I vote she should go with Tom Hanks, kids or no kids. She made a vow to him and she loved him and I vote she should stick to her vow. I know she made a vow to the second husband but that was under false pretenses. I'm curious to see what others think however. Have a nice night.
2006-10-06 15:10:41 · 11 answers · asked by Poppies_rule 3 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
Ok, I spelled the title wrong. How completely irrelevant to what I'm asking but I guess if you'd rather be correct and rude, then good for you!
2006-10-06 15:40:52 · update #1
yes she should have went back to him she is what kept him going
2006-10-06 15:37:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
this is to bigwurster, actually you messed up the title, the movie is castaway which yes is a noun,but it refers to the title character, who is in fact a castaway.
def: a person or thing who has been cast away, or a shipwrecked person
that being said, i think she should have gone back with Tom Hanks too, just for the sake of a better ending.
2006-10-06 22:22:37 · answer #2 · answered by Answer Girl 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
see you messed up the title of the movie. it's Cast Away. Castaway is a noun. Cast Away is a verb thus meaning that something is thrown away. Helen Hunt's character cast away her relationship with Tom Hanks.
2006-10-06 22:13:39 · answer #3 · answered by BigWurster 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes I agree cause if after all those years my 1st love came back 2 me I'd leave hubby No#2 in a heart beat no joke
2006-10-06 22:20:16 · answer #4 · answered by sugarbdp1 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
that was SOOOO heartbreaking!!! I think if you saw that movie continue a year later you would see that her husband would realize that she was still in love with Tom's character and he would LEAVE her. Who can endure that role? After being the first choice to - suddenly being what keeps her from him?
2006-10-06 22:24:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
They were only engaged, not even ready to set a date. She made a promise, not a vow. I was impressed that she kept the car, however.
2006-10-06 22:21:41 · answer #6 · answered by LORD Z 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It had been a very long time. Hank's character had been declared dead. She certainly had a right to move on, she did and I think her greatest obligation was to her kids so love or no she had to stay with her current hasband.
2006-10-06 22:17:34 · answer #7 · answered by MUD 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No.
Hunt's character acted as best she could, and in good faith.
Hank's character was an entirely different man when he returned, anyway; it could be that he was no longer a good match for his former wife.
The resolution in the movie was appropriate, and realistic.
2006-10-06 22:21:38 · answer #8 · answered by silvercomet 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
no she spent how many years believing him to be dead,and she did what anyone is supposed to do and moved on her with her life!just because you love someone doesnt mean you should throw your life away for them.he understood that,why cant you?
2006-10-06 22:14:20 · answer #9 · answered by callalily07 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i think so to thats why the movie was so miserable
2006-10-07 08:00:12 · answer #10 · answered by IUKYUKL 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋