(I apologize if this is a repost…I didn’t see it in recent threads.)
Has anyone else seen this movie? What did you think?
I thought it was interesting and overall, pretty good. It wasn’t scary, just suspenseful.
Off to Cafe Society.
I saw it and liked it. I pretty much figured out the ending (well the very ending any way, I figured out who the"killer" was after the twist was revealed.
I liked that the movie was original and took off in such an unexpected direction. I thought the whole first act was cliched and hackneyed until the twist was revealed and explained why it seemed contrived.
One thing I was sort of confused about:
Was the guy in the fridge who was “found” by the motel clerk another personality? If not what was he?
I liked it all the way until the secret was revealed. IMHO revealing the secret prior to the climactic confrontation spoiled the climax completely. After finding out the secret I simply didn’t care what happened in the climax.
Just saw it about an hour ago, it was far better than I expected. I was thinking it would be some hokey serial killer in a rainy, run-down motel slasher flick, turned out to be a pretty good serial killer in a rainy, run-down motel thriller. I hadn’t been planning on seeing it, as I have a theory that the more a film is advertised, the worse it generally is, and for the last two months I haven’t seen a movie that didn’t have a trailer for it.
I’ve got a bunch more I’d like to say, but involves spoilers, and I have no idea of how to insert the spoiler box, I’ll end here.
Like RikWriter, I liked it until the secret was revealed. Except the secret is revealed in the first 30 seconds of the movie, in a voice-over over the opening credits.
Have you seen the trailer for this film? Have you ever seen a movie with a twist before? If so, it’s way too easy to figure out the “twist” in the film.
I didn’t like it. I spent the whole film ticked off at the ham-handedness of the screenwriting, editing, and the incompetence of the marketing team for spoiling the experience for me.
Reply below:
I don’t believe he was another personality, since we never “heard” from him. I’m guessing he was merely a “detail” in the MPD fellow’s created world.
I would say that he is another personality. When they’re checking what they all have in common, the new owner(second Larry) says that the old owner’s (first Larry) birthday was also May 10. All the personalities have a May 10 birthday.
The guy in the fridge was Malcolm, the big bald-headed guy in whose head it was all happening.
I liked it moderately well. It had the feel of one of the better 1980s-era Twilight Zone episodes.
I don’t think it was trying too hard to keep the ‘identity’ secret, since it gives some huge clues in the early parts (at least clues about something). The other big secret isn’t too hard to get either once you sort it out; I get the feeling they were trying to obscure all the twistts by mixing the clues together.
I saw it a week ago, but just today thought of a plot hole (probably one of several).
Why did the convict (Jake Busey’s character) try to escape? The best I can think of is that he was afraid the ex-cop would somehow figure it out and wanted to get away while he could, but it’s bothersome, since it so obviously seems to be a plot contrivance.
I realize you can say ‘it was all in his head, it doesn’t matter’ but to some extent the events at the hotel were supposed to be realistic (given the psychology of the movie).
I’m a bit ashamed of myself, but I figured out who the killer was way too early in the movie, with help from Roger Ebert. In his review, he made mention that there are no extraneous characters. The interesting part is that I didn’t know how the character committed the crimes.
One part of the movie did bother me a lot:
The car blows up and the little boy and the blonde woman are presumed dead. We find out what happens to the boy, but what became of the woman? If they went to the car together, how did the boy escape death, but not her? I’m sure this can be explained away by “it was all in the patient’s mind,” but that’s not very satisfactory.
In response to panamajack’s spoiler:
[spoiler]The convict tried to escape because he didn’t want to be executed–he was being taken to death row. None of the characters realized they were personalities, and Malcolm treated them like were separate people.
In other words, I guess I’m not so sure what the plot hole was. If I misinterpreted it, please tell me.[/spoiler]
Sorry for all the spoiler boxes. 
On a similar note . . .
If Busey and Ray Liotta’s characters were both convicts who had participated in an escape (and murder of the real policeman), why did Liotta handcuff Busey to the toilet? I could see why they’d keep up the “cop transporting a prisoner” routine to fool the others, but to that extent? Maybe Liotta double-crossed the other guy . . . but then why didn’t Busey expose him as a fake cop when he had the chance?
They show it at the end, when they’re running through how the kid murdered. The woman enters the car to turn it on, the boy is outside, and runs as soon as the woman puts the key on the lock, thus escaping the explosion. In other words, he never was inside the car. And like the other people said, the car was too much burned to identify any body, they just assumed that both were crisped.
Ah, thanks KarlGrenze. I must have missed that.
And, er, ignore my response to panamajack. I saw the movie opening weekend and I forgot some major plot points.
Carry on.
OK, I rented this movie last night, and I liked it. I agree with some of the comments made in this thread about perhaps spoiling the twist too soon, but I liked it nonetheless. I have one big question, though.
[spoiler]Clearly, we learn that the whole motel murders displayed in the movie are really just Malcolm’s multiple personalities duking it out with each other. However, “in real life”, Malcolm IS to be executed for a multiple murder at a motel - as evidenced by the midnight hearing, et cetera.
So, what are we to conclude? Are the murders Malcolm (or one of his personalities anyway) actually commited somehow related to the ones we see in the movie? Or is it a mere coincidence both the real and the imaginary murders take place in a hotel? I’m assuming he really DID kill people other than just in his head, or he would not have been convicted.
Oh and thanks for explaining about the blonde girl and where her body went, even though I fail to believe that a body can be completely incinerated within a car fire that lasts, what, 2 minutes? But I guess that’s the most plausible explanation anyway.[/spoiler]
Thanks in advance.