okay, first of all, who cares if i got a +1 for my post and you hadn’t (yet)? rep means nothing. i would much rather have someone respond thoughtfully to something i say than to simply +1 it –which he DID, and rightfully so. i don’t agree with your theory in this instance, but you get points from me for creativity and thoughtfulness (well, not literally, because i can’t dole out rep on my phone –which is another reason why i didn’t say more than that at the time).
secondly, i can appreciate the amount of thought you put into it. i always think theorizing about movies and television is fun and a good mind exercise, even if they are way out there or we know for a fact it wasn’t the film makers intention –because whether or not Alan Ball intended for the character of Frank to be obsessed with... frank, i do like to think that filmmakers do what they do in part to give people a lot to think about. i know, as an amateur writer, i’d be like “hell, yeah!” if i became a published author and threads about outlandish theories on my novels started springing up on the internet.
anyway, i think my main issue with the whole thing is that there just isn’t enough character development to say what the intention was.
secondly, i can appreciate the amount of thought you put into it. i always think theorizing about movies and television is fun and a good mind exercise, even if they are way out there or we know for a fact it wasn’t the film makers intention –because whether or not Alan Ball intended for the character of Frank to be obsessed with... frank, i do like to think that filmmakers do what they do in part to give people a lot to think about. i know, as an amateur writer, i’d be like “hell, yeah!” if i became a published author and threads about outlandish theories on my novels started springing up on the internet.
anyway, i think my main issue with the whole thing is that there just isn’t enough character development to say what the intention was.
__________________
letterboxd
letterboxd