MovieChat Forums > Dead Again (1991) Discussion > I fell through the plot holes one too ma...

I fell through the plot holes one too many times


I think one of the reviewers said there had to be more internal consistency. Too right.


SPOILERS AHEAD...






The ending scene when Mike goes from unconscious to fighting form? Yeah...no. I suppose you could argue adrenalin rush but even that is pushing it.

In every way Amanda/Grace has the thoughts and memories of Margaret but she's actually Roman. I like that she's Roman, it just wasn't consistent. I suppose one could argue that Roman is having nightmares of what his wife went through. That explanation should have been better limned if that was the intent.

The whole premise was that Franklyn though Amanda was Margaret, yet he could have killed her more than once but didn't.

The point of Robin Williams' character was what exactly?

There's more but that is what I remember off the top of my head. True disappointment of a movie.

reply

i dunno maybe u gotta look at the movie from the perspective of the absurd comedy of the final scene i mean the showdown played like some schmaltzy superbowl pizza ad where the characters waltz in super slow motion rearranging furniture and questioning reality. granted the tone of the rest of the movie seems very "suspenseful" and seems to take itself quite seriously but i mean that's where you and me the viewer come in the point of the film i guess is we don't have to accept what we see; kind of like a deconstruction of film noir and suspense films of the 40s through the prism of a "modern" thriller. "time" as a cultural marker is overtly juxtaposed and manipulated. yeah you really have to do drugs and make your own adventure to "get" the movie.

really what strikes me as most ridiculous is that by the end of the film the damsel in distress is still nothing more than a damsel in distress. branagh's character comes to a cohesive arc what with closing the loop on his past life and present.... but once past trauma is healed,what does the lady have to return to? it's as if the lady never existed to begin with. really, she never "gets her memory back" so to speak. maybe a sequel?

reply

This film had zero suspense, let alone inspiration - except for the last 15 minutes which were pretty good.

reply

With so many intricate plot details and characters it seems as though the writing got sloppy and that's why there were the plot holes that I noticed just as you.

reply

What didn't make sense to me was Frankie wanted to kill Margaret or Roman a second time. Wouldn't he just be doubling his karmic debt that would have to be repaid when they reincarnate again? And now he's killed his mother too.

reply

I realize this post is old and likely the OP will never see this but I wanted to respond anyway.

The ending scene when Mike goes from unconscious to fighting form? Yeah...no. I suppose you could argue adrenalin rush but even that is pushing it.


Eh, this basically happens in all movies. Almost every action movie has people making miraculous rebounds and recoveries from horrid injuries in a totally unrealistic way. Additionally, he could have been faking just how out of it he was. Either way, it's kind of a lame complaint but if it bothered you that much then fair enough.

In every way Amanda/Grace has the thoughts and memories of Margaret but she's actually Roman. I like that she's Roman, it just wasn't consistent.


You are actually incorrect on this. Grace was never Margaret and never had Margaret's memories. She was remembering the events as a spectator or witness, not as an actual player (even if that's what she was in reality). This is pretty explicitly explained when Frankie hypnotizes her and tells her to distance herself from the things she is seeing. All of her narration of the past events is in the third person, not from the POV of either Margaret or Roman. Even the last time she goes under and says Mike was there and he was "going to kill me" she is simply mixing up the past and present, which again is pretty clearly stated by Frankie immediately after she makes the comment. Her nightmares before the hypnosis are the only thing that can even possibly be viewed as an implication that she is Margaret but even at that, they are just nightmares of the situation. And even if she were Margaret in the dreams...so what? Dreams are dreams and are not always clear.

When Frankie puts Mike under hypnosis he tells him that he is not a witness but he is there as the person he really was and he asks him to tell him who he is which is why he immediately and clearly sees himself as Margaret.

It's fine if you did not like the film but some of the things you point out are not actually errors, they are simply your own short-comings and misunderstanding.





"Why couldn't the monkey arrange this from INSIDE the garbage can?"

reply

The plot was convoluted, pretty far-fetched and not very clever, especially to finally reveal the culprit's motive as so mundane. It was really an overdone, inelegant piece of tripe for such prestigious actors, as the (3) Brits are/were, to be involved in. I was actually disappointed that it was so substandard, given the caliber of the talent, but then I hearkened back to Olivier's disastrously, vain indulgence, "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof," with Robert Wagner and Natalie Wood. It reminded me that even those we expect more from can and do muck it up on occasion. That doesn't excuse wasting my time, but at least it explains it. Why I didn't turn it off after Mike missed his obviously striking resemblance, to the pictures in the magazine, is beyond me.

reply

I thought it was all very cleaver, so there!

reply

From someone who doesn't know how to spell clever... I rest my case. Hahaha!

reply