MovieChat Forums > Maléfique (2003) Discussion > so who was Picus? spoilers and such

so who was Picus? spoilers and such


the guards had no idea who he was? but he escaped? he wasnt the guy who wrote the book. who is this person?

reply

I just saw the movie, and it left me with the same question. Plus, there is that reference to Picus reading the cover in Braille, and Picus himself saying his camera is his third eye, often seeing what he cannot. Is it an oblique reference to him being blind? But he doesn't seem it in the cell. Just left me wondering.

reply

The movie feels like it was written as they went along, not much in it makes any sense. It's very unsatisfying - almost, but not quite, redeemed by the good acting and atmospheric photography.

reply


I was led to believe that Picus was another prisoner from another time or maybe not even a prisoner but just someone who simply got hold of the book at some point in history. He did dress very strange and old fashioned.

Bearing in mind the book allowed the user to jump in time (they all went back to the serial killer's cell in the 1920's) I feel that Picus found the book in another time and place and the book used him to bring it back to them.

It would be typical of the way the book works, conning and tricking people.

Andy

reply

I kinda thought that Picus was "The Keeper" of the book. And that Danvers wasn't the original author of it. But just added to it? Maybe finding it there as Carrere did. When Marcus ask the guard "where's Picus",they don't know what he's talking about. Saying the didn't bring anyone into their cell. Or,maybe,he's the living embodiment of the book?

Liquor & Whores,Bitches!

I Kill Kids!

reply

I think that he escaped and the reason why the guards had no idea who he was was because when you decide to escape it's as if you had never been in prison. Basically, you REALLY escape.

reply

Picus is a veritable enigma, I couldn't really figure him out either. And what happened to him? I have a feeling he became his own camera, he loved it and always had it with him and it saw everything he did and things he didn't. So I think that was his true wish. Perhaps that's why there was no record of him?

reply


i thought he was the devil.
______________________
Eric C 4 Prez

reply

Yes, my thoughts exactly. It was as if he were collecting the souls of evil men in that camera. He led the convicts to their own personal hell.

reply

The guardians say that nobody replaced "Paquerette", as if Picus never existed.
I think Picus wasn't real, he was just a manifestation of the book. The book has a conscience, it defended itself when its pages were being eaten, that's why I think the book created Picus to be taken back to the cell, and then trick the prisonners.

reply

You know, I've just re-watched this again and I think Fry might be right. This time around, I gathered that the book wanted to be used, perhaps even needs to be. It wanted to collect them, so to speak. When Marcus got rid of it, it found a way back into the prison by creating Picus and the camera.

After his arrival, Picus tells Carrere that he has many people in his camera, and wants him to introduce himself for his "album," a term that makes me think of a collection. I think the conversation they have in this scene is central to what Picus and the book are. Picus even tells him that with the camera he is able to become immortal, and asks Carrere if he wants to be immortal, as if he wants to get to know him. This might point to the need of the book to get people use it so it can continue to 'live'. It gives them what they truly want, but then it takes their lives.

What I cannot tell is if Danvers made the book this way by mistake, with that part of him that always wanted to be young, so now it seeks immortality. Or perhaps it was just a mistake period. Or maybe even someone else completely. Good film, nonetheless and maybe I'll watch it again next year and see what else I gather.

reply

they mention greek and latin writing in the book- his names are Greek (Hippotytos) and Latin (Picus). He's the author or some sort of keeper like the poster above suggested

....

http://soundcloud.com/dj-snafu-bankrupt-euros

Coz lifes too short to listen to Madlib

reply

it could be both theories: "manifestation of the book" or "the keeper of the book". or even the combination of both!
personally i think it's the manifestation of the book. the book will always come back, no matter how and it may use other kinds of trickery to do this. evil, very evil.

--

reply

I think he is may be one of prisoners of Danvers or man which was known with Danvers. At the beginning of the film we see Danvers which use blood of killed him another prisoners to write magic formules for escape. Perhaps Picus is one of cellmates of Danvers which he trying to kill, but he survived and got the book. Just he wasn't watch in the beginning scene. So he became to use the book for his interests.
We also see such a moment in the Film when Picus use the book and his teleported to old cell in 1920. So he may have some attitude to 1920 - year when Danvers lived. He must be know that use full power of the book possible only in old cell because the book lost the part of powers for many years. So now he is spirit of that man which back the book to prisoners and show the magic spell which send them to old cell back in 1920...

reply