green,hOct 10th, 2006 - 22:18:38

While true Elvis has revenge written all over him, you've ignored the parenting style of David Sandow. Paul was his prize and rather than focusing on Malerie during a time he should have, he begins to groom his 'other' son. What message does that send out?

Elvis was raised by a prostitute - to him sex was probably as casual as going to McDonalds. You see - you want - you go get it without any thought to 'if it's the healthiest thing for you'. If it was planned revenge, why would Elvis be confused about Malerie's locked door after finding out who he really is? Wouldn't the vengeful planner anticipate that reaction? His cognitive abilities were that of a simple minded adolescent who didn't know right from wrong.

He was a hedonist who refused to let rules derail his pursuit for what he wanted. He could drill a rifle as well as any honor guard, delivered pizza without a shirt, had sex with who he was attracted to, and eliminated any obstacle that came between him and his father's attention. Is that a psychopath's revenge or a toddler's temper tantrum in the seriously wrong but capable hands?

Report this comment

April MacIntyreOct 10th, 2006 - 22:52:38

Perhaps you should have written the screenplay.

I write reviews without spoilers as much as possible, giving a general picture, and noting good performance both above and below the line, so the movie can be enjoyed without all the information divulged. I do not try to psychoanalyze the character arcs of every person in the screenplay.

Elvis was a psychopath consumed with covetous, murderous envy and rage of biblical proportions. But his backstory was wane, and the ending and third act pacing too abrupt for my taste.

As I said, a flawed film yet still worth seeing for the performances.

Report this comment