Oh Dear. So here we have a patently harmless, naive, romantic young man "stalking" his love. That is a bit tragic, but hardly as disturbing as the critics would have us believe. Anybody with common sense can tell so much. Will as a real-life person would be annoying at the most. If anybody, including Emma, finds Will threatening, then it is their problem.
In dealing with this film many critics harp on this notion of common sense to deride the main character Will and his behaviour. We readers don't need to reminded by some of these grudge-bearing critics that Will's feelings for Emma should probably lead to great disappointment for him. It is obvious. Whether Will is immature in his love is also not entirely clear, despite what many critics say, because love does not belong in the world of the rational to begin with. Will might be unrealistic to pursue the matter, but literature is full of examples like him and they do not always enjoy the wrath of critics.
So where does all this ill-feeling towards Will come from? Perhaps critics feel mocked by the struggling artist Will over the precariousness of their own existence. Here's another theory: Essentially Will stands for a less materialistic way of life. Will is someone who might well adapt better in a more simple society than most critics would. If more people would live like him, the result would be lower levels of industry, especially in the media area, which might then become a craft again. This might actually not be a bad thing, though we'd miss out on a lot of soap operas. But these ideas are politically incorrect. Most critics would quickly have to change in such an environment, perhaps to their detriment. They are all too aware of this. They should stand by their shallow interests openly, rather than trash a nice idea from behind the veil of culture.
In dealing with this film many critics harp on this notion of common sense to deride the main character Will and his behaviour. We readers don't need to reminded by some of these grudge-bearing critics that Will's feelings for Emma should probably lead to great disappointment for him. It is obvious. Whether Will is immature in his love is also not entirely clear, despite what many critics say, because love does not belong in the world of the rational to begin with. Will might be unrealistic to pursue the matter, but literature is full of examples like him and they do not always enjoy the wrath of critics.
So where does all this ill-feeling towards Will come from? Perhaps critics feel mocked by the struggling artist Will over the precariousness of their own existence. Here's another theory: Essentially Will stands for a less materialistic way of life. Will is someone who might well adapt better in a more simple society than most critics would. If more people would live like him, the result would be lower levels of industry, especially in the media area, which might then become a craft again. This might actually not be a bad thing, though we'd miss out on a lot of soap operas. But these ideas are politically incorrect. Most critics would quickly have to change in such an environment, perhaps to their detriment. They are all too aware of this. They should stand by their shallow interests openly, rather than trash a nice idea from behind the veil of culture.