I saw this yesterday and I’m surprised there’s no thread about it. Just a few comments in a thread about The Source Code.
I liked it. Not a great movie but a good solid entertaining movie. Sort of in the tradition of The Matrix or Inception but it didn’t attempt to be any deeper than what it was - which could be a good thing or a bad thing depending on how you felt about The Matrix or Inception.
I liked the cast and they seemed to work well together. Damon and Blunt had a good chemistry in my opinion.
The special effects were good and served the story rather than overwhelming it.
Judging from the comments in the other thread, some people disliked the ending. But I thought it worked for the movie. It seemed like something that resolved the main issue of the film and not some deus ex machina thrown in from out of nowhere.
The fact that the plan could be changed makes the rest of the movie pointless. It reminds me of the shaggy dog story where a guy goes on a trek during which he nearly loses his life to get to the one cafe in the world that serves Siberian peach pie. When he finally gets there he is told that they are out of Siberian peach pie. He says, “Oh, well, I’ll take apple.”
Seriously, what is the reason for all the machinations to keep this couple apart if the big guy in charge can just change the plan at will? I think it would have been a better movie if the characters’ minds had been wiped clean. That wouldn’t be a happy ending, though.
I didn’t see the ending that way:[spoiler]To me, it’s like asking what was the point of Star Wars when they were able to just blow up the Deathstar at the end? The point to me was David and Elise had to struggle and earn their victory - they weren’t just handed it when the writers ran out of story.
And it worked within the movie because it was characters like Harry, Richardson, and Thompson that were keeping them apart. It wasn’t like any of them had the power to change the plan so their efforts to stop David and Elise were sincere.
I saw the movie overall as a story about a character struggling against his fate and winning, with the interesting variation that his fate was clearly personified.[/spoiler]
I’m getting tired of writing spoiler warnings. So stop reading if you haven’t seen the movie.
I disagree. It was made clear throughout the movie that the Chairman had written the plan and had control over it. Thompson said that the Chairman had even stopped using the plan at a couple of points and later resumed it.
It was humanity and the Adjustment Bureau that were bound by the plan - they had to follow it and couldn’t change it.
The ending didn’t change these facts. It wasn’t like Thompson suddenly decided to let David and Elise go after chasing them all movie. It was the offscreen Chairman, who was the guy who was writing the plan, who sent down orders to Thompson, “I’ve been watching from up above. These two kids have spunk. So I’ve changed my mind. Let them get married and I’ll just rewrite my plan.”
The movie had already established that the plan is somewhat fluid. The plan was sacrosanct to the bureaucrats put in charge of enforcing the plan.
To me, it seemed fine. Outside forces in your life are always trying to dictate what you will do and either you go along with it, get cowed back into going along with it after token resistence, or keep trying until eventually the outside forces accommodate your plan instead of the other way around.
Frankly, it is essentially the same story as another recent movie: Arthur. The personification of the forces trying to dictates Arthur’s life are just different than Matt Damon’s.