8 ms·

If you enjoyed this film and interpretation, I really recommend watching The Prestige, then reading the following: SPOILER ALERT The Prestige has a much bette

by edanm 16y ago

If you enjoyed this film and interpretation, I really recommend watching The Prestige, then reading the following: SPOILER ALERT The Prestige has a much better "alternative ending" theory, because it is not well known and very unexpected. The Prestige ends with all the questions supposedly answered, i.e. the twin thing, the machine that Tesla made, etc. Except that, there is one alternative: the machine never existed! Throughout the entire film, Michael Caine's character keeps insisting that there is only one way to do a transportation act, and that is with a lookalike. We already know that Hugh Jackman's character has a lookalike. We also never see more than one "replica" of Hugh Jackman. The only time we actually see replicas being created is during the memories written down by Hugh Jackman, except, they could be fake! In short, it's possible that Christopher Nolan has managed to fool pretty much every audience of The Prestige into believing in Science Fiction, when there is a perfectly logical explanation for the entire film that doesn't require magical explanations. But like the film repeatedly says, "Audiences want to be fooled".

ubernostrum 16y ago
Except not really; the novel it's adapted from doesn't leave any opportunity for ambiguity, and even in the film, as Jackman's character dies Christian Bale walks past the rows and rows of tanks holding the dead duplicates. If there were never any real duplicates and the whole thing was faked, there's no explanation for those tanks to be there.
- gwern 16y ago
  Indeed; my first thought was the bodies. Likewise, if there aren't hundreds of clones, the poignancy of the whole 'paying the price' theme is lost. One twin's death is less tragic than knowingly inflicting hundreds of drowning deaths on oneself. On the other hand, the parent's post illustrates how easily the film could be changed into a different interpretation, one which is arguably better. (This isn't quite as good as the reinterpretation of _The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya_ in which Kyon is God, since it requires some changes in the movie, but then, it requires much less careful analysis to prove it.)
- edanm 16y ago
  The tanks don't actually have any bodies in them, at least not bodies that you can see. I checked once: all the tanks hold lifeless human-looking blobs, but you can't see them. Except for the last tank, but that could be the body of the actual double. The reason the tanks are there is for the same reason the diary was written: to fool Borden. There are even some people who say that there are differences in makeup between the real Angier and his look-alike, and that you can see that the only real, visible body in the tanks is clearly the twin. Can't say I noticed it myself. As for the book, still haven't read it, but it doesn't matter: from what I've heard, the book also doesn't have the whole "killing doubles" theme, since the replicas are lifeless anyway. But it doesn't matter, the film is its own story. I got this whole theory from this forum post, which you should read for a better explanation of everything: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=531777 http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=531777.
  - ubernostrum 16y ago
    I've seen the film multiple times, read the book multiple times, and now read that thread you linked. And it's still just plain wrong. What I see in that forum thread is not a sound argument for this interpretation; instead, it's someone proclaiming a theory, getting it shot down and then using ad-hoc immunization and condescension ("that's just what they wanted you to think", "oh, you believe what you saw, poor thing", etc.) to try to puff it up into something respectable. The book makes it as clear as possible that Angier's not using a double in the sense Borden is; he really is getting duplicated by that machine and having to dispose of the results. The film never prints it on screen in big block letters with a signed note from the director saying "this is how it happened, trust me", but it doesn't need to -- it's following the book and doing a good job at it. Thus, attempts to read a "ha ha he really put one over on you" secret into the film are just pointless. (and unless you can show me you're not in the same take-your-logic-and-facts-elsewhere camp as the guy in that forum thread, I'm done here)
    - edanm 16y ago
      Your last point first: of course I'm not in the same camp as that guy. I haven't even read through most of that thread (I read through it years ago, but I don't remember most of it, just the original post). I certainly don't think anyone should be condescended to; besides, it's just a movie! I just thought I'd share the inspiration for my comment. As for the theory itself, like I said, I haven't read the book and it doesn't matter to me; I'm interpreting the movie as a stand-alone work. Judging just by the movie, I haven't seen anything that outright contradicts the theory (for example, the whole "can't really see the bodies" thing). Then again, I haven't spent that much time digging into it. There is nothing that proves this theory either. I just think it's nice that it can be interpreted in another way.
samstokes 16y ago
+1 for recommendation of The Prestige. Mulholland Drive is also a film worth watching if you enjoyed Inception.
- shin_lao 16y ago
  Mulholland Drive is IMHO very superior to Inception in every aspect (for the record, I really enjoyed Inception). Mulholland Drive is also much, much darker which might not be to your taste.
- omellet 16y ago
  Or if you like hot lesbian sex. Just sayin'

by edanm 16y ago

ubernostrum 16y ago

Except not really; the novel it's adapted from doesn't leave any opportunity for ambiguity, and even in the film, as Jackman's character dies Christian Bale walks past the rows and rows of tanks holding the dead duplicates. If there were never any real duplicates and the whole thing was faked, there's no explanation for those tanks to be there.

gwern 16y ago
Indeed; my first thought was the bodies. Likewise, if there aren't hundreds of clones, the poignancy of the whole 'paying the price' theme is lost. One twin's death is less tragic than knowingly inflicting hundreds of drowning deaths on oneself. On the other hand, the parent's post illustrates how easily the film could be changed into a different interpretation, one which is arguably better. (This isn't quite as good as the reinterpretation of _The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya_ in which Kyon is God, since it requires some changes in the movie, but then, it requires much less careful analysis to prove it.)
edanm 16y ago
The tanks don't actually have any bodies in them, at least not bodies that you can see. I checked once: all the tanks hold lifeless human-looking blobs, but you can't see them. Except for the last tank, but that could be the body of the actual double. The reason the tanks are there is for the same reason the diary was written: to fool Borden. There are even some people who say that there are differences in makeup between the real Angier and his look-alike, and that you can see that the only real, visible body in the tanks is clearly the twin. Can't say I noticed it myself. As for the book, still haven't read it, but it doesn't matter: from what I've heard, the book also doesn't have the whole "killing doubles" theme, since the replicas are lifeless anyway. But it doesn't matter, the film is its own story. I got this whole theory from this forum post, which you should read for a better explanation of everything: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=531777 http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=531777.
- ubernostrum 16y ago
  I've seen the film multiple times, read the book multiple times, and now read that thread you linked. And it's still just plain wrong. What I see in that forum thread is not a sound argument for this interpretation; instead, it's someone proclaiming a theory, getting it shot down and then using ad-hoc immunization and condescension ("that's just what they wanted you to think", "oh, you believe what you saw, poor thing", etc.) to try to puff it up into something respectable. The book makes it as clear as possible that Angier's not using a double in the sense Borden is; he really is getting duplicated by that machine and having to dispose of the results. The film never prints it on screen in big block letters with a signed note from the director saying "this is how it happened, trust me", but it doesn't need to -- it's following the book and doing a good job at it. Thus, attempts to read a "ha ha he really put one over on you" secret into the film are just pointless. (and unless you can show me you're not in the same take-your-logic-and-facts-elsewhere camp as the guy in that forum thread, I'm done here)
  - edanm 16y ago
    Your last point first: of course I'm not in the same camp as that guy. I haven't even read through most of that thread (I read through it years ago, but I don't remember most of it, just the original post). I certainly don't think anyone should be condescended to; besides, it's just a movie! I just thought I'd share the inspiration for my comment. As for the theory itself, like I said, I haven't read the book and it doesn't matter to me; I'm interpreting the movie as a stand-alone work. Judging just by the movie, I haven't seen anything that outright contradicts the theory (for example, the whole "can't really see the bodies" thing). Then again, I haven't spent that much time digging into it. There is nothing that proves this theory either. I just think it's nice that it can be interpreted in another way.

samstokes 16y ago

+1 for recommendation of The Prestige. Mulholland Drive is also a film worth watching if you enjoyed Inception.

shin_lao 16y ago
Mulholland Drive is IMHO very superior to Inception in every aspect (for the record, I really enjoyed Inception). Mulholland Drive is also much, much darker which might not be to your taste.
omellet 16y ago
Or if you like hot lesbian sex. Just sayin'