@@andrewstephens5885You gotta have a room temperature IQ in order to think that monologue was meaningless, even on your first viewing. Surely a good chunk of the movie being dedicated to a random character had to mean something…
Vinz and Hubert both resent the system of violence and oppression in which their lives are trapped. Each wants to break free, but they disagree on how to do so. Vinz argues that oppression must be met with violence, to cultivate fear, and therein respect from their oppressors. Hubert argues that this kind of violence only perpetuates their oppression--"hate breeds hate." These two opposed approaches each satisfy a need--to cultivate respect, or to cultivate peace--akin to holding up one's pants, or grabbing the man's hand. They cannot elevate the status of the ghetto without satisfying both these needs. But you can't do both at the same time, and ultimately, you just freeze to death.
I find it interesting how towards the end, Vinz does let go of his pride by symbolically giving the gun to Hubert. But Vinz ends up getting killed anyways.
Poor Grunwalski had a choice. If he dropped his pants and grabbed the man's hand, he would lose his modesty and honor but keep his life. If he held on to his pants, he would keep his honor but lose his life. He flip flopped between these two until it was too late and he died.
Just like vinz, through the entire film he built himself on his honor and modesty, wanting to be someone he's not, and ultimately bred more and more hate. He had his pants pulled up. But by the time at the end, when he realized he couldn't kill someone, even if they were the most hateful being in the world (the nazi) it was far too late. His pants were down, and he began to reach for the hand (abandoning that life, giving the gun to Hubert and choosing life and peace), but the cycle of hate he bred had already grown too much, and he froze to death. Wow.
the grunwalski story is a metaphor for what is happening in Vince's life. Grunwalski represent Vince in this story. And the one reaching his hand to Grunwalski represents Hubert. Hubert keeps on reaching to Vince, so he can help him get of the negative path that only leads to death and destruction. Vince is torn between what is happening around him in his life and what he thinks he is supposed to do and to react. (part1)
Meilleur film français des années 90. Chaque scène est puissante et a une signification. Celle-ci est assez émouvante, j'apprécie particulièrement le fait qu'ils écoutent ce vieil homme avec attention, intrigués par son histoire et qu'ils semblent chamboulés quand ce dernier s'en va. Quelle que soit la métaphore, l'analogie ou le message de cette histoire ce que je trouve très fort c'est l'interaction avec l'ancienne génération. La Haine est un film incroyablement humain.
Mais trop tard pour Vinz, lorsqu'ils sont allés chez Astérix, embrouille pour un flingue et l'argent que Saïd devait récupérer, et Vincent après rencontre un Skin-Head c'est pire, là tout est parti en couilles pour eux trois
I was high the first time I saw this, honestly it nearly killed me cos I couldn't stop laughing so hard, I had some real good times when I lived in France!!
It's about pride being a 'sin' - Grunwalski was too prude, which in the end was his downfall. This reflects Vincent's attitude throughout the film and how he ended.
I see that a lot of people get it wrong. Heres why: 1. Grunwalski was shy. He didnt choose to be shy. He just was this way. 2. Others teased him because of that. 3. When the train stopped, he took a dump further from everyone else because he was shy, because of his nature, not because he wanted to prove smth. 4. When he was running and reaching for the hand, he had to stop, pick up his pants and start running again. Its not about his pride, its because of common sense. You cant run with your pants down. You are running while holding your pants, and when you try to grab other preson's hand, the pants fall down. Stop talking about such BS like "If he dropped his pants and grabbed the man's hand, he would lose his modesty and honor but keep his life.". If you want to grab person's hand, you need to be running (which you can do only while holind your pants). The problem with Grunwalski is this. People noticed that he was shy. But instead of helping him, they teased him in the showers. If they hadnt been teasing him, he wouldnt so far away from the train to take a dump. And then everything would be fine. So the problem is not the nature of Grunwalski (i.e. him being shy), or as others think his "pride", but its all about others teasing him.
Nature may predispose you to be shy, courageous, confident, social or solitary... But it does not dictate your behavior. It’s culture and the choices we make that determine this. The same taunts can kill someone and save another, as a rite of passage and acceptance into the group. They have a cohesion and testing function. What the new “woke” generation does not understand, always offended and busy walking on eggshells. Grunwalski knew what he was doing. He was not a pre-programmed robot. I've been on forked paths before, I know that feeling. Both options are front of us.
Wow, this really is the best interpretation of the monologue I’ve seen. I always knew the “it’s about pride” argument was nonsense, but you expressed it really well. The real reason behind Grunwalski’s death was the environment he was in. It wasn’t his shyness or decision to shit far from the others, but rather the events that led him to take such decisions in the first place. If the others in the group hadn’t teased him or isolated Grunwalksi, he would’ve most likely survived, even if he was still shy. This ties into the main themes of the movie, which are police brutality and the attitude of “hate breeds hate.” It’s not about isolated events here and there of police using excessive force against protestors or citizens, but about the environment that created such a relationship in the first place. About how not having a sense of community or a purpose in life with connections to other humans leads to hate both from the police and from angry, ordinary people. The point of the monologue is to show that the root problems of society are much more than meets the eye, and not just about one bad apple in the bunch.
The environment provides conditions. No cause in the sense of the laws of causality. The explanation does not hold water, but it confirms the fatalists in their belief. With the same environment (teasing) and the same nature (shyness) Grunwalski could have made other decisions. In real life, we often find ourselves at crossroads, where there is an opportunity to change the trajectory. There is a major, chaotic part of life where small determinants cause big effects. Point by point : 1. from the age of 7, and throughout one's life, one can self-determine. That is to say, making decisions about yourself, like a programmer who installs software. Shyness, pride, selfishness or lack of self-confidence are workable. 2. Everyone tests and teases everyone. There is an evolutionary function to this, to promote group cohesion, and the survival (strength) of the individual. The biggest difference is in the reaction: those who react well (counter-reply, face their fear), and those who react badly (shut up, leave the group). 3. There is a crossroads, a level of freedom. Not everything is determined p=1. Despite his shyness, maybe he wouldn't have gone that far just to pee, and he would have survived. Maybe if he had thought of something, a fiancé or a child to find, his survival instinct would have been stronger than his shyness. There is a choice. 4. Contrary to what we see in the movies, the person on the train must have an outstretched hand, strong and stable, in the long term, but the person running does not need to extend both hands all the time. He just have to run enough, trust himself, and jump at the right time by grabbing the other's hand or any other stable handle on the train. There might be the option of taking off your pants to run, or tying them up. When you're running for your life, you know what you're doing. Exactly, adrenaline makes you break down the wall of conditioning. Grunwalsky did not do this, and even though it was too late during the chase after the train, he made a conscious decision to walk away. Being teased didn't kill Grunwalski. It was only one of the conditions.
"Il ne faut pas se demander si on croit en Dieu, mais si Dieu croit en nous." À l'époque, j'ignorais le sens de cette phrase, mais aujourd'hui je l'ai compris ✓
That is a good estimate, relating gramp's story to the whole film. There are so many interpretations of this story. My original impression was that the gramps was the bad dude for teasing Grun till he strayed. from the tracks.
The analogy between the Grunwalski story and the rest of the film is quite straightforward. You either accept the cards life has dealt you and strive to make the best of them, or you let your environment define you until you make a stupid decision that kills you. Grunwalski, through his shyness and dignity, was denying his reality. How can one be shy when treated like an animal? Thus, others mocked him for his stubbornness. His reaction, which reflects the choice he made, ultimately led to his demise. This is the struggle Vince faces throughout the movie: he is compelled to react doing the most stupid thing because his environment has led him to believe he has nothing to lose.
We either do something or we don't do it, we can't do two things at the same time. In times like these we live in today, especially in the nation where I from: or, we go into violence or help each other in adversity to have a chance to survive; playing between doing the facts or not nothing happens and defeat is certain, with the pants down and the dirty ass.
@KarasuNoGoh It's funny how both of the top comments have people trying to analyze what this segment of the film is analogous to and what it symbolizes, but I think you're both wrong. I saw various interviews with the director and he said he was at a party once during the filming of this movie and he met an old polish man who told him this story, he loved it and wanted to include it somehow but since the polish man had no acting experience he got Lokcinski to do it since they knew each other.
That may be the case but there is much more meaning to the scene than that. Throughout the film from that point on, his anecdote is referenced by the main trio wondering why they were told this story. They are clearly surprised and shocked by this somewhat random story but it clearly has some meaning and adds further to the symbolism of the film.
I was at a screening for the director's new film "Rebellion" yesterday and someone asked about this scene. He said that the speech is meant to say "We should all keep perspective in our life. There is always someone suffering worse than you". The other men on the train had it bad, but not as bad as Grunwalski... Vinz, Hubert and Said can learn something from that.
Exactly right. Everyone always tries to spin this monologue into something far more complex and profound than was intended. The real message, as you explained, is really quite simple. It’s that no matter how bad we think we have it, there is always someone somewhere who would kill to have your life. That doesn’t mean we have to put up with all the failures and evil around us, but it’s important to keep things in perspective so as to not throw it all away.
(part2)Hubert reaches him sometimes, and when he does, Vince tries to take his hand, tries to get out of his "bubble".. but everytime he tries to take hubert's hand, something happens, what rexsults in Vince going back to what he knows. This happens throughout the movie.. in the end he actually got hold of Hubert's hand , so to speak.. So who was right? Hubert or Vince? In the end it didnt matter, the surroundings have their own life..even if you dont act on it.
Yeah, very true. I think that’s what’s most tragic of all. It didn’t matter if they made the “right” or “wrong” decisions because they aren’t in control of an oppressive system, as shown in the end.
Its also about this man ..aka Hubert being to harsh on Grunwalksi. If he didnt..Grunwalksi or Vinz..would find it easier to stay closer. In the end...the 'nothing' is also very key. He says it like...thats life. Another casualty. Also about the warmness of togetherness and that the loner dies - with integrity maybe - alone in the cold.
yes, but if the guy telling the story had not upset grunwalski he may not have gone behind the bush which would mean he possibly might have been able to get to the train and consequently may in fact have survived. Not important, i know. But, interesting none the less. A different interpretation of the story. I wiil have to watch this amazing movie again.
J'adore ce passage! La morale c'est que des fois, il ne vaut mieux pas essayer d'aider une personne, ca pourrait lui nuire plus qu'autre chose. Il vaut mieux la laisser se debrouiller seule.
La morale de cette histoire c'est qu'il ne faut pas écouter les autres ! Il n'aurait pas dû aller plus loin derrière le buisson et il aurait du se moquer également du vieil homme.
Le malheur c'est que les jeunes de 15 ans issus de banlieue en 2021, n'ont, à cause de l'éducation nationale, aucune possibilité de comprendre cette scène. Ce n'est, d'ailleurs, absolument pas leur faute. Mais il n'en demeure pas moins qu'ils sont un problème.
Parce que tu crois que tu l'a compris cette scène? ta conclusion est en contradiction totale avec l'explication. Pour un commentaire aussi court c'est très fort. Par contre ton analyse sur l'éducation nationale est valable même pour toi.
I think this movie as a whole is overrated, but this scene is easily the best. So many layers to the monologue that it makes the entire film worth the watch. The ending scene is pretty great, too.
Problème : Comment s'écrit le nom du Monsieur ? Les "ü", ça ne sonne pas très polonais. J'ai 12 orthographes différentes à proposer en raison de mon problème d'audition.
My interpretation is that the concept of an eye for an eye is quite like trying to catch a train with a pair of pants that won't stay up, in the middle of Siberia -- you'll be left frozen to death.
Such a smart scene. The old man's story really put Vinz and Hubert's problems into perspective.
only if you’re a really good thinker though, gotta admit i found the story meaningless at first
@@andrewstephens5885 i don't understand may you explain please?
@@andrewstephens5885You gotta have a room temperature IQ in order to think that monologue was meaningless, even on your first viewing. Surely a good chunk of the movie being dedicated to a random character had to mean something…
@@alancantu2557jackass
I love the touch of the guy who is afraid to exit the toilet until everyone has gone...
he is a "Grunwalski" type !
...and he's a cop!!!!! Genial
@@Murmundone The one talking about different types of hasj right?
He's the punchline that answers the question, "Why did he tell us that story?"
Vinz and Hubert both resent the system of violence and oppression in which their lives are trapped. Each wants to break free, but they disagree on how to do so. Vinz argues that oppression must be met with violence, to cultivate fear, and therein respect from their oppressors. Hubert argues that this kind of violence only perpetuates their oppression--"hate breeds hate." These two opposed approaches each satisfy a need--to cultivate respect, or to cultivate peace--akin to holding up one's pants, or grabbing the man's hand. They cannot elevate the status of the ghetto without satisfying both these needs. But you can't do both at the same time, and ultimately, you just freeze to death.
Wow.
Merci.
Brendan DuBois ...great explanation of a dialectical view on violence
Quora, 2016
I find it interesting how towards the end, Vinz does let go of his pride by symbolically giving the gun to Hubert. But Vinz ends up getting killed anyways.
ua-cam.com/video/NKppkmlB5HQ/v-deo.html
The best Monologue in late film history...
Тhis moоviе is nоw avаaailаblеее tо wаtсh herе => twitter.com/193803eed31d94d45/status/795843397621645313 Таdеk Lоkсinski Lа Haine Grunwalski Mоnoоооlоgue
ua-cam.com/video/NKppkmlB5HQ/v-deo.html
Yes. Definitely a classic.
Poor Grunwalski had a choice. If he dropped his pants and grabbed the man's hand, he would lose his modesty and honor but keep his life. If he held on to his pants, he would keep his honor but lose his life. He flip flopped between these two until it was too late and he died.
exactly. Honor or life? It's hard to find a line between & live with dignity.
ua-cam.com/video/NKppkmlB5HQ/v-deo.html
Just like vinz, through the entire film he built himself on his honor and modesty, wanting to be someone he's not, and ultimately bred more and more hate. He had his pants pulled up. But by the time at the end, when he realized he couldn't kill someone, even if they were the most hateful being in the world (the nazi) it was far too late. His pants were down, and he began to reach for the hand (abandoning that life, giving the gun to Hubert and choosing life and peace), but the cycle of hate he bred had already grown too much, and he froze to death. Wow.
His own pride, ego and love for honor set it in stone that he would freeze.
@@Goatnime I really like your take on the meaning behind this scene
the grunwalski story is a metaphor for what is happening in Vince's life. Grunwalski represent Vince in this story. And the one reaching his hand to Grunwalski represents Hubert.
Hubert keeps on reaching to Vince, so he can help him get of the negative path that only leads to death and destruction.
Vince is torn between what is happening around him in his life and what he thinks he is supposed to do and to react. (part1)
Saïd represents the train...
@@NathanaelRamosNo
@@NathanaelRamosHow?
i watched this movie for the first time last night & kept thinking to myself that hubert seems like the only responsible one out the 3 of them.
Meilleur film français des années 90. Chaque scène est puissante et a une signification. Celle-ci est assez émouvante, j'apprécie particulièrement le fait qu'ils écoutent ce vieil homme avec attention, intrigués par son histoire et qu'ils semblent chamboulés quand ce dernier s'en va. Quelle que soit la métaphore, l'analogie ou le message de cette histoire ce que je trouve très fort c'est l'interaction avec l'ancienne génération. La Haine est un film incroyablement humain.
Can u recommend me some french movies or directors? Like la haine or just in general your favourites
@@insert-name101une prophet
one of the key scenes of this incredibly good movie
Super le mec belle métaphore pour faire comprendre aux jeunes d'arrêter
Oui tout à fait merci ❤️❤️❤️💗
Bonjour mais Vinz a compris trop tard
Mais trop tard pour Vinz, lorsqu'ils sont allés chez Astérix, embrouille pour un flingue et l'argent que Saïd devait récupérer, et Vincent après rencontre un Skin-Head c'est pire, là tout est parti en couilles pour eux trois
Oui il faut se serait les coudes et rester ensemble même pour chier
I was high the first time I saw this, honestly it nearly killed me cos I couldn't stop laughing so hard, I had some real good times when I lived in France!!
Hi
@@berkansengul5924 hey
@@calebchildress5478 hi
hello@@elijahebbert6884
Same. It was so hilarious. Hope, it's all going good for you.
This is the best Movie of all time, respect vrom germany.. ;)
ua-cam.com/video/NKppkmlB5HQ/v-deo.html
Agreed
I’m so glad to see people outside of France love this movie. This is a masterpiece.
It's about pride being a 'sin' - Grunwalski was too prude, which in the end was his downfall. This reflects Vincent's attitude throughout the film and how he ended.
It wasn’t pride or a sin
I see that a lot of people get it wrong. Heres why:
1. Grunwalski was shy. He didnt choose to be shy. He just was this way.
2. Others teased him because of that.
3. When the train stopped, he took a dump further from everyone else because he was shy, because of his nature, not because he wanted to prove smth.
4. When he was running and reaching for the hand, he had to stop, pick up his pants and start running again. Its not about his pride, its because of common sense. You cant run with your pants down. You are running while holding your pants, and when you try to grab other preson's hand, the pants fall down. Stop talking about such BS like "If he dropped his pants and grabbed the man's hand, he would lose his modesty and honor but keep his life.". If you want to grab person's hand, you need to be running (which you can do only while holind your pants).
The problem with Grunwalski is this. People noticed that he was shy. But instead of helping him, they teased him in the showers. If they hadnt been teasing him, he wouldnt so far away from the train to take a dump. And then everything would be fine. So the problem is not the nature of Grunwalski (i.e. him being shy), or as others think his "pride", but its all about others teasing him.
I just watch this and I don't think it was about teasing. How that would relate to the movie story?
Nature may predispose you to be shy, courageous, confident, social or solitary... But it does not dictate your behavior. It’s culture and the choices we make that determine this.
The same taunts can kill someone and save another, as a rite of passage and acceptance into the group. They have a cohesion and testing function. What the new “woke” generation does not understand, always offended and busy walking on eggshells.
Grunwalski knew what he was doing. He was not a pre-programmed robot. I've been on forked paths before, I know that feeling. Both options are front of us.
@@thuyaoccidental "Grunwalski knew what he was doing. He was not a pre-programmed robot. "
we are what we are
Wow, this really is the best interpretation of the monologue I’ve seen. I always knew the “it’s about pride” argument was nonsense, but you expressed it really well. The real reason behind Grunwalski’s death was the environment he was in. It wasn’t his shyness or decision to shit far from the others, but rather the events that led him to take such decisions in the first place. If the others in the group hadn’t teased him or isolated Grunwalksi, he would’ve most likely survived, even if he was still shy. This ties into the main themes of the movie, which are police brutality and the attitude of “hate breeds hate.” It’s not about isolated events here and there of police using excessive force against protestors or citizens, but about the environment that created such a relationship in the first place. About how not having a sense of community or a purpose in life with connections to other humans leads to hate both from the police and from angry, ordinary people. The point of the monologue is to show that the root problems of society are much more than meets the eye, and not just about one bad apple in the bunch.
The environment provides conditions. No cause in the sense of the laws of causality.
The explanation does not hold water, but it confirms the fatalists in their belief.
With the same environment (teasing) and the same nature (shyness) Grunwalski could have made other decisions. In real life, we often find ourselves at crossroads, where there is an opportunity to change the trajectory. There is a major, chaotic part of life where small determinants cause big effects.
Point by point :
1. from the age of 7, and throughout one's life, one can self-determine. That is to say, making decisions about yourself, like a programmer who installs software. Shyness, pride, selfishness or lack of self-confidence are workable.
2. Everyone tests and teases everyone. There is an evolutionary function to this, to promote group cohesion, and the survival (strength) of the individual. The biggest difference is in the reaction: those who react well (counter-reply, face their fear), and those who react badly (shut up, leave the group).
3. There is a crossroads, a level of freedom. Not everything is determined p=1. Despite his shyness, maybe he wouldn't have gone that far just to pee, and he would have survived. Maybe if he had thought of something, a fiancé or a child to find, his survival instinct would have been stronger than his shyness. There is a choice.
4. Contrary to what we see in the movies, the person on the train must have an outstretched hand, strong and stable, in the long term, but the person running does not need to extend both hands all the time. He just have to run enough, trust himself, and jump at the right time by grabbing the other's hand or any other stable handle on the train. There might be the option of taking off your pants to run, or tying them up. When you're running for your life, you know what you're doing. Exactly, adrenaline makes you break down the wall of conditioning. Grunwalsky did not do this, and even though it was too late during the chase after the train, he made a conscious decision to walk away.
Being teased didn't kill Grunwalski. It was only one of the conditions.
"Il ne faut pas se demander si on croit en Dieu, mais si Dieu croit en nous."
À l'époque, j'ignorais le sens de cette phrase, mais aujourd'hui je l'ai compris ✓
That is a good estimate, relating gramp's story to the whole film. There are so many interpretations of this story. My original impression was that the gramps was the bad dude for teasing Grun till he strayed. from the tracks.
one of the best movies ever!!
The analogy between the Grunwalski story and the rest of the film is quite straightforward.
You either accept the cards life has dealt you and strive to make the best of them, or you let your environment define you until you make a stupid decision that kills you.
Grunwalski, through his shyness and dignity, was denying his reality.
How can one be shy when treated like an animal?
Thus, others mocked him for his stubbornness. His reaction, which reflects the choice he made, ultimately led to his demise.
This is the struggle Vince faces throughout the movie: he is compelled to react doing the most stupid thing because his environment has led him to believe he has nothing to lose.
Best way to break up a fight haha
One of the best movies ever!
We either do something or we don't do it, we can't do two things at the same time. In times like these we live in today, especially in the nation where I from: or, we go into violence or help each other in adversity to have a chance to survive; playing between doing the facts or not nothing happens and defeat is certain, with the pants down and the dirty ass.
It means don't put yourself in a situation you can't get out of..
The mirror placement is legendary
never seen this sceene in french
love it even more
my favorite scene
@KarasuNoGoh
It's funny how both of the top comments have people trying to analyze what this segment of the film is analogous to and what it symbolizes, but I think you're both wrong. I saw various interviews with the director and he said he was at a party once during the filming of this movie and he met an old polish man who told him this story, he loved it and wanted to include it somehow but since the polish man had no acting experience he got Lokcinski to do it since they knew each other.
That may be the case but there is much more meaning to the scene than that. Throughout the film from that point on, his anecdote is referenced by the main trio wondering why they were told this story. They are clearly surprised and shocked by this somewhat random story but it clearly has some meaning and adds further to the symbolism of the film.
I was at a screening for the director's new film "Rebellion" yesterday and someone asked about this scene. He said that the speech is meant to say "We should all keep perspective in our life. There is always someone suffering worse than you". The other men on the train had it bad, but not as bad as Grunwalski... Vinz, Hubert and Said can learn something from that.
Exactly right. Everyone always tries to spin this monologue into something far more complex and profound than was intended. The real message, as you explained, is really quite simple. It’s that no matter how bad we think we have it, there is always someone somewhere who would kill to have your life. That doesn’t mean we have to put up with all the failures and evil around us, but it’s important to keep things in perspective so as to not throw it all away.
@@alancantu2557 Agreed. and nice to remember that fantastic screening and Q&A 10 years ago!
no the old guy was telling a story to these young guy,s a story of life ?YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY ONE,S TO HAVE IT HARD! many before you!
(part2)Hubert reaches him sometimes, and when he does, Vince tries to take his hand, tries to get out of his "bubble".. but everytime he tries to take hubert's hand, something happens, what rexsults in Vince going back to what he knows. This happens throughout the movie.. in the end he actually got hold of Hubert's hand , so to speak.. So who was right? Hubert or Vince? In the end it didnt matter, the surroundings have their own life..even if you dont act on it.
Yeah, very true. I think that’s what’s most tragic of all. It didn’t matter if they made the “right” or “wrong” decisions because they aren’t in control of an oppressive system, as shown in the end.
ua-cam.com/video/NKppkmlB5HQ/v-deo.html
Its also about this man ..aka Hubert being to harsh on Grunwalksi. If he didnt..Grunwalksi or Vinz..would find it easier to stay closer.
In the end...the 'nothing' is also very key. He says it like...thats life.
Another casualty.
Also about the warmness of togetherness and that the loner dies - with integrity maybe - alone in the cold.
Nothing like a good shit!
Oh how true!
💩😌
Pride comes before the faill.
Exactly.
I loved the joke about the nun, mistaken for batman
This scene is epic too
Du grand Art !!!
Main of the comments are in english ? Whaou, i'm surprised
yes, but if the guy telling the story had not upset grunwalski he may not have gone behind the bush which would mean he possibly might have been able to get to the train and consequently may in fact have survived. Not important, i know. But, interesting none the less. A different interpretation of the story. I wiil have to watch this amazing movie again.
Life before ego.
J'adore ce passage! La morale c'est que des fois, il ne vaut mieux pas essayer d'aider une personne, ca pourrait lui nuire plus qu'autre chose. Il vaut mieux la laisser se debrouiller seule.
La morale de l'histoire de Grunwalski c'est qu'à vouloir trop essayer de sauver son honneur, on finit par en perdre la vie voire les deux
La morale de cette histoire c'est qu'il ne faut pas écouter les autres ! Il n'aurait pas dû aller plus loin derrière le buisson et il aurait du se moquer également du vieil homme.
Cette histoire c'est la même que Vins et Huber mais dans un contexte différent. Seul difference, Huber et Vins meurt tous les deux
Souvenirs énorme
Meaning of Life
too much pride kills
Heineken is EEEEVERYWHERE
cette scène me travail depuis +20 ans...
Pareil ici
Pareil ici
👍👍👍culte
Poor grunwalski
Le malheur c'est que les jeunes de 15 ans issus de banlieue en 2021, n'ont, à cause de l'éducation nationale, aucune possibilité de comprendre cette scène. Ce n'est, d'ailleurs, absolument pas leur faute.
Mais il n'en demeure pas moins qu'ils sont un problème.
Parce que tu crois que tu l'a compris cette scène? ta conclusion est en contradiction totale avec l'explication. Pour un commentaire aussi court c'est très fort. Par contre ton analyse sur l'éducation nationale est valable même pour toi.
Une des rares Histoire de merde qui ont marqué le cinéma...
I think this movie as a whole is overrated, but this scene is easily the best. So many layers to the monologue that it makes the entire film worth the watch. The ending scene is pretty great, too.
Problème : Comment s'écrit le nom du Monsieur ? Les "ü", ça ne sonne pas très polonais. J'ai 12 orthographes différentes à proposer en raison de mon problème d'audition.
No, btopishere is more on the mark with his answer.
My interpretation is that the concept of an eye for an eye is quite like trying to catch a train with a pair of pants that won't stay up, in the middle of Siberia -- you'll be left frozen to death.
Mythique
Alors je temps la main
Wonder how he ended up in Siberia… Maybe he fought for the Germans?
Trop subtile pour toi.....a méditer
after all these years i realized that was actually old man's fault what happened to gruwanksi. because the old man created evilness.
lol
Govalski 😂😂😂