Interesting. Didn't know about all this.
However, i judge a movie uniquely on its own merits and I try to never compare it to its source material, may it be a play, a novel, a biography, a comic book or an obscure script from an unknown screenwriter. Also, one can be bothered by such important (or not) details only if one has knowledge of the source, in other terms, if you had no prior knowledge, you would have taken the story as is and considered as the original end product, worthy of praise in your view or not.
That said, i'm not immune to similar considerations in the rare cases where i happen to know the original source, for instance when the movie is a remake of a movie i really enjoyed, in that sense i understand you. But still, i do believe every work of art should be considered as a stand-alone kinda thing, because it would be silly to judge Van Gogh's "Starry Night" based on how faithfully it describes the view of the sky that night.
In the same order of idea, one could continue and assert that the same book you seem to like is itself an unfaithful representation of what actually happened and propound that the very source that you deem to be the original end product also suffers from a romanticization and fictionalization of the "real" events, whatever that means.
As far as i'm concerned, i loved this movie. It has everything in it, great performances, lots of emotion, laughter, wonder, love, life etc, but its greatest quality as for me is that it made me think a lot and quite some times blew my mind.
For instance, it had never occurred to me that there could be alternate or intermediate states of consciousnesses. When we consider somebody in an apparent catatonic state, there seems to be only 2 possibilities that exclude each other, either that person is unaware of himself and "unconscious", or worst case scenario, he his completely aware but trapped inside his own body. And what blew my mind was how one of the patients described what it was to be in that catatonic sate. She says:
"I was aware of things, but nothing meany anything to me. There was no connection to me."
Which means to me that it is possible for a mind to be in a perpetual almost quantum state in which it is aware and unaware of itself at the same time. Firstly, I find it rather uplifting to know that at least not all catatonic people are living hell, or better said, are aware of living hell. But secondly, i am even more amazed by the philosophical implications of being such a consciousness and by the fact that it is impossible to demonstrate that you are actually not such a consciousness/in such a consciousness state.
From a solipsistic point of view, the realization that one can be lost between 2 realities is as scary as it is fascinating. How do you know that the whole world and everything you know in it and about it isn't the product of your own mind? How do you know you are not imagining the world and everything that has ever happened to you?
In that sense, solipsism is one of the strongest and "most indestructible" philosophical proposition there is, because nobody can escape his own consciousness and/or the world experienced through said consciousness and/or his subjective interpretation of reality, which means that there can be no objective reference point outside any and all subjects by which we could determine if reality is shared by another consciousness such as yourself and hopefully the rest of humanity or if it is a construction of your own mind, or mine for that matter.
At last, i like the idea of solipsism because according to it, every human mind is literally its own universe/a universe in it own right, which means that a death is the destruction of a whole universe. I find it beautiful and quite true.
It is in virtue of all those things that i loved this movie. 10/10 in my book.
People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefsī²
reply
share