Tom and Edie try to make up for not being with each other in high school, so they dress up like themselves back when they were in high school, and start to make out. Tom then removes the panties off of his wife (No Nudity, She is Wearing a Cheerleader Skirt) and performs cunnilingus on her (No Nudity). They then go into the 69 position (No Nudity).
During the Diner scene, one of the criminals grabs a woman’s clothed breast, and sniffs his hand afterwards, and wipes his hand on his chest. It is implied he is gonna attempt to rape her.


. Tom and Edie have violent sex on their hallway staircase. Tom removes Edie’s panties revealing a clear side view of her butt. We also see a clear view of Tom’s butt as he thrusts. There is a lot of thrusting and moaning present in this scene as well.
Edie walks out of their bedroom bathroom, wearing an open bathrobe, clearly exposing both of her bare breasts, and her pubic region. This is immediately after the second sex scene.
References to sexual assault and rape.


Film review:Translated by www.rabudo-ru.com


In 1948, Sartre’s dirty hands was released. This allegorical title tells us Sartre’s question, or rather, it preaches his idea: can you dirty your hands for noble purposes? Hugo, a good young man who came from a bourgeois family but devoted himself to the bright cause, said: “as for mankind, what I care about is not their current situation, but what kind of people they can become.” The person who holds a positive attitude towards the above problems is Hugo’s leader, Hedley. He said: “I love people who are in the status quo.”

After watching the last rehearsal of the play with Sartre, Camus said, “the play is very good, but I don’t agree with one detail.” He thought that Hugo and Hedley’s lines should be exchanged, which showed that he preferred Hugo. Sartre thought Hedley was the real hero in his mind. Hedley said, “I have dirty hands, all the way to my elbows. I put my hands into the dung and blood. What else can I say? Do you think people can take power without doing bad things?” When your hands are stained with blood, it is the time of violence. Camus and Sartre, who have different views on dirty hands, naturally stand in opposition to violence. In 1954, the Algerian national armed front launched a violent uprising against French colonial rule. Camus insisted on explaining and calling for the elimination of the war with humanitarian principles, which in Sartre’s view is a kind of “soft hearted realism”.

Hannah Arendt wrote in reflections on violence: “no one who cares about history and politics can be unconscious of the habitual role of violence in human affairs, but people pay little attention to the role of violence and give special consideration.” She said this in 1969, and it seems that it is not out of date now, but at least one film stood up and said something about violence. It is no longer a white dove flying all over the sky, but a clear beginning. It is marked with the brand of a history of violence at the beginning of the film. In my opinion, this name is not big and inappropriate. History will always leave the most profound mark on the smallest individual, so researchers can tell the great characteristics of history through individual observation. David Cronenberg’s masterpiece was selected as one of the top ten films of the year of 2005 in the French film manual, and ranked second with 10 votes in the vote of editors. I think the French must have seen Sartre’s “dirty hand” shaking in front of them when voting. This hand not only tells the relationship between violence and noble goals, but also tells the metaphor between intellectuals and dirty politics. How can we not let the French who boast of culture be intoxicated, How can they not praise the video “history of violence”, which is good in sound and color and seems to continue the thinking of their predecessors.

Like Hedley, Tom stall wants to say, “do you think Joey Cusack can become Tom stall without killing?” Joey’s ideal is to become Tom, serve customers in the shop and his wife in bed, which is his noble goal. I don’t know how he killed himself in the desert and spent three years getting this sweet and quiet life now. However, I saw how he killed Carl Fogarty and his brother Richie Cusack in order to return to the quiet table after he accidentally became a hero. It seems that Sartre is right. The act of soiling his hands with violence is really worth it, and can successfully achieve the revolutionary goal. However, the essence of violence is determined by its purpose and means. The danger of violence lies in: first, the purpose is to wear clothes, and they are all famous brands such as “justice” and “ideal”, but it is difficult to see what is under the clothes; Second, even if the purpose is really good and beautiful, it is often in danger of being overwhelmed by means. How can people not be eager to try when they hold a sharp weapon that cannot be produced? The heaven reliant sword is to compete with the Dragon slaughtering sword, but it does not prevent it from piercing innocent people and even the chest of sect leader Zhang Da at a convenient time.

Joey understands the horrors of violence, although he is usually the beneficiary. That’s why he was so angry with his son who beat the campus bully to the ground because of his resistance at school, and slapped him in the face. Jack thinks his father is a hero. He can solve problems with guns or with fists. But Joey doesn’t want to see his own shadow in his son. He even tries to establish a family tradition of “solving problems without fighting”. So why hug each other silently after his son shot Carl Fogarty? Yes, the latter is forced by the situation. What is terrible is not violence. Anti violence people like Camus will also say that “institutional violence is a part of the order of things”, and violence itself has its rationality and legitimacy; The terrible thing is to think that violence is the first choice to solve all problems, and therefore feel like a hero. Before we really understand the golden saying of Grandpa Kant that “man is a thing, and its existence itself is the purpose”, it is better to practice less violence.

Tom stall or Joey Cusack’s biggest worry is not that his hiding is exposed. He needs to solve the ensuing troubles. His biggest worry comes from the people around him. As Edie said, they witnessed the process of Tom becoming Joey with their own eyes. The eyes that once showed definite love were stained by dirty hands. Edie said desperately, “I don’t believe you!” Violence blocks the communication between people and establishes its own order. In this order, people become distracted because of their different understanding of the magical thing of violence. The wife does not understand that violence is also one of the ways to solve the problem, and the son has not deeply understood that violence is not the only way to solve the problem. Therefore, the only thing that can give him comfort is the little Sarah, who was covered by her mother’s eyes and never saw her father’s dirty hands. Only she will be the first to hand tableware to her late father and let him eat this extremely sad dinner.

After this dinner, only dirty hands and the eyes of people who have seen them will be left in the adult world.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here