- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Primal Fear (Spoilers)
Posted on 4/27/15 at 2:21 am
Posted on 4/27/15 at 2:21 am
So, after the board telling me how this was Ed Norton's best performance I finally got around to watching Primal Fear tonight. Overall I liked it a lot, I thought the story was interesting and acting was top notch, for the most part.
The only thing that threw me off was Norton's character in the end. You're telling me this 19 year old kid can pull off a stutter and personality change well enough to fool a neurologist?
Also, this is kind of a law question, but since Norton told Gere immediately after the courtroom incident, would there be enough time for Gere to do anything regarding his sentencing?
The only thing that threw me off was Norton's character in the end. You're telling me this 19 year old kid can pull off a stutter and personality change well enough to fool a neurologist?
Also, this is kind of a law question, but since Norton told Gere immediately after the courtroom incident, would there be enough time for Gere to do anything regarding his sentencing?
6
Posted on 4/27/15 at 2:35 am to FranMully
quote:He can't. Attorney client privilege. The only thing a lawyer can report is the prevention of a felony. This felony already happened. I'm pretty sure that's how it is, anyway.
Also, this is kind of a law question, but since Norton told Gere immediately after the courtroom incident, would there be enough time for Gere to do anything regarding his sentencing?
quote:I think that's what made it more shocking, honestly. Of course these things never happen, but that's why it's a movie.
The only thing that threw me off was Norton's character in the end. You're telling me this 19 year old kid can pull off a stutter and personality change well enough to fool a neurologist?
This post was edited on 4/27/15 at 2:37 am
Posted on 4/27/15 at 8:18 am to abellsujr
Ok thats kinda what i was thinking for his law duties. And yeah, the movie was really good. Like every time Norton switched to his "other personality" I was like "woah". Like idk it was really cool and scary at the same time
Posted on 4/27/15 at 12:14 pm to FranMully
I watched it for the first time not long ago. Great movie. I thought Norton did a great job.
I just assumed that neurologists are always looking to diagnose someone with something. So given the opportunity, she did. Plus, he was pretty convincing.
I just assumed that neurologists are always looking to diagnose someone with something. So given the opportunity, she did. Plus, he was pretty convincing.
Posted on 4/27/15 at 1:06 pm to DownSouthDave
I think this movie is pretty underrated as far as they go. I watch it often if it's on
Posted on 4/27/15 at 1:19 pm to FranMully
Primal Fear = before the days of internet pr0n, you had to get your own cast
Posted on 4/27/15 at 3:54 pm to FranMully
quote:
You're telling me this 19 year old kid can pull off a stutter and personality change well enough to fool a neurologist?
He was a sociopath. They can do crazy shite, like beat polygraph tests, fool court-appointed doctors, and literally "become" other people.
Posted on 4/27/15 at 5:26 pm to FranMully
quote:I like this movie, but my question is:
The only thing that threw me off was Norton's character in the end. You're telling me this 19 year old kid can pull off a stutter and personality change well enough to fool a neurologist?
If he's so cunning to pull off the murder and charade that follows, how the frick was he so inept that he allowed himself to be a participant in the Priest porn which is the catalyst for the whole story? It's not like these are separated by years of time. He's the same age from murder to trial to ooops you got me Mr. Vail. I planned this all along. Why was I part of the porn collection? Let's not ask that question. HA.
Posted on 4/27/15 at 7:51 pm to drizztiger
quote:
If he's so cunning to pull off the murder and charade that follows, how the frick was he so inept that he allowed himself to be a participant in the Priest porn which is the catalyst for the whole story? It's not like these are separated by years of time. He's the same age from murder to trial to ooops you got me Mr. Vail. I planned this all along. Why was I part of the porn collection? Let's not ask that question. HA.
maybe he liked it.
Posted on 4/27/15 at 8:00 pm to diat150
quote:Then why not continue liking it?
maybe he liked it.
Or if you liked it, but it's gotten old, walk away?
No, he decides to murder him without any attempt to conceal it and play the "ima crazee missster vail". Sure, why not.
Posted on 4/27/15 at 8:10 pm to abellsujr
quote:
Attorney client privilege.
A lawyer legally can't directly lie to a judge or jury. If his client tells him something and he has to ask about it, and he was told otherwise, he can't make something up.
Posted on 4/27/15 at 8:14 pm to FranMully
quote:
You're telling me this 19 year old kid can pull off a stutter and personality change well enough to fool a neurologist?
I work with some people who could do this. It's innate and they've had the ability since birth. It's just a form of charisma if you really think about it.
Posted on 4/27/15 at 8:23 pm to athenslife101
quote:When does he have to lie to the judge or jury? At the time of the trail, his attorney told what he thought to be the truth. He truly believed he was insane. That was part of Norton's act. If he learns something after the trial, the lawyer has no legal obligation to tell on his client; unless he has direct knowledge of a future felony.
A lawyer legally can't directly lie to a judge or jury. If his client tells him something and he has to ask about it, and he was told otherwise, he can't make something up.
This post was edited on 4/27/15 at 9:08 pm
Posted on 4/27/15 at 8:34 pm to abellsujr
quote:
When does he have to lie to the judge or jury?
I never said he did. Just explaining things how they were described to me based on your initial thought.From what I've been told, this is the reason why a lot of defense lawyers don't ask their clients if they did it or not.
Posted on 4/27/15 at 9:09 pm to athenslife101
quote:This clarifies, I was confused about your intent as well.
I never said he did. Just explaining things how they were described to me based on your initial thought.From what I've been told, this is the reason why a lot of defense lawyers don't ask their clients if they did it or not.
Attorneys are very rarely put in a position to testify under oath for a former client - certainly not a current client.
But if Norton's character confessed and by some how, some means, Gere's character is called to testify, attorney-client is out the window.
Posted on 4/27/15 at 9:19 pm to drizztiger
quote:True, but in this case that is completely impossible. The judge dismissed the jury and made a ruling on the case of not guilty by reason of insanity. Therefore he can not be tried again for the same crime. However, he may be guilty of fraud or some other federal crime, which can be perused because that falls under federal jurisdiction. Or so I've heard.
But if Norton's character confessed and by some how, some means, Gere's character is called to testify, attorney-client is out the window.
ETA: I think Breesus is a lawyer, so maybe he will give some insight.
This post was edited on 4/28/15 at 2:45 am
Posted on 4/27/15 at 9:48 pm to abellsujr
If anyone is interested there is a series of books. Primal Fear was based on the first, and imho best of the books, but there are two others.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News