Oh come on… two guys travelling through time to finish a report, so they can pass a history class. The guy from the future (Rufus?) has to supply them with the time-machine (Of course shaped like a telephone both.) so they can do the report and one of them won’t get shipped off to military academy in Alaska.
Talk about a closed time-loop. It’s been awhile since I’ve seen it, but I think the future guys came back to help Bill and Ted because if they didn’t, Bill and Ted would never make a band… and they loved B&T’s music.
Yet, how could they have ever heard B&T’s music to know it was worth saving? I’m confused. Someone help me if I made one (or a dozen) mistakes here.
how about a book with an incomprehensible title? I just read the “bible”. cover to cover. still have no idea what the hell a “Bible” is. It’s never mentioned once throughout the whole book. I figured it would be a book about a “bible” (whatever the hell that is). I mean, like, Jumanji, another nonsense word book title, but al least by the end you know what the hell a Jumanji is. “The Bible” doesn’t even do that. Say what you will about grisham’s “The Testament” but at least it’s about a fucking testament. hell, the bible is about testaments, but there’s no mention of a “bible” anywhere in the “bible”. Talk about a plothole. “Bible”. sounds like the souns a baby maked while gurgling. SOmeone should write to the publisher. a book like that is never going to sell. some book company must be really desparate.
anyway, the point is, I just saw “jay and silent bob”. No complaints here.
Damn, this movie lost me about ten minutes before the end. Hallucinations, voices, and a nearly incomprehensible final scene. And who were those two guys who went into the cafe right at the very end?
My mother and I sat and stared at the screen for about five minutes after the credits rolled. Just couldn’t quite comprehend…
When I saw the film, I was sickened to find at the end that the movie was hiding such a cheesy gimmick. Most of it was so good, so powerful, that I feel I had the right to expect much better. From a lesser movie, it would have been more or less expected, and I would have been willing to shrug it off when it came. From a movie that bought itself such profound credibility with gorgeous details, it was an unforgivable betrayal.
Yet, all the time, I find people who think that this part, this bullshit ending, was somehow the deep stuff. No, the first twenty minutes were deep. The fact that Durden’s rejection of civilization quickly evolved to it’s own form of civilization was deep. The bullshit “ha, ha, we’ve been lying to the audience” ending could have been omitted, and the movie would have been all the more profound.
Okay, I hate to drag this one out and polish it up some more, but I really like this film and thought I’d try to clear up some of the confusions. First, the swimming scene dialog:
Anton (Loren Dean):“Vincent! How are you doing this, Vincent? How have you done any of this? We have to go back!”
Vincent (Ethan Hawke):"<mockingly> It’s too late for that. We’re closer to the other side!"
A: “What other side? You want to drown us both?!”
V: “You want to know how I did it? This is how I did it, Anton. I never saved anything for the swim back.”
There’s nothing they’re swimming towards, just against each other. And, as in the last time we saw this event, Vincent (the supposedly weaker “God-child”) has to save the genetically enhanced younger-but-larger brother from drowning.
As far as the apartment with Jerome (Jude Law), he lives downstairs. In the scene where they meet, Vincent looks up the stairs and asks “Who lives up there?” Jerome snidely replies, “Well, I certainly don’t.” The whole place is built in a topsy-turvy “futuristic” kind of way, with (as waterj2 pointed out) the front door upstairs. There’s another entry downstairs, as evidenced by a different scene where Jerome talks to a policeman who has shown up with some questions. The cop expresses some surprise that the supposed astronaut is a cripple, and to cover it he explodes into an excuse about having injured his leg in training, then wheels after the cop outside and is screaming for his badge number. And, at any rate, the majority of the time Vincent is there to carry him up and downstairs if necessary.
> Damn, this movie lost me about ten minutes before the
> end. Hallucinations, voices, and a nearly
> incomprehensible final scene. And who were those two guys
> who went into the cafe right at the very end?
The point was that Roy Schneider’s character was the one survivor. It looked like he was going to be able to get away from Central America with the money the oil company paid him. But those two guys who went into the cafe were Mafia members who were still looking for him because he had killed the priest at the beginning. Despite everything, he was still going to die.
I was always partial to thinking that the events in Total Recall were real. After Arnold kills the fat guy who say that everything is an illusion, Arnold is knocked out. Arnold’s wife then comes in, kicks him, and says something like “That was for making me come all the way to Mars.” If the whole thing was an implanted fantasy, then why would they give Arnold a memory of this statement? He’s not supposed to be conscious at the time! The fact that the fat guy was able to predict what would happen later is easily explained: he knew what his bosses were hiding, and thus knew what Arnie would find if he persisted (and stayed alive). Someone else mentioned that the communications between Mars and Earth were instantanious. I’m inclined to excuse this as a movie convenience, like faster-than-light travel in most space films. Even if we knew for a fact that the events in Total Recall were real, this little “flaw” would probably still be there. As it stands, I like the way the movie ends, with no definitive proof either way.
As to other recent Arnie movies, I thought that True Lies was pretty decent, and I thought that The Sixth Day was damn good!
‘Lost Highway’… man I almost forgot about that one. Whew. that was a tough flick. I never understood the link between the two guys, but I understood what happened. I always tend to like the ‘cycle’ movies that come back on you at the end. Best part of that movie was the part where he put his head thru the glass coffee table.
As for Gattaca, I loved this movie, and had thought it was roughly based on Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” until I saw it. I thought it was a great movie. As for where they swam, I just took it to be a metaphor for the limits we set on ourselves. Appearantly he wasn’t as weak as he was ‘prescribed’ to be. The only part I couldn’t figure out was who the guy with the piss test was. I thought maybe it was his dad, but it didn’t fit. Maybe it was Jude Law’s character’s dad. But none the less, it was the movie that sparked my fiancée to start the phrase, “The glass is always cleaner on the other side” when Ernest was doing the windows.
As for the OP, when does a plot have to do with a movie in America? Hell, some of the best movies are ruined by a plot! Especially when the last 30 mins of the movie are coming up and we’re still getting to know the characters!!!
I’m glad this one was found to be ridiculous! How aboutthe fact that they jump from 1932 to wartime Sicily (in 1943)! I just wished the burned guy would just die!
I first saw Fight Club only recently, so I may have been ignorant of many things about it coming in. And while I can understand some of what you are saying, I thought the end to be quite good. If it hadn’t have ended the way it did, it would have just ended. But with the ending it does have it made you go back and think about what you had just seen for the past 2+ hours in a way that you wouldn’t have without it. With it, you wonder more about what Tyler says, and from where those things come from intellectually (or, perhaps, psychiatrically). Without it you might just well think, “well, Tyler was right, but he took it all too far.” Without it you have answer, while with it you have a question. Personally, I find the question more interesting.
Ah, but the story told in the hotel room isn’t that these are implanted memories, but a free-form delusion caused by the implanted memories. Quaid’s mind is making up the story as he goes along, incorporating events from his life and his past into the story provided by the Rekall people. One of these things is that his wife didn’t want to move to Mars and they had been fighting about it, so in his delusion, he turns her into a villain.
I believe that everything that happens up to the point where he goes to Rekall is real. The point at which he freaks out in the chair is the last “real” moment on the movie, and everything else is a delusion.
I think the key clue is that the Rachel Ticotin character is an exact match for the girl that is programmed into Quaid’s requested memories on Earth, and that her picture is in the Rekall computers. How could an underground freedom fighter on Mars get her current picture into a recently developed virtual vacation simulator on Earth? Even if she did, how likely is it that the Rekall computers would pick that picture to match his description?
I agree that not hitting the audience over the head with the right answer works well. I also think all of the clues are there if you look carefully enough, just as they are in Blade Runner. The filmmakers actually expect you to find the answer yourself. I like that.
Wow, I can’t believe people are bashing the whole Tyler-is-in-your-head thing.
I think that was paramount to the movie’s premise… the narrator’s evolution, so to speak. Tyler was like the devil on his shoulder that had to do something. In fact, the final dialogue really hit me after the seventh or eight viewing, where tyler says, “We will ge through this, as always, I will drag you kicking and screaming and in the end you will thank me.” (or something to that effect) It was the narrator’s self that knew what needed to be done, and saw no other way to do it.
Of course, on a more abstract level it makes even more sense to have Tyler and the narrator be the same person. If we consider the idea another poster brought up about the whole anarchy-becomes-its-own-government we see that Tyler is like the left hand, and the right hand doesn’t only not know what its up to, but shouldn’t know or he would interfere with the whole affair and both of their efforts would go to waste.
I think Fight Club is one of the best movies to come out in a long time. It deals with a number of political, social, and philosophical ideas that most high-budget movies (or at least big name movies) are afraid to touch.
And I am in love with the character Marla. Just figured I’d toss that out there.
On a final note, this has to be the only movie that I liked better than the book it was based on.
Oh, yet another one: ORLANDO!
“Hi, I’m the same character thoughout history even though I change genders along the way for no discernable reason (and in a way that sheds no light on gender diffs). I also fail to display any continuity of interests, intentions, or motivation, but don’t let the fact that I don’t look like me, think like me, or act like me fool you, I’m still me.”
You’re pretty close. Rufus is from the future, where the music of Wyld Stallyons is (supposedly) so good that it leads to a world of peace and harmony and such. If Ted (Keanu Reeves, the black-haired guy) flunks history, he goes to the Alaskan military academy, and Wyld Stallyons won’t be formed to save the world. Ergo the whole running around bruhaha. It makes about as much sense as any other time-travelling adventure story; much of the (in)credibility depends on what model of time-travel you’re willing to buy into.
Great movie, by the way – dopey, but fun. And it certainly makes more sense than the Bible does. “Be excellent to each other and party on” is a decent motto to live by.
Amen. And that angel singing at the end… what the hell?!
Anyhow… I’m going to drag my way back to “Pi”… I just saw it yesterday. It made fine sense until the Rabbis and the stock market people were fighting for the same 216-digit number. And that y-shaped thing appeared on the side of his head. And the fact that he went into seizures every time he pressed “enter”. Other than that, I loved it.
Fight Club… I thought it was great all the way through. The whole point is that Tyler (Jack) is too f***ed up to realize that he hates himself and what he does… so he projects himself as everything he’s ever wanted to be, and is in such crazed denial that he believes Brad Pitt’s character will ‘save’ him from his current living condition and enlighten him. The ideas proposed were amazing, though… and so was Marla. ::grins:: Her hair is a great deal of fun to mimick.
Dancer in the Dark. With Bjork. What in the HELL was up with that movie?! It made me crazy… I can’t believe I actually finished it. I mean, yay for her that she didn’t betray her friends or whatever, but… arghhh!!
For those knocking The Fifth Element: That movie was spectacular, despite any tiny nuances… it takes a great deal of imagination to turn make something like that happen on the screen. Music, culture, everything was restructured. It’s one of my favorite movies.
Err… what else is incomprehensible…
Mad Max - Beyond Thunderdome. My dad loves it, I’ve tried to sit through it… I think I got all the way through, and walked away from the TV thinking “Oooookay…” once it finally ended.
That’s about it for now… I can’t think of any more at the moment. Most of the movies we’ve watched have made sense to me. Heh.
Depending on how far away Mars is in relation to Earth, the delay could be anywhere from five minutes to half an hour. And, did Arnold wear that “fat woman” disguise all the way from Earth to Mars?
I think it was all a fantasy created by the programmers.
Another clue rarely mentioned: while he’s sitting in the chair at the beginning, a tech in the background makes a comment to the effect of “Huh, look at that – a blue sky on Mars”.
Frankly, I try not to think too hard about Arnold Schwartzenegger films. Was it real, or just imagined? Who cares – it was a mildly entertaining flick (although overly gory for my tastes).
“Piss test guy” was neither Jude Law’s dad nor Ethan whatzisname’s. Just a company doc who didn’t turn Vincent (Ethan’s character) in because he also had a child who was a faith-birth. IMHO, he doesn’t turn Vincent in partly because of his own child’s existence and partly as a political statement; “Hey, look! The faith-birth, the one with the faulty DNA made it into space!”
“Be excellent to each other and party on” is a decent motto to live by.
was neither Jude Law’s dad nor Ethan whatzisname’s. Just a company doc who didn’t turn Vincent (Ethan’s character) in because he also had a child who was a faith-birth. IMHO, he doesn’t turn Vincent in partly because of his own child’s existence and partly as a political statement; “Hey, look! The faith-birth, the one with the faulty DNA made it into space!”