Posted on 12/27/2015 7:25:08 PM PST by presidio9
And yet when George went crawling to Potter begging him to lend him the $8,000 to cover the loss, and Potter asked him what happened to the money, George said that he (not the uncle) had lost the money.
I can’t stand the movie myself but Jesus, Smith. Get a freakin’ life, will ya?
While he wasn’t drunk then, his brain probably was helped along by a lifetime of going to far into tipsy.
When George thinks his life is over because of his uncle, he lays into him for everything. And to be fair, were his uncle a more capable man, George wouldn’t have needed to take over the business.
I was shocked by George’s yelling and screaming at his wife and kids. He was really abusive,
You’re joking, right...?
Your opening statement makes as much sense as saying that the decision for some one not to sing Amazing Grace on a particular occasion is a bunch of Methodist nonsense.
Please don’t encourage him to post anymore...
I don’t like it either. Got the other 9? Is there a movie that actually portrays how life will be under the rule of the baby born and sleeping in the manger? Now that is hope and joy!
Potters theft would not upset George as much as his uncle’s negligence.
Hmmm...George didn’t know Potter stole the money...if he had known, you can bet he’d take it out on Potter’s hide, and not Uncle Billy’s...
Potter caused the crisis. Georges uncle caused the depression.
I agree...you said it better than I did!
Lets waste time scanning movies like Star Wars for political messages whilst we are invaded by head-choppers, third worlders and their sickness and anyone else that will not assimilate.
Yep.
No Potter KEPT the money that the uncle inadvertantly handed to him folded in the newspaper he pulled out of potters hand in order to harp about the younger brother being awarded the CMH.
Potter could have claimed it as found money or as being given to him. Where Potter was wrong was swearing out a warrant for George on false pretenses knowing that he wasn’t at fault.
Thank you for taking the time to post that. It was an interesting read.
Uncle Billy’s wife had died years earlier, if I recall correctly, and he never quite recovered from her loss. He used to walk around with strings tied around his finger because he was so forgetful. He would even forget what the string was for and would tie another string around another finger to help him remember what the first string was for! Uncle Bill redeemed himself at the end by rallying the town (along with Mary Hatch Bailey) to raise the money to cover the $8,000 he accidentally gave to Potter. That was a critical role, without which, this story would not have had a happy ending.
It’s true, I think, that Uncle Billy was so scatterbrain that the Bailey Brothers Building and Loan would have been closed or sold to Potter after his brother’s heart attack and death if George hadn’t taken over. He was instrumental in the “miracle” at the end, which is a nice touch and totally out of character for him. So even Uncle Billy redeemed himself and in the process saved his nephew and family, the building and loan and even the community spirit of Bedford Falls.
The story is wonderful in part because all the characters in the movie are so human and frail and flawed but often manage to overcome those challenges when it’s a matter of life or death — or prison and ruination and redemption in the case of George Bailey.
As you can tell, I do love this story. It’s inspirational for all of us trapped in our little worlds and too easily pressured into settling for disappointment and failure at critical moments in our lives.
OK. Prove it.
So you admit that you can't produce any evidence disproving my assertion, right? No quotations from the Bible stating that angels don't have bellybuttons.
My point exactly: Since you are unable to produce any quotes from the Bible categorically stating that angels can't (also) be dead people, and none stating that they are (also) dead people, the issue is unresolvable.
Care to debate any other topics regarding angels? Like how many can dance on the head of a pin?
Regards,
I had heard that Capra supported General Franco. Doesn't sound like a lifelong apathy towards Catholicism.
I always felt it really gave the movie its chops. Stewart makes you feel George Bailey’s despair and desperation in that scene. Brings tears to my eyes every time I watch it, and makes the film’s payoff that much sweeter.
I like The Bishop’s Wife, the original with David Niven and Carey Grant.
“It’s called artistic license”
Glad you wrote that post. Last night when the arguing started, and one suggested something like he got most of it from images posted on FreeRepublic, I started thinking that by using that logic, there may be some people in for a very rude awakening if they actually believe (and they most certainly don’t) that some of the “artistic license” being used by talented FReepers isn’t actually the real thing. LOL! Examples being Cruz in a superhero costume, or Trump brandishing an M-4. Again, good post!
Did he "support" them, with money and influence, or did he "root" for them? There's a difference.
At that time, there were also more obvious reasons to root for Franco than the fact that the Catholic Church in Spain was on Franco's side against the communists. In Capra case, it was most likely because he was such a vocal opponent of FDR and the New Deal.
Donna Reed was pretty!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.