why didn't they just walk back in the direction they came?
-
junkhotshot — 10 years ago(May 24, 2015 12:33 PM)
How simple it is to ask, "why didn't the girl just follow the car tracks?". Let's review the scene, the girl is bright but only 16 years old and she has just witnessed her father attempting to shoot her brother. She becomes terrified and rushes to her brother to save him but the poseurs, excuse me, posters on this thread are not experiencing this event first-hand, consequently they fault the girl for not making the logical choice as they chomp on their popcorn.
I did not eat popcorn during this film, and I would have made the logical choice in that situation and at that age. For the love of god, she was 16, not 6.
In the act of retrieving her brother, she witnesses her father committing suicide and the VW goes up in flames. She possesses the wherewithal to salvage what she can from the picnic supplies, goes back to her brother and gets as far away from the scene of perhaps the most traumatic event she may ever experience in her lifetime as fast as she can. Before she is allowed a chance to regain her composure they are lost as her little brother realizes much later in the film.
She could have gotten as far away as possible by going in the direction the car came from. And even if she sort of lost it momentary, she should have been smart enough to realize rather quickly she was going the wrong way and to backtrack. Anyone who has enough wherewithal to salvage the picnic supplies would probably not go 100% the wrong direction.
Suspension of disbelief, no problem whatsoever. The film is allegorical, plays with the passage of time and events are sometimes portrayed in a subjective manner. If one tends to get caught up in geography, please avoid this film, the melancholy of the picture will be completely lost.
If that is the argument you want to use, then use it. Do not try to act as if there was logic in their decision.
Dont be lazy, use the
tag. -
raf-33 — 10 years ago(June 29, 2015 12:33 AM)
I'm thinking it's possible that the geography of Australia is possibly not the best Trivial Pursuit subject for a 15/16 year old British girl in 1971. No one consider that?
She would know that it is big, that's about it. It's unlikely by 1971 she would know anything greater about the US, but she would probably know that it is immensely populated and that even out west you are likely to come across a road or a settlement in under a days walk. Not so in Australia where you can walk from the east coast to the west and be dead before you stumble upon your first dirt road.
If I was in a land where just how desolate the place is was the least of my knowledge then I would not be logically thinking about tracks, I'd be thinking "pick a direction, find a phone".
Even if she did have knowledge of Australia's geography she would likely be thinking 'father must have been headed somewhere' so why backtrack the 1,000 or so miles that emptied the fuel tank when you can walk 10 miles and find refuge?
She was a teenage girl for beep sake!
Damn armchair experts, they should cease and desist their pursuit of telling everyone "what an intelligent person would have done".
Ya Kirk-loving Spocksucker! -
junkhotshot — 10 years ago(October 28, 2015 01:09 AM)
She was a teenage girl for beep sake!
Are you saying teenage girls are so stupid they would walk in 100% the worse possible direction?
Damn armchair experts, they should cease and desist their pursuit of telling everyone "what an intelligent person would have done".
It's not about being an 'expect' its basic common knowledge. One path leads 100% to safety, while the other has a chance of leading to 100% death before finding water/food/people.
Not playing russian roulette with your life is not something an 'expert' needs to tell you to avoid.
Dont be lazy, use the
tag. -
ridge-m-1 — 10 years ago(July 20, 2015 10:30 AM)
I never said she acted "logically". Haven't you already come to the conclusion that most individuals do not act in a logical fashion even in a non-stressful situation.
She acted in a manner that does not infringe upon the ability to suspend disbelief. -
andyd-1 — 9 years ago(January 10, 2017 05:33 AM)
She was portrayed as having previously developed few practical skills in life, she was receiving a formal education that was apparently concentrating on manners and accent - that was covered in the film. She failed to do quite a few things, right?