The Rules of Attraction : For 'fans' of the suicide scene/2:37

I put the word "fans" in quotes, as most, including myself, found the suicide scene the most emotionally moving scene.

Anyway, watch 2:37, an Australian film that came out after The Rules of Attraction. Some people compare it more to Elephant, but if you've seen The Rules of Attraction, you will understand the comparison.

Personally I preferred 2:37 to The Rules of Attraction.

They look to have nothing in common, even if both have suicides in them [a reference which btw you should delete from your subject header for spoilers].

Tonally, even the trailer alone indicates it's nothing like a B.E.E. story. Just because people might appreciate why the suicide is in Rules of Attraction that doesn't indicate an interest in watching any story including a suicide. If this 2:37 doesn't share such in common then they look even less thematic related.

Appreciate your comments, hels, but have to disagree here.

I don't believe stating "suicide scene" in the subject is a spoiler as a) that's not what The Rules of Attraction was about - it was just one part and b) in no way did I state who committed suicide so.

Sounds like you're a fan of the author as I had to look up who the heck "B.E.E." was. However, it doesn't sounds like you've seen 2:37.

As for your big words such as "thematic related" and other literary thangs meaning you must be educated in thematic themes, uh, as I said, IF you appreciated the portion of Rules of Attraction that dealt with the suicide scene - and why the character committed suicide - well THAT is entirely what 2:37 is about.

So I beg to differ as thematically that IS a very common bond. And for what it's worth, I don't watch trailers (nor mobile homes).


"Into every life a little coffee must spill."

My opinion simply put:

a) Suicide is an event that some people won't know is in the film at all; it indicates a plot that reveals how serious the film becomes. Most non spoiler users would prefer a title such as 'About the food service girl: Spoilers', since that only indicates you want to say something about a character and you'll be referencing a plot point. You're forcing people to know a suicide happens, and you don't have to. You could easily change it and keep the reference to suicide and the food service girl in the body of your text.

b) Again, an appreciation for why a suicide is a major part of one story does not indicate that fans of that will be interested in suicide as a plot point of films in general. When you say they share a common bond because of the suicide and why it's committed, I assume you mean either that the event is the same [bathtub], or the cause is the same [unrequitted love]. My point is still that similarities do not mean fans of one will be fans of the other, when the tone and context of Rules of Attraction is so unique. 2.37 looks to adher to a traditional, dramatic tone about serious issues taken seriously and gravely. That is much more common tonally than Rules of Attraction and other B.E.E. works. If this was a board about a film that is entirely about a suicide of a teenager I wouldn't quibble with your belief that fans might want to be pointed at other films entirely about the same subject.

c) But many of the people who like this film will like it for it's tone, context and philosophical approach, a very rare tone to take. Some of those people will be invested fans who like the writer, many won't know the writer but will be acutely aware that they might like the writer's work if this film is really their thing. Apologies if you don't like it, but the reason this film got made and a major attractor of fans is that the novelist behind has a unique tone, approach and inferred philosophy. There is much media about teenagers, drugs, privilege, relationships, suicide, rape, homosexuality, or college but that doesn't mean that a fan of something as unique as Rules of Attraction is interested in seeking out any other media about one of it's themes. If I opened a thread on here suggesting people watch Boys Don't Cry because it contains a rape [or because it's about people sexuality, not being straight, or people misinterpreting other peoples' sexuality] it would be stupid, not only because they are not similar scenes but because they are tonally dissimilar. I wouldn't assume that an appreciation for Rules of Attraction as a whole means anyone is particularly interested in one of it's themes. I might assume that a fan might want to see other B.E.E. adaptations because his work is so tonally similar an enjoyment of one likely indicates an enjoyment of another.

d) Sorry if you don't like it, or the words I use. Yeah, as a fan I've read the books. If you don't like people using big words on a board about a film adapted from literature, that sounds like your problem.

e) Don't know what you mean by mobile homes. Totally lost on me.

I wrote my comment disagreeing with you so other people who would read the thread would know that the film you advocate doesn't seem similar to B.E.E. work; if someone reading the thread would, like me, not be interested in a referral to watch a trailer for something not tonally similar, they get to save a minute by not bothering. If someone is interested in suicide in general, they'll watch the trailer anyway. Or not if they can't be bothered. No need to get in a bunch just because I disagree with you.

Seems like you're in the bunch based upon how many words you've used here.

Now YOU have actually included a spoiler in your mega-text post, stating it is the food service girl who committed the suicide. I never did.

The reason for the suicide in this film is basically the SAME reason for the suicide in 2:37. That's the whole reason I mentioned this.

Nothing more. Nothing less. If one is intrigued by a person who was basically ignored committing suicide, one may be intrigued by another movie dealing with the EXACT same freakin' topic! lol

To me, the connection is clear as day. Of course, you've not seen the other movie - nor the similarities, yet you still criticize me.

Without merit, I might add.

As I've said before and I'll say it again, I never said 2:37 had the same style as the author behind Rules of Attraction.

I'd seen 2:37 first, but when I saw the suicide scene in Rules of Attraction, it spurred me to watch 2:37 a second time.

Hence why I posted. Now why not give it up. I have a point and you love the author of The Rules of Attraction. Nothing wrong with that.


"Into every life a little coffee must spill."

Here's the difference - if someone who has not seen the film opens a thread that is spoilerised in it's first paragraph or already in it's subject header, they are aware that the thread is about the content of a film they hadn't yet seen. Ergo they know more spoilers are likely to continue in further comments; they can turn back if they don't want to know spoilers and accept the ruin the first spoiler caused. If they continue reading, most people are sensible enough to know they are inviting more spoilers. So my spoiler you reference is a moot point. In practical terms, if someone who had not seen the film read this thread as far as my comment about food service girl and then was unhappy to see more spoilers, they should have known better than to continue reading a thread discussing the nature of spoilers.

My point was [and this is considered good standard of practice on IMDB] you didn't have to spoiler at all in your subject; if your thread is about spoilerising content putting 'Spoilers' in the subject is considered good practice. Note my point there: that's not just my opinion that's the opinion of IMDB. Then someone who doesn't want to know one iota about the plot won't open your thread at all until they've watched the film.

When you put suicide in the subject header, you force people to know there's a suicide in the film even if they are looking for a specific, non spoiler thread topic. Or even you spoil it for people not even checking thread titles if your thread gets stickied [sic] on the front page.

I won't bother discussing all your other points but will say: this is a thread for people interested in discussing Rules of Attraction. You want people to watch a film that has one event similar to Rules, which actually might not be of any interest to fans of Rules, in which case you wasted their time AND you didn't discuss Rules on the Rules board. Nobody here has to want to bother watching another film just because it has suicide in it, something that is in thousands or hundreds of thousands of films, tv, books and all forms of media. I have a point and you're irritated I disagreed with you.

And don't tell people to give it up; it makes you sound like you think you're in a war, this is just a disagreement with some mild misuse of IMDB rules.

One thing which I find very valuable about IMDb is recommendations of similar movies. Or other movies which one may enjoy.

I've watched many gems based upon the comments an IMDber would share with another. And I am doing just the same.

And I was very clear about that. My bringing up 2:37 was very valid. You seem upset with that.

I didn't bother looking up to see how long you've been around IMDb, nor do I care. But I'm far from new here.

I'm glad you enjoyed Rules of Attraction.


"Into every life a little coffee must spill."

Thankyou for that recommendation OP. Just finished watching it and I have to say it was worth my time. I'm amazed I didn't know about it either given that I'm from the city it was shot in.

angels bleed from the tainted touch of my caress

You're very welcome, GammaScorpii.

You make my argument with dels worthwhile and I feel vindicated.

Into every life a little coffee must spill.

The suicide scene was probably the hardest death I've ever had to watch in a movie. I love this film, but it's really hard to watch again because of that scene.

By contrast, this film also has one of the most beautiful moments, where the two characters are split-screened to the song Colours leading up to when they meet.

I don't know if you're aware of this but I've already changed things. I killed Ben Linus.
Sayid

To clear this up, here's the synopsis from the imdb page for 2:37:

A contemporary, ensemble drama telling the complex tale of six high school students whose lives are interwoven with situations that so many of today's youth are faced with. The story takes place during a normal school day. At precisely 2:37 a tragedy will occur, affecting the lives of a group of students and their teachers. As the story unfolds, the individual stories of the six teenagers are revealed, each with its own explosive significance.

Sounds pretty similar to me?

I had to shut my eyes for the suicide scene in 2:37, too harrowing.

Yes. As I wrote the original post nearly 3 years ago, so had to completely reread the thread to get my bearings, 3 years later hels is as off base as ever.