I just saw this movie and I think it was quite good (very slow in the beginning but nothing is perfect).
It's really depressing to see how the ending that starts to look like the happiest of the 3 of them is the one which finishes with his life, but I think that this ending is what makes this film unforgettable.
[deleted]
That's the point. When you think everything is going perfect in your life a blind chance might decide the opposite. Sometimes the initial disastrous or misfortunate choices turn out positive in the end. That's the mystery of human existence and destiny.
share... also, it should be considered that the airplane explosion ending is no more or less likely than the other two. Subjunctivity when realized linearly is inevitably imperfect, since people tend to take the last image as overwriting the earlier; in Blind Chance this is clearly not the case.
shareEven blind chances have their rules. Kieslowski believed in destiny and even said that a person is somehow predestined to act in a certain way regardless of the circumstances. Witek never managed to reach France whether he caught or missed the train. His character takes three different life roads but essentially remains the same.
share"Witek never managed to reach France whether he caught or missed the train".
Yeah, no leaving Poland, is there?
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Actually, the screenplay contains a story line which didn't make it into the film but reveals a possible reason for the plane explosion. It would make the connections between the various characters and incidents even more intricate so maybe Kieslowski decided to leave it out.
shareDid you hear about this or do you have access to the original screenplay? I'd love to read it!
shareI've got the screenplay but I'm afraid you'd have to learn Polish ;(
shareI'm Polish so no worries :)
shareHej, to daj maila, wysle ci ;)
shareKooool...sprawdz swoj PM. Dziex.
shareI'm assuming the appearance of the priest in the terminal right before Witek boards the plane might be somehow indicative of why the plane blew up. One can only speculate as to how exactly, but that's immediately what I thought of when the plane exploded onscreen...
shareKieslowski," a witness to life", had very simple ideas and never superficially contrived the plot. He was communicating that all those people exist next to each other, meet daily but their life paths might or might not cross. Witek was exactly in the same place with the same people in three different life circumstances. This motif comes back later in "Double Life of Veronique" and "Three Colors Trilogy" especially in "Red".
The priest is always present at the airport because he’s going to France on the same plane that Witek either missed or made. Kieslowski often throws in his signature “I don’t know” aspect which in this case is the plane catastrophe. It’s not important what caused it; it’s merely shown to make us think about life’s strange twists and paths . In the last moments of his life we see all three different scenarios flashing in front of his eyes. His screaming mouth becomes a portal taking us to the three alternative pasts.
As MikeNY said before, the original script introduces another person to the plot that wasn’t fleshed out in the movie. Wera’s husband is an expert airplane mechanic and the plane crew always waits for his verdict before take-off. He’s known for detecting the tiniest engine irregularities. As you remember from the movie, Wera is cheating on him with Witek. The day she returns from Lodz she tells her husband she has a lover there. That day the father of the mechanic who is a doctor working with the junkies gets stabbed in the hand multiple times with a fork by one of the drug addicts. The engineer sets out to punish the perpetrator and gets arrested by the police. The plane gets clearance from a young mechanic and blows up in mid-air. In the second life path Witek can't leave the country because he refuses to cooperate with the security police therefore misses that fatal flight. In the final life scenario he changes his flight date to be with his wife on her birthday.
As MikeNY said before, the original script introduces another person to the plot that wasn’t fleshed out in the movie. Wera’s husband is an expert airplane mechanic and the plane crew always waits for his verdict before take-off. He’s known for detecting the tiniest engine irregularities. As you remember from the movie, Wera is cheating on him with Witek. The day she returns from Lodz she tells her husband she has a lover there. That day the father of the mechanic who is a doctor working with the junkies gets stabbed in the hand multiple times with a fork by one of the drug addicts. The engineer sets out to punish the perpetrator and gets arrested by the police. The plane gets clearance from a young mechanic and blows up in mid-air.Thanks for that, nyccoolgirl. Very interesting. share
Subjunctivity when realized linearly is inevitably imperfect, since people tend to take the last image as overwriting the earlier; in Blind Chance this is clearly not the case.Good point. share
I'm not sure whether Kieslowski had such intention, but exactly that can be understood having and living an opinion can save us from a disaster despite of initially or throughoutly being the harder way.
shareWhy do we assume Witek was on the crashed plane? Could it be there was another plane?
shareThis is definitively one of the best movies I've ever seen and one of the best (if not the best) by Kieslowski.
The plot is amazingly good, the "blind chance" as a "demiurge" it's a very interesting concept.
To think about all those alternative lives that we all could have had but we chose a different path... Anyway for Kieslowski seems that could be thousands of paths but the end is always the same.
Or perhaps the question is we do really have the "chance" to modify our fate? can't we really change it deeply? beyond some superflous aspects? can we?
Is our destiny already predetermined? or each second with each decision taken by us we "create" a new one?
Many questions, Kieslowski doesn't answer, That's up to each one of us.
Wonderful film.
Anyway for Kieslowski seems that could be thousands of paths but the end is always the same.Well, in this offering by the great man the end(ing)s are NOT the same.
In the third scenario Witek does not commit himself politically and this is what leads to his demise. Had he signed the protest organised by the scientific community against the arrest of the dean's son he would not have been permitted to travel and would have lived.
Why problem make? When you no problem have, you don't want to make ...share