is he the guy


did the guy really rape her?is the guy really that doctor?how do you know he is since he confessed everything under her threat,that he had to say things she wants to hear in order to save himself?

reply

[deleted]

To be truthful, I was unsure - until the doctor confessed near the rocks. As much as I believed Pauline was not mistaken at all, the doctor pretended so well that I sometimes thought this was a coincidence. But the rocks scene was obvious to me.

reply

[deleted]

Yeah, definitely. He said things at the end that were not told to him earlier. He even said some things that Paulina didn't even know about. Pretty interesting story.

reply

Just watched the movie again. The Doctor though that Paulina and Gerardo were going to kill him. He did not confess, so much as tell about the experience and boast about the power he had over the helpless prisoners.

reply

[deleted]


Yes, he was definatly the guy she thought he was.
He knew she was tied with Piano wire and not string among other things.

If it harms none, do what thou wilt.

reply

He played the situation far too well in their house. The rock scene doesn't prove anything really but I think he was the guy.

Somebody here has been drinking and I'm sad to say it ain't me - Allan Francis Doyle

reply

The "rock" or rather cliff scene proves everything, as it was the first time Kingsly's character told the truth. He confesses to the crimes and admits loving it.


"...the young man would love it too, but he can't afford it."

reply

DID YOU WATCH THE MOVIE?

Yes HE'S THE GUY.

His genuine confession at the end proves it.

reply

Even before the confession when she said that he quoted Nietzsche I thought that was pretty good evidence especially when he quoted Nietzsche earlier when she wasn't around.

reply

I agree with Grumples. Did anyone in this thread actually watch the movie? It's more than a little obvious that he's the guy. If there was any doubt, the final scene clenched it.

reply

I don't think it's obvious at all, and anyone who says it is, clearly doesn't understand Roman Polanski's love for ambiguity.

The confession can work in two ways:

1) He's guilty and he confesses because that's what she wants to hear;

2) He's innocent and he confesses because that's what she wants to hear.

Even his knowledge about the wires is ambiguous. He first said ropes because that's what Gerardo coached him to say. Then Paulina contradicts him and he offers another answer... wires was a chance answer and it was right.

Elena Galvan confirms his alibi. Just because Paulina dismisses it as the regime setting up alibis for the war criminals, we can't dismiss it too so quickly. She wants to believe he's guilty. But e don't have to taker her word for it. We can analyse things and make our own judgements.

What does he really reveal in the confession? That he raped her fourteen times? She told him that. That there were fluorescent lights? She was blindfolded, he can have invented that just to give more substance to the confession. He just said what she wanted to hear: that he raped her, that he enjoyed it, that he's sorry it was over.

I think it's the ambiguity that makes this movie so interesting and for me this is Polanski's style.

This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel.

reply

That's exacly the point to me too. Obviously, as a subjective spectator I can say that I think he was guilt. And the movie works with ambiguity proving the limits of evidence in a technical sense vs. intuition. By intuition, he really seems guilt. But no evidence is definitive. When Gerardo, at the end, is finally convinced the doctor is guilt by his confession, it is a transformation of this character, a lawyer, a man used to pounder with the impartiality.

And there's one more ambiguity to add: the final scene. It was said that Paulina heard a voice once, like if she had some trauma allucinations because of the torture experience. So when she surprisily sees the doctor in the theater, and her husband just looks at the sime direction indifferently, we can't say it is an allucination of her - a trauma that will follow her forever - or not.

reply

[deleted]

Her husband doesn't look at him indifferently. He seemed quite serious and a bit stiff.

----------------------
http://mulhollandcinelog.wordpress.com/

reply

I have to disagree with you, Eumenides. When the husband asked the administration office for information to see if "someone" did a residency from 1975-1978, she was obstinate. But only when he asked for "Elena Galvan", did she pause, and return with a "Yes...this is Elena Galvan". Then she was extremely forthcoming when the husband asked if she knew a Dr. Miranda, and if he was there on that particular date. Just how that whole dialogue played out, coupled with Paulina mentioning that it was known that escaped members of the regime were given cover and alibis, was one of the things that made me feel that Miranda was not who he claimed to be.

The other thing was Ben Kingsley's ending monologue. If he were truly innocent and was fabricating that confession (which wasn't being recorded), then why would he have gone into THAT far and in that much detail and that much excitement, when he was describing his deeds. If he were truly innocent, and he wanted any chance of surviving, why be that vulgar, unsympathetic, and excited over his past actions, per his ending confession? Furthermore, if he were innocent, and he felt that he was going to die, then why didn't he either plead to not be killed, that he's innocent (with the hope that at the last moment, she may come to her senses), or just shut up and accepted his fate, and not give her the power of hearing what she wanted to hear. Because, if he were innocent, telling that confession that happily, could have easily made her lose her composure and killed him, and at the same time, he would have given her what she wanted.

I don't remember the husband or her telling Miranda about how many times that he was raped, or every single little detail. Much of it he was told by them, but other details, I don't remember her or the husband telling him.

Also, if he were innocent, then why didn't he simply report her to the authorities, and tell them that some crazy woman and her husband tortured and tied him up and forced him against his will to make a confession up, simply because she was crazy and he supposedly "sounded like her torturer and rapist". If he were innocent, he has the wounds to prove it, her fingerprints on his car, a match to the blood that would likely still be on the gun, and the confession tape. But, if he were guilty, he wouldn't want anything said, because even though the confession tape is coerced, it would give him unwanted attention, and an investigation into his past.

"Every time there is a bang, the world's a wanker short." -Billy Connolly

reply

[deleted]

If Kingsley is not the guy, then the final opera scene doesn´t make any sense. Yet it´s an absolutely crucial metaphor with the torturer lording over Weaver´s and Wilson´s lives, a shadow of the past that won´t go away. And yes, the cliff scene proves conclusively he was the one. How can there be any doubt?



"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

HKmoviefan^

** SPOILERS **


Good points!

Gee, I didn't sense any ambiguity at the end either, but sometimes people process information differently I guess. And, it IS true that we don’t have video of the actual criminal events, so no smoking gun that I guess some people need to feel certain.

It never even *occurred* to me, as presented, that he still might be innocent, after the 'rocks confession', until I came across this thread.

The 'Elena Galvan' thing -- Yes, re: the hesitation and change in tone and then offering up the info. May be a bit of stretch, but I thought it was plausible that the name itself (Elena Galvan) could have been a code term, meaning that if someone would call, maybe specifically about Dr. Miranda, that the cooked up alibi story was to be told to the caller upon the caller asking for an ‘Elena Galvan’.

Also, Paulina said she knew Miranda’s 'smell' and she also tasted him (when she bit him). Now, some people might not think that is good evidence, and if those were the only clues offered I might not either (which they weren’t), but sense of 'smell' can evoke very strong memories, especially in conjunction with PTSD where memories can be 'frozen' in time, as it were.

The quoting of Nietzsche, the 'Death and the Maiden' tape, and the snorting laughter to me do constitute some circumstantial evidence...again, not by themselves, but within context....

And, also to me, the confession on the rocks was just too darned authentic...I think you make a good point about his attitude while making this confession...why would he confess to liking it so much, wishing it had never ended, etc., if this confession was only done and made up to spare his life? That is not logical.

And, he also did not need to input the extra detail he did to satisfy Paulina. What it looked like to me is that, not only was he fearful at the time, but that he wanted to vomit up this information – probably hadn’t been able to 'share' this experience he so enjoyed with anyone else since that time, so not only was he confessing, but he was able to relive some of his experiences by speaking of them. And, not only was he confessing to the events, but to his feelings about the events.

I think he realized that he could not BS her anymore; she wasn’t buying it. So, when he spoke, he spoke of feelings from such an unusual experience only 'shared' by the two of them -- a strange, brutal kind of intimacy (and, the experience from her perspective; I realize that the doctor in question raped others), and I think he knew that. And, I think that is why she accepted his confession as true. Not just because he said ‘I did it’, but because of ‘how’ he spoke about it -- we can recite facts about all kinds of strange experiences that we hear or read about without having experienced them, but to be able to so convincingly tell about how he thought and felt at the time...I think that was what convinced her (and me)-- along with all the other bits and details already mentioned.

Another poster said that maybe Dr. Miranda had been somewhat involved, but that he had only retold what he had heard from the actual guilty people. I think *that* is a stretch, and also I don’t think that explains his authenticity in the rocks scene.

Not only do I think that his confession was genuine: I think he really did not have any remorse for what he had done. And, earlier he had tried to act and say things that he thought he should -- the proper outrage, etc. -- that, why wouldn't he admit to remorse while at the rocks if all he was concerned about was not being killed, to the point of offering a fake confession?

So far as remembering the 14 rapes: Regardless of whether he overheard this number earlier or not, it is not beyond belief that a sadist would remember each and every one of his 'victories' likes notches on a belt. I’ve heard interviews with serial killers who can recall, years later, the most minute of details regarding their killings.

Bottom Line: I think he was guilty.

But, to each their own, and a fantastic cinematic piece of work, no matter how you slice it.

:)



11/16/12: The day the Twinkie died :(

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

He's guilty and he confesses because that's what she wants to hear


This is my theory.

Dr. Miranda may or may not be the man who raped Paulina. BUT, he is guilty of colluding with the regime in some way and he may or may not have raped other women. He either confessed to crimes he had committed or he confessed to crimes that he saw carried out at the prison.

As to all the various details of Paulina's rape and imprisonment, he could have seen how other prisoners were treated or he could have heard the details from any of their captors. No doubt there was some amount of boasting among the captors, as Dr. Miranda himself boasted when he said he enjoyed the power.

Paulina never saw Dr. Miranda before he came to their house and I don't think we can say conclusively that he was her tormentor.

reply

Its up to your decition. To me, he wasnt. He was going thru a difficult circumstance and he said what Gerardo had previously told him (adding a few details, perhaps on his manuscrip which was also made with Gerardo) more convincingly. To me its the look at the end which sums it all up. He looks at them like saying: "you are no better than those who did that to you". Its a sort of image they will never be able to get off of them. But who knows, I might be mistaken.

reply

[deleted]

He confessed that just because Pauline told her husband and her husband told him what to say.

reply

You're forgetting the most important parts of his final confession: he went into great detail about how he felt while he was doing it, not just what he did.

Things like, "I was good at first. I was strong, I fought it so hard. No one fought as hard as I did. I was the last one, the last one to have a taste. Inside, I could feel I was starting to like it. I loved it, I was sorry it ended."

The most telling thing of all, though, is how calmly he was confessing. Not hysterically, like a man who knew his life depended on telling her what she wanted to hear. She knew this, which is why she let him live.

Anyone who thinks the ending is ambiguous isn't paying attention.

reply

"Anyone who thinks the ending is ambiguous isn't paying attention".

Indeed. Not to mention that Kingsley not being the doer would render the whole film - and especially the final shot in the theater with Kingsley looming over her and her husband - kind of meaningless. All these 110 excruciating minutes tormenting the wrong guy?



"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

Ugh, people don't know acting and scenarios for jack.

reply

I dont know, I was hoping when the husband told her the hospital confirmed his alibi that we'd find out it was actually her husband that had raped/tortured her.

reply

You all sure are a bit retarded. He was the guy, and it's official. There's no question, even if the final scene is not enough for you (and, well, it SHOULD BE), the producers and other people involved in the movie said he was the guy. It's even on the Trivia section here on IMDB. I mean, wake up people.

VIVA LA VINYL

reply