.

The driver may have been argumentative, but he just as well could have been detained for dui, despite being perfectly calm. What if the driver has warrants? What if he is carrying contraband (not in the car, as demonstrated in the movie, but on his person)? What if they found that gun on him? There's a dozen ways it could go there, and none of them involve letting them go on their happy way. At that point, they would most likely discover immigration statuses. and they would have been screwed, anyway. I don't know nuttin' about crossin' borders, but it seems to me if you are illegal or expired visa, driving through a border checkpoint is the last place you want to end up. That is just courting trouble to "happen", imo. I don't know how she possibly could have stacked the odds more against herself, aside from physically bind and gag the kids and waving a big sign saying "I'm up to no good". Seriously!

Until recently the Mexican border did not require passports, but correct paperwork certainly helped.

Family is important in Mexico, and they have awesome weddings, often lasting 2-3 days. If I were the housekeeper, i would have probably done he same thing. If nothing had happened, the kids would have fond memories to tell the rest of their life.

If family is so important why did the housekeeper get kicked out of the car by her NEPHEW in the middle of nowhere at night with two American kids? As to the awesome wedding comment; so there was even a chance she might get stranded down in Mexico for 2-3 days? Would you consider having your six year old watch as a chicken has its head ripped off a fond memory? If I was the parent the housekeeper would have been fired as soon as I heard about their innocent road trip. Way too irresponsible I think for most parents to let slide.

Theres no doubt it was a fireable offense from the Parents point of view, but thats not the POV I am debating from :)

From the housekeeper's point of view:

1. The parents violated the employment contract by not providing any means for her to attend her kids wedding, even though they knew far in advance.

2. The overly sheltered American kids benefited by seeing where their chicken nuggets came from. They had the time of their life there.

3. And being in Mexico with Mexicans was no more dangerous than being in America with Americans.

4. And lest we forget, the housekeeper also got laid.

They nearly had the last time of their life, had they not been extracted from baking to death in the desert. Had that been the case, no amount of "worldly experience", "violation of contract", or positive sex life of the nanny would have justified this trip to the parents.

I sense, you are trying to rationalize this from the nanny's viewpoint, but I think this is a moot avenue. If the rationalizations don't pass muster with the parents when it comes to their own children, there is no amount of justification the nanny could provide that would have made this "ok". She was in charge of the safety of these children, and there is no conceivable way she could have guaranteed this by attending a wedding party. That is the 1st priority for the task that the parents trusted her with. If that cannot be met, then that is all the more reason they should never have left the front door.


As for being "safe", in the company of Mexicans vs. Americans, I don't attempt to make any great distinction there, other than these days, little kids are not safe being left unattended, anywhere. The nanny was clearly depicted in the movie as not having a hawkeye on them at all times while at the wedding. As the 2 kids that stood out in this crowd, it only takes 5 minutes slip of the eye to have one or both of these kids molested or abducted (ransom, human trafficking, sex slave, worse?), lost, or accidentally drowned in a neighbor's pool (speaking of more general locales for this scenario). This could happen in Mexico or America- no big difference.

If I were to really be picky, I think the movie shows the 2 kids not even buckled up in the back seat on the trip back. :p These kids were in peril from the very moment they left home, imo! :)

Yea there were parents in my neighborhood that watched their kids every waking moment, Paranoid that every wedding was fraught with dozens of dangers, and every stranger was a slave trafficker.

Sadly, these were the same kids that got into trouble when they finally got out into the real world.

This is, by far, a safe than sorry, proposition. There may not be a danger, but that doesn't mean that dangers do not exist. All it takes is one time you were not watching your kid because you thought it would be ok, something happens, then you regret it (not to mention the kid suffers the consequences) for the rest of your life. That's not something to take lightly.

These are choices you have to make when it comes to your own kids. When it comes to guarding someone else's kids from danger, you will be held to a different standard. If it is your own kids, you have only yourself to blame if something happens. If it is somebody else's kids (who have entrusted them to you), you have to abide by the standards of what the parent's deem "safe", not what you deem safe...because if something happens, you will be on the hook for anything that you would have let go that the parents would have not let go as "acceptable", as the reason something bad happened. This has nothing to do with "being paranoid" or "sheltered kids gone bad", and everything to do with liability.

At any rate, we've gone to far on this side-note. To get back on topic, I blame the writer/director for the contrived storyline of what a Mexican nanny would do, because I don't believe a real Mexican nanny would make such poor choices to end up in a situation like this in the first place. If she did, she would have been eliminated long ago by such antics, from any role as a trusted, loyal housekeeper/caretaker of children. The only thing we disagree on is I think the storyline is poorly constructed on the count of depicting implausibly bad judgement, and you feel the storyline is plausible because the character "simply had no choice" to do otherwise.

She took the kids to her son's wedding, fer cryin' out loud! ;)

Things took a turn for the worse. But that's life.

Yea there were parents in my neighborhood that watched their kids every waking moment, Paranoid that every wedding was fraught with dozens of dangers, and every stranger was a slave trafficker.

Sadly, these were the same kids that got into trouble when they finally got out into the real world.

It is sad what a loving, conscientious, two parent family can do to mess up a child's life.

I take it the other kids that hung out at the mall, had no parental interest as to their whereabouts or what they were doing turned out fine. You were tracking all the kids, right?

So you think the Moroccan parents were doing a better job than the American parents? At least they could handle themselves better at a Mexican wedding or being stranded in the desert, when they're not sniping at tour buses.

I think there is also a strong component in these storylines of "being out of your element" and how that can make you more vulnerable (unexpectedly so, perhaps).

I do think it would have been more plausible for the housekeeper to go if she had a daughter that was giving birth in Mexico. Or, if Pitt had mentioned they couldn't make it back for the wedding implying they would be taking the kids to Mexico when they got back if there had not been any problems in Morocco.

Anyway I'll quit beating on this Pinata now.

It was her son's wedding. I assume Mexicans are more likely to stay married for life compared to Americans, so this would have been a once in a lifetime thing for her. Things were fine until the ordeal at the border.

But that's life. Everything was going fine, until...

Maybe this would have been an opportune moment for product placement where the nanny watches the whole wedding w/o leaving the house, via video cellphone? :p

Verizon, we're there when you are illegal and can't! :eek:

The director is clearly anti-American. He makes anyone in authority who is American out to be a complete jerk. Stupidity abounds with characters doing things that are just laughable. The anti-gun message is heavy heavy handed. Might as well put a gun to our heads. :D

.

The American border guards dispatched their duties professionally. The American Consulate got their act together and airlifted the lady to safety.
What characters were you referring too? About the only jerk American, and I am not even sure he was an American, was the fat tourbus guy.

I guess I didnt catch the anti-gun message either. Was it "guns are dangerous in the hands of kids"?

BTW, i re-watched an hour of this flick last nite, its an extremely well executed flick, with lots of details.

If I debate you on the issue the tread will be closed. I won't be responsible for that. I am just too disgusted with portions of this film to talk about it calmly. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

:)

And please remember, I was moved by the Japanese storyline. It was well written, brilliantly acted and executed to perfection. I wanted it to be all that was on screen and wanted to see so much more.

...much more?! She couldn't be any more nude than she was, right? The underage seduction storyline was just begging for controversy... :p Do Jpn schoolgirls really walk around in shorts that high?

I guess I didnt catch the anti-gun message either. Was it "guns are dangerous in the hands of kids"?

I think the controversal message that comes out is that guns are going to bring you trouble no matter who you are, and even after they have left your possession. Most pungently, it could end up bringing you trouble even as an innocent, unrelated bystander. Hence, it is an anti-gun message, in general. I can imagine that will get a number of people riled up.

So ... on a different subject ... Did the Japanese schoolgirl kill her mom? And with what gun?

Why would you suspect that? I thought the explanation they gave was reasonable.

Since the girl lied to the police about how her mom died, it raised my eyebrows a bit...

I think the controversal message that comes out is that guns are going to bring you trouble no matter who you are, and even after they have left your possession. Most pungently, it could end up bringing you trouble even as an innocent, unrelated bystander. Hence, it is an anti-gun message, in general. I can imagine that will get a number of people riled up.


I saw no ant-gun message whatsoever. The kids were goofing off and shooting at cars with a rifle that was supposed to be used for shooting/killing coyotes to protect their livestock. They were stupid. They were kids. Someone got hurt. It turned into a big incident. I don't see where anyone is getting all of this "anti-gun" gun control message BS. :confused: The movie wasn't about guns. It was about people, relationships, and communication. "Listen."

I certainly had not intended to give any impression the movie was about "gun control". I merely wanted to remark that it's possible there was some message about guns as one of the many subtle undertones of the movie. Certainly I agree the main focus of the movie is as you describe. I just don't put it beyond the writer/director to do some liberal dabbling of other numerous "messages" throughout the movie. If this is the case, I would certainly agree that these messages are definitely not well hashed out. They're just sprinkled all over the place as freebie zingers for the viewer to mentally chew on, I think.

In a similar vein to the gun control notion, there was some dabbling with illegal immigration and sexual relations with underage girls, imo. These aren't fullblown story themes, but rather "elements" that incidentally exist in the larger, more obvious storyline (communication and obstacles to communication).

I'll have to say, there was absolutely nothing nuanced or subtle in any of these interrelated stories. All messages were transmitted in the clear and announced with a chime. All stories were competently but not brilliantly told. The interrelationships were plain very early on, all endings were predictable. The craftmanship was there but the storytelling in most regards contained nothing of particular interest.

Since the Japanese teenaged girl was handicapped, it is perhaps unavoidable that one invest more effort to understand her role but that doesn't make for nuances, it only means you have more effort invested. The subtitles were IMHO much more intrusive than English dialogue would have been.

I walked away from the theater with two main impressions. Those were that this film was essentially pointless, and the underlying theme of interrelated plots was unnecessarily intricate. Finally, there was no need to waste any time watching it again.

Gary

On rewatch, the cinematography was stunning. i really liked the way the director showed confusion. The disco scene was real well done..

How the War on Terrorism politics caused the ambulance to be called back was interesting.

The acting they got out of the little kids was incredible ...

I agree, John.
The cinematography was excellent, as was the acting.
I actually picked up my HD-DVD player the day after Babel came out. I was tired of waiting, and I wanted to get Babel anyway. So I took the plunge and went HD-DVD (for only $200, the add-on for the Xbox 360 is great).

I actually picked up my HD-DVD player the day after Babel came out. I was tired of waiting, and I wanted to get Babel anyway. So I took the plunge and went HD-DVD (for only $200, the add-on for the Xbox 360 is great).

Brian,

Picked this up on BD and will be watching this week.
My main theater has been down for awhile and I have a back-log of disks to get thru. :eek:
Watched Children of Men R2 last nite...excellent.
Have Babel, the Prestige, and the Departed on BD first up. :cool:

BTW, how is your 2910 holding up?

oink,

Can't wait to watch CoM again. Saw it in the theater in December, same night as Babel.


My 2910's doing great. I use it mainly for music, just because I have music playing a lot more often than I sit down to watch movies.

Anybody want to discuss the bus driver?

Should he have hung around as long as he did, or taken off sooner as an obligation to the rest of the riders? Was the Brad Pitt tourist being unreasonable to keep stalling them for time?

This is not to say what he did or not do was realistic or plausible, but more a question of what would you do in a situation like that?

Its a tough call , because one of his passengers was dying. We dont know the pressures he was under to complete the bus trip. You would think at least some of the passengers would have wanted to stay until the ambulance came.

Richard Smith (Brad Pitt's character) certainly didnt want to give up the one motor vehicle left in the town, the bus!

Good grief this is crazy! It's almost impossible to read this thread due to all the damn spoiler tags. Larry, shouldn't a thread be considered to have spoilers in it, if it's about a movie? I mean Christ! How can you discuss a movie, without discussing the movie? Personally, I NEVER open a thread to a movie that I intend on seeing, until after I've seen it for the mere fact that I expect there to be spoilers.

BTW, this isn't an attack on you, I think you're one of the better moderators in that you're not as overly 'lock' happy as some of the others.

Okay, I feel better now... breath in... breath out. ;)

Yea, I know it's tough. I can only clink on the mouse and drag one or two times before he needs a rest... :) The rules were made a while back and when the rules are followed nobody gets "spoiled" and everybody gets to say what they want and hopefully they remember to use spoiler tags when necessary.

It's up to the OP. If it wants to change it, that's ok by me. I'll make the edit to the title but there will still be many posts with spoiler tags. Starting a new thread with spoilers allowed is an option, but I don't see much point in that now. Most of the regulars here have weighed in, but I won't prevent it a new thread.

larry

Watched last nite.
Extremely well crafted movie (the deft editing, cinematography, and music stand out in my mind).
Good acting by all involved.
I don't consider the so-called "controversial" topics touched on by the film-maker to be proof of any "agenda," as some have alluded to.
These are, IMO, only lightly touched on and are not the true focus of the movie.

It has been pointed out that a gun ties the stories together.

I think that is a bit of a red herring.
What ties everything together is the relationships between parents and children.
That is the main point being made here with Babel.
No parent can be absolutely sure they have succeeded in raising a healthy, happy child...there are no guaranties (in spite of the best of intentions).
And sometimes life can be merciless to even the most innocent.

I am surprised that a movie of this type was, in fact, nominated as BP.
This is not the kind of film that can win the Oscar.

Well Crash won last year, which was a movie like this. And I thought Babel was soo much better.

Its funny, even hearing the screenwriter try to describe the theme of this movie, is not convincing.

I really think its just 3 nice human stories, each story having thematic elements, but ... no central theme, except maybe, "we are all connected and similar".

And "Listen."


Glad to hear your thoughts on the movie, oink!


Everyone, if you liked the music in the movie, definitely pick up the soundtrack. It's excellent, and great for 2-channel listening. The music and soundtrack got the Oscar I think too.

Everyone, if you liked the music in the movie, definitely pick up the soundtrack. It's excellent, and great for 2-channel listening. The music and soundtrack got the Oscar I think too.

I don't usually pick-up soundtracks, but I will make an exception here.
Very memorable music. :)

just finished watching babel and you know...with all the sad & gloomy state of events around the world right now do we really need more pretentious depressing fluff like this to cheer us up even more. i rather watch slither 3 more times than go through these similar pointless crap films again. depressing & pointless are not good combos.

and babel? what a stupid name. they should've called it the crying game cause that's all the main characters are good at.

Theres no doubt it was a fireable offense from the Parents point of view, but thats not the POV I am debating from :)

From the housekeeper's point of view:

1. The parents violated the employment contract by not providing any means for her to attend her kids wedding, even though they knew far in advance.

2. The overly sheltered American kids benefited by seeing where their chicken nuggets came from. They had the time of their life there.

3. And being in Mexico with Mexicans was no more dangerous than being in America with Americans.

4. And lest we forget, the housekeeper also got laid.


:rolleyes:

These had to be the worst arguments from any POV. Not surprised however, "LA" says it all.


yeah headless chicken walking, blood coming out of it's neck, just what small kids needs to see at that age. Then lets drag them across the desert curtecy of the illegal alien nephew, to the IA nanny who had no business to take the kids in the first place. Yeah let's blame the parents, and circumstances, but never the actual wrong doers. Typical [sanctuary city] LA crap. and yes the nanny knows about the shooting.

Watching an animal get slaughtered, like every farm kid in America has probably seen , is going to damage them?

Where i grew up, we considered these kinds of experiences good things for kids. Fishing and farming and huntin', thats living baby!

I cant wait till next summer, when I put all those Maryland Blue Crabs in a pot, and boil em to death, for our first crab feast of the year. My 5 and 6 year old Nephews will be there taking it all in too!

No matter where you see the chicken get slaughtered, the first time isn't going to be "fun". Funny you mentioned crabs. I still remember the fun I had as kid crabbing in the NJ coast inlets and how that changed once we came home and I saw the crabs thrown into the boiling water. I forgot pretty quick once we started eating them. :)

larry

Watching an animal get slaughtered, like every farm kid in America has probably seen , is going to damage them?

Where i grew up, we considered these kinds of experiences good things for kids. Fishing and farming and huntin', thats living baby!

I cant wait till next summer, when I put all those Maryland Blue Crabs in a pot, and boil em to death, for our first crab feast of the year. My 5 and 6 year old Nephews will be there taking it all in too!


That's all good, I'm not a spokesperson for PETA, but I was quiet "surprised" just like the kid in the movie of that particular "slaughter". Far different then boiling crabs.

Xenophobia can be cured, as easy as watching your food die. Movies can help.

deleted

[post retracted]

deleted

Thanks, ADU. I'm not going to read those spoilers. Instead I'm going to infer from it that you're recommending that I do finish watching this movie. So I'll do that now.
I only hope and pray that my ability to infer stuff is not misleading me this time.
He kind of gave you the thumb halfway up, with a slight spasm further in the upward direction.

Watching as a very young kid (5 being my earliest recollection), my grandfather would go out to the chicken coop and grab one, bring it back and chop its head off. The thing would flail about until it finally keeled over. Can’t get chicken any fresher than that. My neighbors would butcher hogs every year – witnessed the entire process. This is how life was prior to the mega Supermarket. This is how people survived for centuries. The notion that seeing this traumatizes kids is ridiculous. The next thing you know people will start saying picking vegetables out of the garden is too traumatic for children to see. “Those poor vegetables are alive and look how roughly they pull them out of the ground.” Oh, the shame. :rolleyes:

I'm going to infer from it that you're recommending that I do finish watching this movie. I really have no opinion one way or the other. Just tried to answer your query as straight forward as possible. [Previous post now retracted since it serves no useful function.]

You can read this spoiler Robert. The scene where she is bleeding to death and gets sewn up by a rusty needle and it stops the bleeding IS one of the uplifting moments!

I hated the movie 45 minutes into it. Check my first post ....

Now Im thinking its one of the better movies of the year, a real thinker :)

Babel is all about what happens to kids when adults do stupid things. ;)

.

deleted

Just saw this movie. Did anyone else sort of think this was a rip off on Crash?

No more than Crash being a rip off of Magnolia ;)

[post removed by ADU]

http://files.schoolyard.com/asparis/SitepageRandomImages/ASPLife/girl_touching_nose.JPG
In that case, maybe it will be best if I delete my posts to this thread too. I'll go do that now.

Xenophobia can be cured, as easy as watching your food die. Movies can help.


:D Did it even occur to you that someone may just preffer not to see such thing or not to reffer to it as fun?

I watched this last night. I won't say this was a terrible movie, just that I didn't find it entertaining in the least. The storylines tried too hard to be relevant and oh so artistically poignant. I felt the director was using sledge hammer subtlety, but he missed my head completely. The intersecting storyline from Japan, was just way out there...I just can't get my head around that piece. I just couldn't care about any of them.

I tend to agree that the Japenese storyline was way too deep to be a sub plot. That in itself deserves its own movie. The rest of the film was horrible. It was like a long drawn out story that doesn't go anywhere at all. My wife and I both want the 2 and 1/2 hours of our lives back. (well make that an hour and 45 min because I enjoyed the japenese sub plot)

Babel had how many interconnected stories? There was Mexico, Morocco, U.S., and Japan. Only three more and Kevin Bacon would have shown up.

.... The scene where she is bleeding to death and gets sewn up by a rusty needle and it stops the bleeding IS one of the uplifting moments!

::clears throat:: then, in best golden era MGM singing voice:


THAAAT'S EEEEN-TER-TAINMENT!

Just saw this movie. Did anyone else sort of think this was a rip off on Crash?

A ripoff in story style maybe, but I disliked Crash and liked Babel. The reason being, Crash kept beating me over the head with its message (racism is bad mmmmkay!), whereas Babel was just a story trying to evoke emotion. I really liked how you got so involved in the story that when it changed it was kind of jolting but within a few minutes you were already involved in the current storyline.

Superb acting in this movie...

I watched this last night. I won't say this was a terrible movie, just that I didn't find it entertaining in the least. The storylines tried too hard to be relevant and oh so artistically poignant. I felt the director was using sledge hammer subtlety, but he missed my head completely. The intersecting storyline from Japan, was just way out there...I just can't get my head around that piece. I just couldn't care about any of them.

Wow you couldnt care about the Japanese Deaf girl that feels alone in bustling Tokyo?
Or the housekeeper stuck between a rock and a hard place?
Or the couple on a vacation to save their marriage?

Maybe give it some time to sink in Ron :)

Superb acting in this movie...

Stunning acting, even the minor actors in the wedding were excellent. The lady with the Opium pipe was straight out of National Geographics...

The morrocan teenage girl reminded me a little of that famous photograph of that Afghan girl...

http://www.npr.org/news/specials/americatransformed/photos/010924.afghanpic.natgeocove.jpg

Just in case people weren’t aware, the photographer found her 17 years later.

http://www.stefangeens.com/graphics/blog/sharbat-gula.jpg

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2002/mar/girl/index.html

Wow you couldnt care about the Japanese Deaf girl that feels alone in bustling Tokyo?
Or the housekeeper stuck between a rock and a hard place?
Or the couple on a vacation to save their marriage?


Well said.
Especially the deaf girl being subjected to mindless ridicule and somehow trying to cope with the life she was handed.
The same kind of thing was explored in the same gut wrenching manner in Station Agent. Which is exhibiting a new maturity in moviemaking which I don't remember in films before this decade. Which is why it so disappoints me to actually read a thread here which says "movies after the year 2000 suck".

Stunning acting, even the minor actors in the wedding were excellent. The lady with the Opium pipe was straight out of National Geographics...

The morrocan teenage girl reminded me a little of that famous photograph of that Afghan girl...

Also the performance they got out of that one little rugrat is pretty amazing.
When the nanny is about to leave him and his sister in the desert, his reaction to that looks absolutely real. In those "pre-2000" movies that likely would have looked as fake as a three dollar bill.

Wow you couldnt care about the Japanese Deaf girl that feels alone in bustling Tokyo?

Had lunch with a very nice (and beautiful) Japanese lady today, who just happend to watch Babel last night. I explained that I just couldn't figure out the girls motivations or how they dovetail into the interconnected story. Though I found the piece interesting, it was incomprehensible to me. I asked her if I was missing something since there was no subtext/subtitles coming from the character (being mute). She looked at me and with a very thick Japanese accent, said "WTF was that piece about, I asked my husband, he couldnt' tell me either" I asked, do you think she was being abused? " No, her dad just passed on the f**king gun" Now I hope she forgives me (cuz she didn't swear), but that's the gist...exactly what I got out of it...and who cares...not me evidently :)

Or the housekeeper stuck between a rock and a hard place?
Nope

Or the couple on a vacation to save their marriage?
Wonderful vacation choice, an air conditioned bus ride through the armpit of hell to get back in touch with their humanitarian spirit (at least Brad's)...adopt another baby...

This picture shouts "Look how relevant...what a world citizen I am, Praise me, praise me"

I'm just not sensitive enough to find it entertaining. I think I'll go scratch my crotch rot now... :D

[
Had lunch with a very nice (and beautiful) Japanese lady today, who just happend to watch Babel last night. I explained that I just couldn't figure out the girls motivations or how they dovetail into the interconnected story. Though I found the piece interesting, it was incomprehensible to me. I asked her if I was missing something since there was no subtext/subtitles coming from the character (being mute). She looked at me and with a very thick Japanese accent, said "WTF was that piece about, I asked my husband, he couldnt' tell me either" I asked, do you think she was being abused? " No, her dad just passed on the f**king gun" Now I hope she forgives me (cuz she didn't swear), but that's the gist...exactly what I got out of it...and who cares...not me evidently :)


The fact that it was a Japanese deaf girl and it was set in Tokyo was not the point. The point was a deaf girl having to exist alongside others who are intolerant and insensitive to what it's like to be in her skin.
So the notion that a Japanese person passing judgement on this is somehow like Simon the Cow passing judgment on American Idol; is really, really, really, really missing the point.

Let's remember spoiler tags, please!

larry

Just in case people weren’t aware, the photographer found her 17 years later.

http://www.stefangeens.com/graphics/blog/sharbat-gula.jpg

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2002/mar/girl/index.html


Wow, did she have a nose job? :)

That whole Japanese part of the story was like a sore thumb. Outside of the already mentioned connection it made no sense to include it. Maybe the director wanted to go to Japan and film there, but the story he told in context of the entire movie, wasn't necesarry.
Now if he wanted to make a movie about that girl or like her alone, that would have been ok with me , but it was pointless here IMO.

You keep it going if you want to, JohnR, but I give up. It's like expecting NASCAR fans to be able to appreciate art.

Wonderful vacation choice, an air conditioned bus ride through the armpit of hell to get back in touch with their humanitarian spirit (at least Brad's)...adopt another baby...
This picture shouts "Look how relevant...what a world citizen I am, Praise me, praise me"
I'm just not sensitive enough to find it entertaining. I think I'll go scratch my crotch rot now... :D

Whoa! :eek:

Ron, go crack a beer. ;)

Tokyo at night didnt need to "go" with the other locales at all, it was there for contrast.
I thought it added zing to the flick!

Sorry, I didn't feel I was revealing anything previously...but...yes, the japanese piece could have been fleshed out into a compelling story. It had nothing to do with Babel. however. It was like the footage for an interesting short had been edited into a fairly boring screenplay, realizing that the rest was pure crap.

JMO :D


Oooohhhh, crotch feels good now....

Thats how the excellent long range hunting rifle got into the poor Morrocan community, you may as well handed of handed that kid a surface to air missle, it was an accident waiting to happen, and it happened.

ba·bel (bāb'əl) Pronunciation Key
n.

1. A confusion of sounds or voices.
2. A scene of noise and confusion.

... and here I thought it was just

babble

1. to utter sounds or words imperfectly, indistinctly, or without meaning.
2. to talk idly, irrationally, excessively, or foolishly; chatter or prattle.
3. to utter in an incoherent, foolish, or meaningless fashion.

Thats how the excellent long range hunting rifle got into the poor Morrocan community, you may as well handed of handed that kid a surface to air missle, it was an accident waiting to happen, and it happened.
True, but just because they're poor doesn't mean they lack common sense. A central theme for the movie could be adults making poor decisions. :)

larry

Come on, it's a hunting rifle, not an RPG fer cryin' out loud. And this is in the mountains miles (and miles and miles?) from the city, not downtown in a big urban city at a home with no (?) electricity. For hunting, killing animals for food or for killing animal predators of their livestock. They were having trouble with coyote killing animals in their flock, and they traded for the rifle to protect the flock.

The kids were just acting stupid. The older brother was jealous of the younger brother's skill, and it got out of hand.

Wasn't there some talk from the guy who sold the rifle to the father that it needed to be hidden or implied not to get caught with it? So giving the gun to his two sons with basically no training and telling them to go kill some coyotes while he's gone doesn't seem too bright.

Wasn't there some talk from the guy who sold the rifle to the father that it needed to be hidden or implied not to get caught with it? So giving the gun to his two sons with basically no training and telling them to go kill some coyotes while he's gone doesn't seem too bright.

There was. However, IIRC,

after that both the father and the guy who sold/traded the rifle watched on as the two kids demonstrated their relative skill with the gun. AND, after the taller kid showed his poor marksmanship, before the short kid even took hold of the rifle, the father essentially said 'give that to your brother (the short one), he's a better shot' which implies that at least one of the kids had some experience, if not instruction, with a gun. Unfortunately, it appears that dad didn't teach them not to shoot at people.

This is another interesting facet, where I am tempted to consider, yet again, the borderline plausibility of this story arc. I suppose the father could have negligently left the gun with the 2 boys, but I also understand that proper gun training inherently involves the respect of the gun and its power, in order to ensure it is used safely. You don't wield it around as a joke, and you certainly do not aim at other humans. Did this "gun respect" just go out the window with the father and the 2 boys? Is the writer/director building the story on the presumption that there was no sense of "gun respect" amongst these participants?...or that the children were properly trained in gun use, but that just flew out the window one day when they decided to play "sniper" with real people?

If I were a gun proponent, I would have to say the story premised here is utter rubbish. If these kids were properly versed in respect/responsibility of a dangerous "appliance", it is utterly implausible that they would take potshots at a passing tourbus, just for kicks. I would have to see this story as a very one-sided attack in the politically-charged vein of "guns are dangerous and no one should have them".

If I were an anti-defamation of ME stereotypes person, I would have to question if the message is implying children of 3rd world countries have some sort of sociopathic element to them once given free reign of a gun. A message like that would definitely be way over the line for political correctness. Unfortunately, the writer/director fails to be particularly clear about what this message should be. Given the sensitive nature of undertones that are touched here, it seems a tad irresponsible of them to allow the message to be vague.

If the "kids were just being misbehaved kids" as the motif for this story dilemma, shouldn't the writer/director also have treated us to a graphic "3rd world style" whipping of these kids by the father? Is the writer/director guilty of cherrypicking what atrocities to present and what to ignore, just to put the story on a "spin" as it suits his personal views?

Please explain this bit:


If the "kids were just being misbehaved kids" as the motif for this story dilemma, shouldn't the writer/director also have treated us to a graphic "3rd world style" whipping of these kids by the father? Is the writer/director guilty of cherrypicking what atrocities to present and what to ignore, just to put the story on a "spin" as it suits his personal views?


What the hell is a "3rd world style whipping"? They are less civilized and therefore beat their children? Children in 1st world countries like America aren't beaten and abused? That is the most racist and ignorant comments I have seen on this BBS, and I hope you didn't mean it that way.

It would be silly to dismiss that other cultures have instances of severe punishment for children (and this is no claim that it doesn't exist in our own, as well). It is neither "racsist" or "ignorant" to acknowledge these elements of life. It is not a matter of being more or less "civilized", either- just different sensibilities. Ignoring that things like this exist, just to maintain some aire of political correctness, would definitely be ignorant. Do you actually deny that the punishment may very well have been a severe whipping, rather than a "time-out" or taking your cellphone away for a week? Seriously!

The racist and ignorant part about what you said is the way you called it not a "beating" or a "whuppin'" but a "3rd world style whipping."

I repeat my question. What is a "3rd world style whipping" by your definition, and how does it differ from the harsh beatings and whippings parents give their children outside of the 3rd world and even in America? Your above response to my original question shows a continued air of racism.

And I haven't seen the movie since December, but IIRC the father did lay into the boys pretty hard. Maybe not "third world" enough for you, Mr. Hanky, though. Who said anything about a time out or taking cell phones away?

I remember sitting in my dad's office, watching my dad work, and seeing a cleaning rod come straight up through the floor between my Dad's feet. My brother had been cleaning his gun in the basement ...

basically s*** happens with guns .... and thats how I took it that scene, based on personal experience.

If you want to point the "your a racist" fingers around, go right ahead. I'm sorry if the terminology I chose to use causes you such torment. If you absolutely need a definition of a 3rd world whipping, it is simply a harsh beating that you could in no way get away with "here" w/o getting a knock on the door by the authorities.

You don't know me. You don't know enough about me to make any judgement of my "racism", so please drop your aire of condescension toward me. If you are to go on a accusatory rampage to judge somebody based on a single parsed word you don't like, that really says more about you than me.

You may not be a racist, and I never called you one anyway. But your comment was racist whether you realize it or not.

And actually people get away with such beatings, of kids and spouses and targets of hate, all the time in America, unfortunately. They shouldn't, and when they get caught they do get in trouble. But they do get away with it. There is nothing necessarily less civilized or more brutal about a beating given by a father in Morocco than a father in America, and suggesting that there is is racist and ignorant.

You are reading far more into it, than I ever said- hence you are putting words in my mouth, and I don't appreciate that. Whether you are calling me a racist or calling my remark racist, makes no great difference to me. Your intent was to be accusatory and cause offense, either way. You might as well just stick with calling me a racist, and I can similarly (by the same level of logic) call you a knee-jerk liberal. See how over-the-top your reaction is?

I made no assertions about who gets away with what, what is civilized, or what is brutal, but YOU most certainly stuck your own contexts in there to suit your accusation. All I said is that these kids can very well expect a pretty severe beating in Morroco (more than a few pat-smacks to the head) and still remain in line with the sensibilities of that culture. Whether I call that a 3rd world beating or a Morrocan beating or just a severe beating, it certainly is unlike any beating you could get away with here.

You know so much about Morocco, you obviously grew up there. You should have said so in the first place. I take back everything I said.

Don't be snide. I never said I grew up in Morocco. That is yet another instance where you are forcing in context that was never in the discussion. You should also be keen to note that I did NOT call it a "Morrocan beating" (as that certainly could be construed as a racist remark), and went with a more vague grouping of 3rd world.

If you think any sort of distinction of a 3rd world is racist, the irony of acknowledging that this entire movie must then be premised in racism should now become apparent. Why was it even necessary to go to a different locale for the different storylines, if it is now so politically incorrect to acknowledge that different places have differences?! Just base the whole story in San Diego, right?! This is a ridiculous proposition to revision the entire world as one great homogenous society where one 1 sq mile is utterly indistinguishable from the next.

Ok boys, lets leave it.

You really have to turn your head at a certain angle to take Mr. Hanky's comments as racist given the context of his post. Let's stick to debating points about the movie.

larry

I don't think there was much time elapsed between the father finding out his sons were shooting at the bus and the arrival of the police and the chase and shooting of the son. So we don't know what he would have done for punishment.

It seemed like the police were genuine in their desire to find out who was responsible for the shooting and were pretty heavy handed in getting to the truth. That kind of surprised me.

John in LA, perhaps if your brother had intentionally aimed and hit your Dad with his rifle it would have been more traumatic like the shooting in the movie. Accidents do happen, but the shooting at the bus was intentional.

I liked Pitt's dilemma after his wife was shot; communication (hoping he'd get help to come) verses transportation (should he take is wife back on the bus). He couldn't have both. It would have been a hard choice for me to make.

This movie has provided a lot of interesting and serious discussions.
I think that was one of the intentions of the film maker too. :cool:

I had a splitting headache while watching it, but I don't blame it on the movie! :D

I think we should categorize harsh beatings as "Beating you like a Caveman". I really want to see if those guys in the Gieco commercials really do exist :D

I think we should categorize harsh beatings as "Beating you like a Caveman". I really want to see if those guys in the Gieco commercials really do exist :D

http://www.tmz.com/2007/03/02/tv-is-so-easy-even-a-caveman-can-do-it/8

I just love those Geico commercials.
And that Fedex one as well. :D

This thread is cruisin' for a closein'. :) Typical life of a thread. Meaningful on-topic discussion slows down and for some reason people feel the need to drift instead of moving on.

larry

Hey, those cavemen just got a TV pilot!!!

Jon

This thread is cruisin' for a closein'. :) Typical life of a thread. Meaningful on-topic discussion slows down and for some reason people feel the need to drift instead of moving on.

larry

Sorry Larry, I was just having a little fun. I'll start a Gieco Caveman thread tomorrow :D

Okay, I'm a bit behind the times. But my wife saw Babel in the theater, and I finally got around to it last night. My wife raved about the film when she saw it, but I had a really hard time making much sense of it. One possible reason: subtitles. Did the theatrical version have subtitles? I didn't choose the option on the DVD, instead just chose the Play Movie selection. I had to go to Wikipedia last night to figure out what the movie was about, and the level of detail there seemed far more than could have been picked up from the non-subtitled version, at least for mono-lingual folks like me. My wife can't remember if the theater version showed subtitles.

Yes, there were subtitles for the non-English parts (parts in Japan, Morocco, Spanish-speaking nanny, etc.). Did you not see any of those?

Good, then I'm not quite so stupid as I had feared... or maybe I am in the sense that I didn't stop the movie to select subtitles! I wonder then if the default in the DVD is no subtitles, or if my Oppo just chose that for me...

Anyway, Babel certainly lived up to its name for me!