Surprisingly gory to me. I can’t say whether it was necessary or gratuitous – really you’re just talking about a matter of degrees. I’m sure no one is saying “well, there should have been more gore”, and I’m sure that most would agree that having SOME gore definitely added to the feelings of unease and fear that William of the Bull created. But, given the feelings the complete picture left me with, I’m not even going to presume to criticize the director for his choices.
On the ambiguity of the fairy tale:
[spoiler]I’m sorry, folks, but this wasn’t “Legend” or “The Dark Crystal”. It wasn’t a fairy tale. It was (among other things) the story of a little girl’s coping mechanism with the horrors that surround her.
The Faun was was as real as the square that Mia Wallace drew in the air in Pulp Fiction.
[/spoiler]
I thought the Pale Man was one of the most creepy, imaginative beasties I’ve ever seen in a movie.
Please, PLEASE don’t eat that fruit you little dummy!!!
This is the kind of movie that really changes the way I think about movies. After this movie, I was thinking, “can I really sit through another Harry Potter movie?” This had so much more depth, and imagination, and originality. When all you (and by “you”, I include “me”) watch is Pirates, and X-Men and Superman, you can really start to forget what it means for a movie to be meaningful.
I agree. But, like **nevermore **said, it really doesn’t matter.
BTW, The Faun and The Pale Man were played by the same actor, Doug Jones. Well, “played” in the sense that the CGI was based on his movements just as Gollum was based on Andy Serkis’.
I’m still having arguments with myself before I go to sleep. “Self, the Pale Man isn’t coming to get you, because he’s still trapped in his underground castle. He didn’t get out. You’re fine. Go to sleep”.
I’m a wimp. Trunk, I still think it’s left ambiguous, and the reality of the objects seems to me a compelling argument. I like that I was left unsure about how much, and what, was real.
From my understanding, the faun and the Pale Man were mostly makeup; there was CGI with the eyes in the hands and the faun’s legs, but other than that, I think it’s all Jones.
Actually he was not CGI, he was in a costume with a 10 lb head piece and stilts that forced him to pretty much walk tippy-toed in the outfit. They did CGI out part of his legs, he had prosthetics for the hock of the faun leg, then the CGI blotted out his real legs. They had to design him a special “standing chair” so he could rest between takes. The mechanics that made the ears move on the headpiece were so loud he had to memorize both his own lines and Ofelia’s because he couldn’t hear her.
And it took five hours to get him into the Pale Man outfit.
Well, I just don’t understand what you mean by “real” then.
What’s left ambiguous. . .did the movie take place in the hills of Spain in 1944, or did the movie take place in some alternate universe where giant toads, fauns, and faeries exist?
My wife and I went to see this film due to the critics, moviegoers, and SDMB members praise of it. I can’t see where the praise is warranted. The movie is visually lush and I was fascinated by the story of this slice of life in another land at another time. The fantasy journey seemed simplistic and there were flaws in logic in both worlds.
I was pleased by the depiction of the faire. I had heard them described (as first seen) in another story and think I remember this depiction as the original way fairies were portrayed (not like the Cottingley fairies).
About the character of the Capitan:[ul][li]I felt the character’s rigidity and fight for control. I always saw the perfection of his uniform and heard the creak of his boots as he moved. It made me think every move he made as a struggle to take control of his surroundings. I also noticed his creaking moves versus the wood scraping moves of the faun and the bone snapping moves of the monster. I don’t know if that was intended, but it made me think about how is in charge at various points in the movie.[]I loved that he wasn’t a leader who ordered men into battle but would also get out there, charge, and shot right along with them.[]I don’t understand how he survived the stabbing - except that Mercedes used a 3 inch knife that she couldn’t get to penetrate much and…[]I didn’t understand how he could not succumb to the drug in his whiskey - but I assumed he had a really strong constitution (which fits his character).[]I loved the end where his one dream of having his name carried forth was unceremoniously shot down.[/ul][/li]
About Mercedes:[ul][li]I liked the tough character that does what she can in difficult circumstances, though she still questioned her courage at staying versus fighting.[]I especially loved the realization that - day after day after day, she would wrap that knife in her apron because she knew that one day she would need it. That takes guts to live like that.[]What was confusing is that she didn’t kill the Capitan when she had the chance. That seemed totally out of character (as well as tactically stupid). Granted if she killed him then Garces would have shot her during the escape, but she didn’t plan that.[]She was smart enough to lead Garces to the clearing where the rebels could pick them off.[]I can almost accept her being able to outrun the horses a) for that short distance, b) with a headstart, and c) with horses having a hard time galloping up hill - but it was a stretch that she evaded them until the clearing.[/ul][/li]
About Ofelia:[ul][li]Basically I thought of her as brave and smart only when confronting the frog. Otherwise she accepts the faun without questioning and she eats the food when she shouldn’t.[]Her actions just seem delusions of what’s going on around her. The search for the key seemed a delusion around the Capitan’s warehouse key. The mandrake root is by superstition known to help women in labor. The knife is like the knife Mercedes keeps taking.[]In other words her delusions help her ignore the real world; not cope and not escape.[*]The worst point was the end. The King and faun say her final test was to sacrifice herself instead of the baby. She didn’t sacrifice herself. She was shot. She knows the Capitan wouldn’t harm the baby. Her plan made no sense. The praise that she was brave and made the right choice in the end was untrue. She didn’t choose anything.[/ul][/li]
Overall:The rebels won because they had good plans and wore down the soldiers. Mercedes was strong but should have killed the Capitan. Ofelia escaped into a dream world that didn’t help her or anyone else survive in the real world. Even Ofelia’s reward in the end was not from anything she did.
So if this is such a brilliant film, can you explain why my points of view are wrong or simplistic? [sub]I hope that doesn’t sound snarky. It’s not meant to be. I really am interested in other points of view.[/sub]
If you get a chance, see the “making of” movie. My fiancee got to see something on it at a special screening and it’s aparently quite fascinating (she was very excited about the “standing chair” for some reason.)
I mean. . .it sounds like you were watching a movie about who would win a battle between rebels and soldiers, and you were looking for a magical girl to come to the aid of the rebels to defeat the soldiers.
Yeah, the girl had delusions. That WAS how she survived. How could a little girl remain sane in that world if she didn’t have delusions.
I just don’t get your point about the drugging of the capitan. . .
First of all, it did have effects. It helped Ofelia get away.
Second of all, it was just a sedative that they’d been giving the mother.
Third, do you have some medical knowledge about the effects that medicine should have had on a man his size. Basically, what knowledge do you have that the movie offered that makes you think he should have succumbed to that drug?
Fourth, how could the effects of the medicine on the capitan have ANY influence on what you thought of THIS movie – a movie about fairy tales as politics, and politics as fairy tales, and good and evil, and the loss of innocence?
It really sounds like you were watching “Fort Apache”.
I’m criticizing that [spoiler]Mercedes should have killed the Capitan when she had the chance. To not do so seems out of character. I’m criticizing that Ofelia’s character didn’t develop in either the real or the fantasy world and I was expecting character development. I had no idea what the movie was about. I didn’t know which way the battle would go and wasn’t looking for it to go any way. I didn’t expect Ofelia to save the day or call the faun army or anything; I was waiting for the story to be told. What I got was a wonderful slice of history, lush cinematography, and more interesting character development in Mercedes and the Capitan than Ofelia.
She was neglected but didn’t want for food or shelter. I was looking for symbolism that suggested she was raped or tortured but didn’t see any. Did I miss some? So she’s quite well off compared to the local population. She might reasonably fear for her life after hearing the Capitan say “If it comes to a choice, save the baby over my wife” but I don’t think the child would think that morbidly. So how could all the locals and the soldiers remain sane in that world if they didn’t have delusions. That just excuses the story. Now if the story had enough characters being delusional that they created a viable world (e.g. Wicker Man) then that would be an interesting story to see.
Good point; the Capitan’s dizziness helped Ofelia get away.
Two drops were enough to help the mother sleep through her pain. With so much more medicine I would think he should have been more affected.
But, I am not a doctor. Do you have medical knowledge that says he would not have been more affected? I rationalized that his adrenaline and his strong constitution allowed him to push through the sedative effect. But it was a weak rationalization since he was made dizzy in the first 30 seconds after drinking it.
The medicine is part of this plot and so affects this movie. Everyone who was shot, died. That makes sense. It would be like excusing the story if Ofelia had survived her gunshot wound.
You mention this “movie about fairy tales as politics, and politics as fairy tales”. That is something I didn’t see and I asked about things-I-might-not-have-seen in my post. Can you elaborate?
Good analogy, except that Shirley Temple didn’t see fauns. But she was magical in The Little Princess.[/spoiler]
I wanted to comment on Mercedes comment about not trusting fauns. It seemed that right after Ofelia heard that fauns may not be able to be trusted, that the faun became more menacing and demanding. I think that Ofelia was integrating that new knowledge about the faun into her fantasy. I thought it was a good touch.
Her knife was just a small, flimsy kitchen knife she used to cut vegetables, and the Captitan was much larger and stronger than her. I think she did about as much damage as she possibly could after her surprise attack, and upon realizing this, she decided to escape before the Capitan could regain his wits and overpower her.
Plus I’m sure she was frightened and not thinking with 100% clarity (and possibly stunned by the violence of her own actions and the effrontery of her disobedience). It speaks volumes about her selfless nature that she immediately thought of Ofelia and stayed long enough to warn the Capitan not to hurt the girl.
More on the tests:
Although there are many paralells between what’s happening in the fantasy world and what happens in real life, I don’t think the tests are meant to be seen simply as mirrors of actual event. The fantasy reflects and amplifies many of the themes from the non-fantasy part of the film, but it’s also a seperate story unto itself that doesn’t always lend itself to a simple, unambiguous interpretation.
That said, I think Ofelia passed the second test despite what the film initially leads us to believe. She retrieved the knife needed for the final test, and she escaped the Pale Man. She did this despite disobeying the Faun and breaking the “rules” (chosing the left door, eating the food, and staying past the time limit).
The final two tests were not intended for Ofelia to prove that she could obey orders, but rather that should could think for herself, and if necessary *disobey * authorority. This is how she was determined to be worthy of eternal life in the underworld. In effect, the Faun was very much a trickster, which is why Mercedes’s comment about not trusting Fauns was significant.
One of the central themes of the movie is that blind obedience is a tool of evil. The doctor sums this up quite well in his final speech to the Capitan.
I especially loved the realization that - day after day after day, she would wrap that knife in her apron because she knew that one day she would need it. That takes guts to live like that.
I thought
The knife was just a small paring knife, plain and simple. It might also be used to cut strings off bundles in the storehouse, trim candle wicks, or any of a number of other housekeeper tasks. Mercedes kept it with her not because she would need it against the Captain, but because she used it all the time for innocent purposes. That she had it was lucky for her, but short of a slash on the throat (and you have to cut deeper and with more force than you think to kill with a throat cut), I don’t see how a two and a half inch paring knife is supposed to kill a much larger, much stronger trained soldier.
[spoiler]It was her only option. She didn’t have the option of carrying around a gun or a hunting knife.
I don’t think the film maker would choose to focus on the act of her surreptitiously stashing the knife if her intent was to cut strings off bundles, and trim candle wicks.
Sure, it’s not the best tool for killing a person with, but given the capitan’s history, the ability to surprise him with it in the neck, the back, or the balls just might have come in useful for her.
In other words, from your point of view, it was “oh, lucky I have my wick trimming knife because who could have seen this coming?”
From my (and Corner Case’s) point of view, it was, “oh, the day has come that I finally need to use this. Good thing I’ve been stashing it.”
[/spoiler]
[spoiler]Yes, from a storytelling point of view, the director set up way ahead of time the fact that she had a small weapon on her at all times. It was classic storybook storytelling, where the narrator mentions the Object casually in Chapter 2, and it’s revealed to be The Key in Chapter 10. So from a storytelling point of view, I agree it was carefully set up, and I knew early on the knife would come into more momentous play somehow.
What I was talking about was Mercedes’ motivation for carrying the knife as if it weren’t a story. As it was so casually rolled into her apron, within full view of the kitchen staff, and never remarked on, whispered about or even glanced at meaningfully, *within *the story, it was just a housekeeper’s knife. If the director had wanted us to think she had nefarious plans for it, he could easily have shown us suspense, guilt or something - perhaps the Captain walking in and Mercedes scrambling to hide the knife. But that didn’t happen, it was just her putting her knife away in a safe spot. (Knives in loose apron or dress pockets tend to lead to accidents.)
Just like Mercedes herself was “just a housekeeper” until she was put to greater use. [/spoiler]
Well, we saw it last night, and I had no idea how violent and disturbing it was going to be. (Didn’t read the thread, didn’t want spoilers!) It was an incredible movie, but deeply disturbing. I didn’t get to sleep until about 3 AM, and even when I did I was thinking about the pale thing’s fingers.
On “was it or wasn’t it?”,
The only thing the BF and I could see that couldn’t be explained away as “not magic” is how she escaped her room, and we didn’t actually see that happen. Everything else could have had a perfectly rational explanation. I leaned toward “all in her head”, he leaned towards “possibly real in some sense.” So the faun gave her some chalk, so what? There wasn’t anywhere else to get chalk?
And on the pale thing:
Jesus, that may be one of the most unnerving monsters I’ve seen in a movie. It was more scary to me before it moved, really - or rather, before she saw it moving. I was also more okay with it once it had some eyes on it. I thought they were setting it up when she was opening the little door and you could see it in the background, and then it was gone! I thought it had moved because it seemed like a classic movie setup, but I guess the shot angle just changed.
What I found really interesting about this movie was, incredible and scary as the fantasy monsters were, the Captain (who looked quite ordinary) was far more terrifying - one literally shuddered at his every move.
A really fine piece of acting IMHO. You really believed in his threat, that he could explode into psychopathic violence at any moment.
And the thing is, he’s got an enormous filmography and has played all kinds of characters. Definitely not one of those actors who can get accused of “playing himself”: nobody doing that would be so versatile.
