In the movie Rashomon, the ending is left up to the viewer to interpret which character they believes is telling the truth about the murder. This type of film allows you to see why different characters are lying to make themselves look better as a person. The first story that got told was from the ‘bandit’, Tajomaru. I do not think that Tajomaru’s story is liable considering he was the one guilty of the murder, he took the wife away from her husband. He has a big ego and is very in your face wanting you to feel crazy for believing other stories. He has many good reasons to lie about the truth to make him self ‘look better’ or to get ‘off the hook’. One of his excuses as to why the husband died was simply because of the wife. The bandit said the wife ran away from the scene when she witnessed the fighting happening. The bandit tried to justify the murder by using the excuse that the husband died an “honorable death”. The bandit got drunk and fell off his horse thats when he got captured. He did not want to admit that he fell off his horse. The bandit pawned the samurais sword and traded it for liquor. This is why I think the Bandit is not telling the truth. …show more content…
In every story, she instigated the fighting and the death of her husband. In the beginning, the wife told the bandit that either he or the husband had to die because she could not live knowing she had been with two different men. In her story, she acted as if she passed out when the husband got murdered and she didn’t recall anything about what had happened. She grieves a lot in the movie for her husband but I believe this is to take the eyes off of her. I believe that she wanted her husband dead so that she could be with the bandit. The wife makes herself out to be a good person, as she goes on saying that she would rather die than living with knowing what she has
In both films, the director was trying to convey the complexity of human nature. Rashomon tells the scenario of a man’s murder and his wife’s rape through the statements of four others who have been linked with the case. While in Unforgiven, it is the story of William Munny a retired, but once ruthless killer has changed his way after the loss of the wife. He returns to his old ways just one last time to accept a bounty for some men that will allow him to gain some money for his children back home. Although, both films are expressing the same idea of human nature, they are displayed in two different ways between the films. Which is why I think you chose the two films to be compared to each other.
In the story, "Trifles", a man named John Wright was supposedly murdered. The characters made some inferences that could possibly lead to Mrs. Wright murdering her husband. The facts stated that Mr. Wright was found to be hung by a rope tied around his neck. My inferences state that at the beginning of the story, Mrs. Wright too relaxed at the idea of her husband being dead. Mrs. Wright was laughing and was rocking back in her chair, turning herself away from Mr. Hale. If someone's husband was dead unexpectedly, a loving wife would more than likely be upset about it and would like to be involved with the investigation. Another inference of mine is that she wasn't active in the rest of the story to try to even help anyone try to discover who
To sum up, the narrator is sane in the Tell-Tale Heart. He knows what he’s doing was wrong. one could only imagine that he is insane. this seems plausible at first, but after analyzing all the data you can clearly see he is sane. You always see how when someone does something evil like this that they have a mental disorder because something must be wrong with the narrator to do something this cruel to another
Others may believe the narrator/caretaker form “The Tell-Tale Heart” is the most unreliable because he had killed very violently for no reason. In “The Tell-Tale Heart”, the narrator says, “I cut off the head and the arms and the legs….There was nothing to wash out- no stain of any kind- no blood spot whatever. I had been too wary for that. A tub had caught all-ha! ha!” (Poe 3). The belief that the narrator in “The Tell-Tale Heart” is the most unreliable is incorrect. The narrator in “The Tell-Tale Heart” had killed very violently for a reason while, in “Strawberry Spring”, the narrator describes the murders, “But Springheel Jack killed her just the same, going unerringly for one of our own. The false spring, the lying spring, aided and abetted him - he killed her and left her propped behind the wheel of her 1964 Dodge to be found the next morning and they found part of her in the back seat and part of her in the trunk. And written in blood on the windshield - this time fact instead of rumour - were two words: HA! HA!” (King 4). The narrator in “Strawberry Spring” was violent for no reason. The narrator in “The Tell-Tale Heart” was violent because he was trying to not get caught after he killed the old man. There are huge reasons for why they were violent and the other narrator in “The Tell-Tale
To begin with, in The Tell-Tale Heart the author uses a descriptive tone to describe the murder’s feelings for the one was killed. Evidence to support that statement is “How, then,
To begin with, the narrator husband name is John, who shows male dominance early in the story as he picked the house they stayed in and the room he kept his wife in, even though his wife felt uneasy about the house. He is also her doctor and orders her to do nothing but rest; thinking she is just fine. John is the antagonist because he is trying to control her without letting her input in and endangers her psychological state. It is written in a formal style, while using feign words.
She always talked about wanting to get away from the people and big city when she was older. She had plans of starting a life and did not want her kids accustomed to the big life she received. It all started making sense now. We believe she knew she was struggling with the cartel and wanted out of it. Fast. Some threats we heard when she would need to return money or drugs to the drug mules, were excruciating to hear. Mrs. White says, “I wish i would have known what was going on. I would have gotten her out of this right away. I do not understand how she hid it so well. She was looking as great as always and always had a smile. Long blonde hair and blue eyes. Toned and very athletic. I guess I could say she was strong enough to handle this battle and keep herself presentable. Her death has murdered me inside.”
As she grew up she stood away from boys but when she noticed and kissed one her nanny married her off. In hope to give a wealthy life in which work was a distant memory. Her treatment in the first community was that of a object by her older husband (Mr.Killington). The community followed his example and thought her as nothing more than a common gold digger. They would gossip and spread rumors about her killing and running away with a young black man.
She thought about her husband for the first time and if he went to the tribal police to report her missing. The Yellow Woman did not think about her husband when she woke up next to another man or when she decided to go home with another man. She did not want to think about reality, but just for that brief moment when hunger strike did she think about her family. Once the man spoke to her, she went back to her fairy tale and went inside the man house and made him dinner. As they were eating she asked “Have you brought women here before” because she wanted to know who was playing who. The entire thing was here idea so she thought. For a moment her fairy tale was not a fairy tale because she questions if he knew of the story of the Yellow Woman. If Silva did not know the story she felt like her fairy tale could not happen. Silva was on his game because he said “someday they will talk about us and they will say, “Those two lived long ago when things like that happened”. That line would make any woman go back into a fairy tale mode and that is what Yellow Woman
All four of these stories have one thing in common; they are told in such a way that the teller is justified in whatever he or she may have done. In each story, except for the last, the teller was the murderer. Admitting to the murder they all did and blaming someone else for their own actions, they did too. As for the last storyteller, he did not kill anyone, but he stole the dagger and lied to the police. Unable to allow their egos to drop to low, they all told a riveting story of how they were not at fault. The only question here is before asking where the truth lies, is how is it possible for four people to come up with such extremely different tales to tell? People will say anything in order to cover up the truth if they are at fault in some way or another.
The number one motive for her selfishness derives from the expectations of being a high class, God fearing “lady” and its importance to her. She would rather go to Tennessee and visit her acquaintances, than go to Florida. She would rather bring her cat in secret rather than leave him behind. She would rather stop and see a plantation house than honor the wishes of her son to keep going. If her children and grandchildren did not agree with doing what she would rather do, she would fabricate stories intriguing enough to sway their decision or knowingly lie to dodge any shame. The grandmother reveals her selfishness clearly when she fears the end of her life. Upon realizing the man who stopped to help the family after the wreck was The Misfit she almost immediately starts pleading for mercy on her life. She continues to beg The Misfit to excuse her from the systematic murder of her own family with the excuse being that she is a lady.
She saw the good in everyone and everything even if they had proved that they were not worth of her good thoughts. For instance, “I saw it happen but it isn’t true. It can’t be. He was always gentle” (Lines 2-3), shows that even though the wife might have seen something that proved that someone wasn’t as good natured as she thought, that she still believed that the thing was not malicious in any way. This piece of evidence is an example of her loving and caring character traits. Her protective trait shows up in lines 104 and 105 where it says, “The mother anger come into me then, and I snarled and crept forward.” This is an important part in the text because although she loved her husband very much, she was willing to do anything, even harm him, to protect her children. In summary, these two pieces of evidence show that the wife’s traits pushed her to do what was right. In this case, she loved her husband to the very end, but she did the necessary things to help her family, friends, and her
There are multiple possible causes for the internal conflict the narrator faces. The first being nervous depression and the other is the fact that her life is being controlled by her husband. Her husband is in full control because in the beginning of the story, John, her husband, influences how she should act. He decides the actions that should be taken in regards to her health and sanctity. Although she finds herself disagreeing with his synopsis, she is confined and does not admit how she feels to him. This also brings about another a major conflict that occurred in the 19th century, men being dominant and woman being categorized as inferior. Evidence can be found when the narrator states, “If a physician of high standing, and one’s own husband assures friends and relatives that there is nothing the matter with o...
She proclaims her husbands love throughout the story, I feel, in an attempt to bind the disconnection she feels with her husband.
... she was scared and alone. With the Grandmother, she already prepared to die if anything happens. She doesn’t have to wear the fancy outfit for the trip but she did it anyways. At the end, she refuses to die and begs for survival. In the end, she realized the error of her ways in the story and that even with the difference between her and The Misfit, they are both the same in sin. Both the grandmother has reach an understanding of fear of death and have self-discover who they really are their whole lives.