2. Forrest Gump Jr.
At the end of Forrest Gump we discover that Jenny has had a child. The child is also named Forrest and is said to be his son. Soon after Jenny passes away from an unknown disease (likely HIV/AIDS), leaving Forrest Jr. to be raised with Gump. Throughout the film Jenny is not portrayed as being totally morally inclined. She is promiscuous and continually pushes Forrest away. Whilst they do have sex it is only the once and indeed was Forrest’s first and also his only time in the film.
We know that Jenny trusts Forrest unquestionably, possibly because he is as far away as you can get from her own father. He is extremely unlikely to be an utter douche to a child, especially his own. He is also essentially a millionaire and will be able to provide a child with a comfy upbringing. So when Jenny hears that she will soon pass away, who would she turn to? Forrest Gump of course. However with Jenny’s previous lifestyle what are the chances that Forrest Jr. is actually Forrest’s son? It is possible, but it seems a bit unlikely in the grander scheme of things. In fact when placed next to an alternative interpretation its likeliness is reduced even further. The fact is that it is entirely possible that Forrest Jr. is not actually Forrest’s son. He may have been the inspiration for his name, but as they were childhood friends with a deep connection he would likely be the first name she thought of anyway.
The most likely scenario is that on any one of her promiscuous endeavours another man got her pregnant, it is in fact likely that she does not even know who the father is. Upon learning of her disease she turned to the man most likely to come to her. The man who she wants, maybe even believes, to be the father. But the fact is that statistically the father could be any number of other men.
Want to write about the stuff you're passionate about and have your work read by an audience of over 10 million a month? Click here to become a contributor.
5 Comments
Even though I hate the layout and navigation of this site since it was switched over from OWF, it’s articles like this that keep me coming back. Well done, sir.
There were a definitely a few on this list I had not heard before that I agree enrich the films. I think Signs is massively improved by the demons interpretation.
However, a Stephanie Meyers theory was teased in the introduction and never spoken of again. I’m kinda dying to know what could possibly redeem that work.
If you subscribe to Oneiric theories – Inception would be very simple defined as a purely ‘dream film’ – In Inception there is no reality for the film exist only as the collective dream of it’s audience. Simply – the first ‘dream level’ is the film itself – the audience, by entering the theatre, has entered into the first ‘dream level.’ By leaving the theater we continue with reality – just try not to choke on any popcorn because your soul may get stuck in movie theatre-limbo
I just wanted to voice my opinion here on the Avengers bit. Loki’s motives are actually laid out quite clearly. Or at least I though they were. In the movie Thor (Spoilers beyond this point), Loki attempts to have Thor exiled and tries to murder Odin in order to become “king” of Asgard. In the end he gets blasted into what appears to be space. It’s then mention in the Avengers that Thanos and his army found Loki and were told of the Tesseract, which is on Earth. Hawkeye mentions in the beginning that it is a gateway through space and that a door can be opened from both sides. It is mentioned that Thanos and his army want the Tesseract and that Loki is helping them by giving them information about Earth. It is also mentioned that Loki wants dominion over Earth, presumably because he failed to become king of Asgard. His motive is simply a megalomaniacal craving for power. There is even a completely blatant comparison made between Loki and Hitler. This isn’t to say that you’re theory is incorrect, as far as Thanos and the Gauntlet goes, since if Loki had succeeded in subjugating the Earth and obtaining the Tesseract then it would have been the perfect place from which to stage an invasion of Asgard. But I just don’t think it’s fair to say that Loki’s motivation is left vague in any way and that it is a plot hole. All the basis for his motives are laid out quite plainly in the film.
RE: the Tarantino-verse……
In Django Unchained, Kerry Washington’s character is named Broomhilda Von Shaft. Quentin has indicated that, yes, she is the ancestor of “black private d–k who’s a sex machine to all the chicks” John Shaft.
Can you dig it?