So why shitpost about it here?
Maybe check out the other thread:
Wasn’t this also your opinion?
Followed by this.
I didn’t realize this was a Rah Rah only thread.
Okay, how about this.
Andi invents the foundational technology for Alpha. The equivalent of inventing Google’s search algorithms, or Amazon’s shipping systems. She brings Bron in as investment capital, and to manage the corporate side of the business. She works with the company to fully mature her invention and see the company though its initial period of success, the retires from an active role in the company, but stays on as a major share holder, probably with an eye towards working on new projects. When Bron tries to push development on Klear, she uses her shares to block him, possibly invoking some clause in the original agreement that says the inventor of Alpha’s foundational technology can force other investors to sell out under certain situations - but the contract doesn’t identify who the inventor is, so Bron invokes it first, claiming that he was the person being referred to as “the inventor,” and when Andi sued to stop him, he brought in the testimony of his friends, who all “remembered” him working on it, demonstrating that “everyone” knew the contract was always talking about Bron when it referred to “the inventor.” Arguably, Andi should have known better than to sign a contract with that term undefined, but that’s getting out into the weeds of the backstory. Maybe Bron suborned the lawyers Andi was relying on for contract law knowledge, anticipating that he might have to take her out at some point, and they deliberately failed to point out the trap. The point is, its not an insolvable plot point, it’s just too distant from the story of the film to waste time resolving on screen.
Going back to the theme of “burn it all down”, my favorite part was that as you watch the extended flashback, you slowly realize how angry Blanc is at these people, and that every little apparent awkwardness or misstep on his part in the first part of the movie was actually when his anger welled up and he let the mask slip and trolled these motherfuckers because he couldn’t help himself. It’s definitely Columbo-like, but much more personal. He’s doing this for a third grade teacher, not for any of these rich assholes.
I figured it was some sort of Social Network deal where Miles had the ability to issue himself a tremendous number of preferred shares, essentially diluting Audi’s stock to irrelevance. Or possibly in some sort of stock swap between Alpha and the new subsidiary, so the equity got transferred disproportionately to Miles.
Yeah, I think Lionel even references The Social Network when talking about what happened to Andi.
In one legal move, he cut her out completely.
Booted her without a dime, Social Network’d her.
Lionel is a credible character, so viewers can accept that Andi’s ouster was a legal move. And, even though his explanation references a fictionalized account, it is better than: “his lawyers had worked the contract so she was cut out of the company”.
What remains is the difference between what could have happened with Miles and Andi vs. what Zuckerberg actually did to Saverin.
If you’re interested, you can take a look at this relatively good site: How Mark Zuckerberg booted his co-founder out of the company.
This was a dumb comment that I added at the last minute.
Andi would have had nothing to do with the Norwegian chemist (who is described as “sketchy”) or with his hydrogen fuel.
Miles either bought him out or somehow stole his idea.
The movie clearly demonstrates that, not only is Helen a reliable narrator, the flashbacks are an enhanced version of her narration, with a level of detail that Helen would not be conveying to Blanc, and most probably was not even aware of.
For example, when, in flashback, we see Andi is sketching out her plan for Alpha, there’s a closeup of the napkin. It is very unlikely that Helen described the details of the napkin to Blanc. When, in the present, Helen shows the napkin to Miles before he ignites it, it is the same as the one in the flashback.
This confirms Helen’s role as a reliable narrator, and that we are expected to take the flashbacks as accurate.
(BTW, given that Andi kept a journal and, assuming that she continued her childhood aspiration to become famous enough to have multiple biographers, she would have put notes about the business plan in her journal, along with a history of Alpha’s creation and development. Her journals could have been used in the court case to rebut the “disruptors” testimony. Anyway, there’s no indication of that in the movie.)
In another flashback, Andi finds the napkin and we see her typing an email message. For sure, Helen didn’t say to Blanc: First, Andi typed “Found it.” in the subject line, then she typed “I finally found it…” but that is what we see. And (and!) the content of the email on screen is exactly the same as what we see (in the present) when Helen shows her smartphone to Blanc, right down to the error of not capitalizing the start of the second sentence (or, using a period instead of a comma.) Likewise with seeing the photo of Andi and the red envelope with “Love, Andi XO”, in the flashback and in the present. These are indications that the flashbacks are accurate depictions of what actually happened.
So, when we see the Alpha/Klear contract, it is reasonable to assume that we are viewing the actual contract that Miles presented to Andi for signature, even though Helen did not know the specific contents.
The investment contract says “100% ALPHA Investment into KLEAR HYDROFUEL”, which is consistent with Miles’ desire “to give the company’s entire resources to launch this thing.” Andi and Miles are the only two signatories, with each as “Equal Partner 50%”. Why will each of them be 50% owner of the new company? Obvious reason: They are 50% owners of Alpha, and all of Alpha is going into the new company. So what nefarious scheme did Miles hatch, with Andi owning half the company? If he had already done something to their original contract, he could have proceeded with Klear without Andi’s approval. He would not have had a new contract drawn up with Andi owning half of the new venture, but let’s say that the new contract had some conditions that Miles would have used to his advantage. Andi didn’t sign it, and there’s no indication that Andi signed any subsequent contract after refusing to go ahead with Klear.
Thanks for pointing that out.
For me, it’s a bit like doing the Sunday NYT crossword puzzle. It takes time and effort and, even if I can’t solve it, it’s satisfying to get some of it right.
Part of the puzzle is figuring out the movie, which has multiple components that fit together very consistently. The other part is figuring out why some posters have proposed explanations that are not consistent with the movie or with real life.
In any case, I’ve felt like Andi over the past few days: I’ve made some small mistakes and a major one in real life, but at least nobody died …
I can’t figure out if you’re fixated on this contract stuff because you think it’s a flaw, or if its because you think that it’s important information that changes how we should interpret the film.
Good (implied) question.
First, let me say that the NYT crossword puzzle analogy is not as good as saying that it’s like a series of logic puzzles, e.g. Blue-eyed islanders. In any case, it doesn’t explain my fixation on the contract.
So, as I said in my previous post: I’m wondering if anyone has any explanation for why Rian Johnson included a shot of the Alpha/Klear contract that Andi was about to sign. The movie’s flow and overall logic would have been fine without that 2-second shot.
Andi tells us that she controls half the company but she could be wrong, because of some shenanigans by Miles that Andi’s not aware of. So, when she’s kicked out of the company, it could have been because of some terms in the contract put by Miles’ lawyers. But, the Alpha/Klear contract makes this conclusion almost impossible to accept.
So, the inclusion of the contract creates an apparent contradiction with the rest of the movie, which leaves us with the puzzle: Why did Johnson include it? The entire movie is assembled almost flawlessly so it’s almost definitely not a film-making oversight.
The prop for the contract isn’t assembled flawlessly. It is quite non-sensical. I would hesitate to draw any conclusions from it.
Here is an article with a close-up of the prop and a list of issues with it:
I think it’s clear from this article that the contract is a prop and you’re not supposed to worry about what is written on it.
Thanks CaveMike for finding that analysis.
I can accept that the contract is nonsensical, which in turn means that the movie makes more sense. Also, it makes it easier for me to accept the other nonsensical aspects of the movie.
Since this has been bimped:
I finally got around to watching it, I love it. I could watch Blanc be clever all day. Even if the mystery really wasn’t very mysterious.
And Miles is totally Musk!
I hope, for us old tech luddites who prefer to have a physical medium, that it comes out on Blu Ray soon,
The biggest thing I took away from this film…
Madelyn Cline is a stunningly beautiful woman! She looks amazing. I had never seen her before in anything. There isn’t a more beautiful actress in the industry than Madelyn Cline. Hope to see more of her moving forward.
Peg absolutely did not deserve the mistreatment she got from Birdie and Miles, and was my favorite character.