It's a great film simply because:   
      
   In the opening Chris Wilton talks over the tennis ball scenario. Sometimes   
   the ball goes forward and you win. Or it doesn't... and you lose. This is   
   fine as long as you're playing in a game where there are clear rules, like   
   tennis. However, in life there are no clear rules. There is no God, or   
   "higher power" guiding us all. Therefore the ring bouncing back at Chris   
   Wilton is not necessarily "good" or "bad" luck at all. It turned out to be   
   good luck, although in your logical "there must be a God or higher power"   
   mind you think he's going to get caught because the ring doesn't go into the   
   river.   
      
      
   "benjamin&sharon"  wrote in message   
   news:vnRKf.51093$dW3.16527@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...   
   > Marc-Olivier Girard wrote:   
   >   
   >> For me, it is just a rehash of Crimes and Misdemeanors with younger   
   >> people in London with few exceptions.   
   >   
   > I felt it was more of a compliment to Crimes and Misdemeanors than a   
   > rehash.  It fleshed out the story of the mistress and made her desperation   
   > seem justified instead of loony & demanding, almost stalkerish in Crimes &   
   > Misdemeanors.  When you see what the affair was really like, the gravity   
   > of the Crime seems a lot stronger.  This gave Woody a chance to explore   
   > another angle of that situation I don't think he'd deny the Crimes and   
   > Misdemeanors connection at all.  It's almost like a prequel.  And I don't   
   > think it's about luck.  I think that's a diversion.  When the ring fell   
   > off the rail, I thought he was through, and that was his bad "luck".  But   
   > it turned out to be his good "luck". What that tells me is simply that he   
   > took a risk, knowing full well he could get caught, and decided it was   
   > worth it to keep what he had.  The primary focus of the film wasn't luck,   
   > but his choice.  His wife offered him an out, and he denied it.  He would   
   > rather murder than go back to being less rich.  He couldn't hurt his sweet   
   > wife's feelings, but he could kill his mistress, facing her, apparently.   
   > That isn't luck, and it's what is interesting about the film to me.   
   > Although it was bad "luck" he met his mistress when he did, he made the   
   > choice to marry someone else knowing full well how he felt.  No luck   
   > there.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)