Interpretation of the confession (major spoilers)
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Under Suspicion
sgraf_x — 16 years ago(April 14, 2009 11:55 PM)
Ok I really like this movie. Gave it a 8/10. Now as to Hearsts false confession and this is just my own opinion on this, as there is room for viewer interpretation due to the ambigutiy of the ending.
I think his false confession was a sort of "Well *uck you then." to his wife. The entire storyline revolves around their marriage even though these murders are the focus of the film. As everything plays out through the Q&A regarding the murders the constant theme is the state of their now dysfunctional relationship. It all stems from her lack of trust in him at the Christmas party and downward spirals from there. Her lack of trust and his disappointment that she should know him better causes him deep pain as only true love can. He has pretty much loved and cared for her, her entire life and now he feels betrayed that she would even consider him guilty of this crime.
So he just gives up because he is basically all used up and has given up hope for them. In his mind he thinks "OK if thats what you think I am then I will be what you think." I know its a kind of self-defeating logic but havent you ever felt that way? Ultimately his intent is to hurt her back they way that he feels hurt.
There is, NO Gene for the Human Spirit. Gattaca -
sockscats — 16 years ago(April 17, 2009 02:35 PM)
Thank you for also liking this film. I actually gave it a 9 out of 10.
I don't see it as a f you kind of thing. I see it as a man devastated that his wife would think he could do this so there is nothing to fight for.
He had been sparring with the 2 detectives for a long time and just gave up. What she thought of him is what mattered most.
I think visiting the cheap whore's "in the dirt" was his F you to his wife.
Like all movies involving a person or people who are falsely accused oxbow incident to mystic river there is simply too much evidence too believe and I thought the photos were way over the top. -
sgraf_x — 16 years ago(April 17, 2009 09:53 PM)
I pretty much think we are coming from the same place with our understanding of the confession. Only slightly different in perspective. Of course in trial he would have been aquitted even if the real killer had not been caught in the act. Hence his confession in the presence of his wife was inteded to inflict her pain even if only for a brief period of time.
And yes there were a lot of red herrings deployed throughout this film. Not only to suggest Hearsts guilt but also to imply perhaps his wife may have done it as well.
There is, NO Gene for the Human Spirit. Gattaca