This film may be interpreted on multiple levels: a cheap low-budget T&A movie, a sloppy mystery in which no characters have any discernible motivation, a quickly-produced straight-to-DVD flick designed to initiate teeny bopper into popular conceptions of sex, or a combination thereof. Even so, I believe that Wittgenstein would suggest that the point of the film is an ethical one: for the Ethical is delimited from within, as it were by this movie; and I'm convinced that, strictly speaking, it can ONLY be delimited in this way. In brief, I think: All of that which many are babbling this movie has analyzed merely by remaining silent about it. Think of the following use of language: Cassidy Merteuil (played wantonly by Anapau) sends Jason Argyle (an apathetic Kerr Smith) shopping. Merteuil gives him a slip marked 'five red apples'. He takes the slip to the Michael Cattrall (brilliant portrayed by Tom Parker), who opens the drawer marked 'apples', then he looks up the word 'red' in a table and finds a color sample opposite it; then he says the series of cardinal numbers Merteuil assumes that he knows them by heartup to the word 'five' and for each number he takes an apple of the same color as the sample out of the drawer.It is in this and similar ways that one operates with words"But how does he know where and how he is to look up the word 'red' and what he is to do with the word 'five'?" Well, I assume that he 'acts' as I have described. Explanations come to an end somewhere.But what is the meaning of the word 'five'? No such thing was in question here, only how the word 'five' is used.
Review of Cruel Intentions 3
