Conclusion
This film is rated PG, so many would put it on their list of acceptable to watch movies... but should it be? Is the rating that Hollywood gives a film an acceptable guide for what is appropriate? They measure how much violence, sex, and foul language are in a film... is that a reliable grid? This film involves drinking, foul language, an unwed mother, lying and fraud, the gaping face of a dead man, an old witchlike character, two men in a bed together, a man taking a bath, public nudity on a motorcycle, and finally sacrilegious situations and conversations.
If we wanted to we could shoot it down by counting the swear words and the number of times people drink alcohol and we would have plenty of ammunition, but the real questions we have to address is if these kind of things are a necessary part of the story and do they either 1.] Present ungodly values as acceptable and desirable or 2.] show people living according to unrighteous principles and suffering no ill consequences for it. or 3] take a scoffing view of good moral conduct. (In other words, it doesn't have to present a 'Father Knows Best' everything is perfect Christian world view, but if it shows another then it should not deceptively omit the true consequences of such behavior. Seeing a man destroy his life through an illicit love affair says a lot about fidelity.)
A plot is a situation within which there are circumstances that create tension; and the action that the various characters take, and the ensuing result of that action to resolve the tension, is the working out of the moral or ethic statement. The idea that there is a temptation, the opportunity to get a lot of money, is what creates this story. The tension comes into play by making it such that there is a great moral dilemma involved in getting this money. They must commit deception and fraud to get it. Would you?? When there is a storyline such that you can project yourself into the situation and wrestle with the moral decision in your own mind.... That is exactly what makes for a good, suspenseful, and riveting story. The conclusion of any story should reinforce a solid moral position of doing what is right or suffering the consequences for doing wrong. Unfortunately this film glorifies dishonesty, fraud, lying, and deception all done for the love of money and makes a mockery of church and marriage and wholesome relationships in the process, which is a shame because otherwise it is a wonderfully made piece of art. Technically Kirk Jones is a great director, but the poor morality of his story line is his downfall.
This film could have been redeemed by utilizing a different ending. Any ending that would reestablish the morality or at least accuse or exhibit remorse over the moral violation would have set it back on the proper track. Although there could be several solutions, here is one alternate ending to demonstrate how Jones could have redeemed the moral pitfall of his story line.
First of all the townspeople have to think that Quinn has blown the whistle and they have lost the money. This leaves plenty of room for people to repent and express how what they were doing was wrong and that they shouldn't have done it to begin with - "and if they send the lot of us to jail, we'll only be gettin' what we deserve!" one of them would say. This would correct the proposition that it's OK to defraud the government (i.e. the Lotto). In the vein of the old Brother's Grimm story of the lady who sold her hair to buy her husband a watch chain while he sells his watch to buy her a beautiful hair comb, each sacrificially thinking of the other...Maggie decides she loves Flynn enough to marry him even though he smells of pigs, while Flynn has decided that for such a love he would give up his business and "I'll just hafta' find somthin' else ta do!" Each is willing to make personal sacrifice because of love, as opposed to the real story where they are presented as being in love, yet neither will make changes or allowances to be with the other.
Next change would be that as they confess their love for each other she decides they must have a relationship built upon truth, so she comes clean with Flynn regarding the true father of Morris. Though he is a little taken aback to find that he is not the father, still Flynn decides that he loves Morris as his own son regardless and so they marry for true love. To add a little twist at this point, Quinn would next appear in a scene where she is talking to the Lotto man and it turns out that she and Ned were old friends and Ned had confided in her about Morris being his son and he had shown her his will whereby he left everything to Morris. She is blowing the whistle, but only because she feels the rightful heir is being cheated. (She's not really so rotten after all!) When the truth of it becomes public knowledge, the townspeople (with Jackie as the leader!) insist that Morris be declared the true heir and the money put in trust for his future.
Next the Lotto man consults with Morris on whether he wants to pursue legal charges against the town for trying to defraud and cheat him out of his inheritance. (This would reinforce the wrong of what they were doing and show that it was not a 'victimless' crime but one committed against whoever the money should have gone to.) Morris has a spiritual meeting with the substitute priest where they discuss temptation, weakness, and forgiveness; and he then declines pressing charges saying 'After all they didn't really mean any harm. It was just greed got the better of them.' (Thus the priest redeems the spiritual and practical life giving role of the Church in the community. After all, he not only serves as a spiritual counselor to Morris, but he also helps save the town from going to jail!) The theme of Jackie and Michael's wonderful lifelong friendship could be reinforced in a scene where they console each other over the loss of the money....
Setting: Pub
Action: Jackie enters and sees Michael who waves him over. As he sits down the bartender serves him a beer.
Michael : "So, that's that then?"
Jackie : "Yes it seems so... young Morris will be a rich man indeed in about 11 more years when he gets his trust! It's all for the best I recon '. " (Takes a contemplative sip of beer.)
Michael : 'Are you not going to miss havin' all that money then?'
Jackie : "Well I'll tell ye, Michael. When we was in that church and I was talkin' about you like it was you instead of Ned in that coffin, I thought to myself...'Why, I'd give all the money in the world just to have my friend Michael back by my side! (Lifts beer in a toast.) So who's a poor man when he's rich in friends?!!! Here's to friends! (Freeze frame as the two touch glasses and a musical Irish jig crescendoes.)
Last updated: 12 April 2006
Updated by: Matt Bynum