A few things that I would mention, after reading your responses.
I think the idea is that 2002 is in his mind (or heaven or whatever) and he IS allowed back to change things. Case in point, his first try that he viewed he fought and looked like he pushed his brother. When he goes back he actually tries to grab him and that causes Peter to lose his balance pulling away. The first time he picked up the flower and put it in Claire's hair, then makes out with her causing his brother to be pissed, then he goes back and tries to break up with Claire, and his brother still gets pissed because he is talking with her intimately. Then third his first try he drives to the cliff to try to truly kill his brother and cover it up, and he goes back and does the right thing and goes right to the hostpital instead of driving to the cliff first. Both times, however, he meets Claire on the way and wrecks again. I DO ALSO love the fact that he really makes note of the phone his second time around, hinting to the fact that MAYBE one of these tries he will answer the phone, talk to Claire, and work it out so they do not get in a wreck.
Oh, and by second time I mean perhaps 7th to 9th time, as I noticed the number of wine bottles, I too think that it means Simon has gone through that quite a few times.
The real reason I came here was to try to figure out the many holes. At first I was confused by the picture of his Dad, that was in fact the doctor in 2002. I even started the movie again and found that his Dad's name was I think Ken? Or Lenny? When Simon first lists his background to the doctor he says his name, and it is not Jeremy Truman (Doctor in 2002's name). Simon and Peter's last name was Cable? Regardless, I could see that there were two boys in the picture with Dr. Truman, so I take it that in his mind he could not put his fathers picture together with someone other than a doctor he doesn't know? In other words, why does he not recognize his father? That whole "The 2002 scene is heaven" and "He gets 2002 from the time that he chose to come back" were great catches by you guys. I totally didn't get it when I first watched the movie, and it makes much more sense now.
I also like the idea that the doctor trying to kill him in 2002, or in fact that appears in his visions at any point, is due to his guilt at killing his brother, or anger at his brother, or heartache at killing his brother. It seems like it is something that he has to overcome to keep going in this attempt to change the past. I also like the idea that the heart patient is also tied into this doctor thats trying to drug him (who Simon actually kills when he overcomes the doctor that is trying to kill him). I like the idea that the heart patient represents his broken heart. Interesting.
The only final holes that I can see (after seeing the movie only one time) is the WHOLE part of Anna. It seems that the only real part of Anna might be at the end as she is the paramedic that is trying to save Peter. The issue that I see with that is that I thought 2002 was heaven, and visions, and that 2000 actually happened, and the events in 2000 are actually what he is going back to and changing. If that was the case, how can you explain the heart patient in both 2000 and 2002, The Anna that blackmails in both 2000 and 2002, etc etc. Did she really blackmail him in 2000? Or are MOST of the 2000 scenes real, and parts like Anna and the heart patient more like all the parts of 2002, visions or feelings or guilt that move back and forth from the 2000 and 2002 scenes as they are a part of Simon?
So actually there may be 3 parts to this. One is the 2000 events Simon is trying to change. One is the 2002 events that are actually in heaven or Simons mind. And the third part are people that are in both 2000 and 2002 events that represent Simon's feelings that stick with him both in his past experiences and when he is dead? I guess that does stand to reason a bit, those two characters being a third and separate part to all of this, as both of those characters are the ones that he hurts in 2000 and when he gets back to 2002 their damage all of a sudden magically appears. Am I remembering correctly, that the stab wounds on the heart patient and the gash on Anna's head are the only two times that happens?
Also, another confusing thing is that I THOUGHT it looked like a GIRLS hand that the wallet was close to, at the pictures of the car accident at the end, that had the picture of the sailboat. Or does Peter and Simon just have very girly hands? If not, then it would mean that Claire was the one that had the wallet with the picture of Dr. Truman (presumably Simon and Peters father)? Or maybe Claire had it in her wallet as it was an old picture of her fiance Peter when he was a kid?
I am definitly going to need to watch this movie again to think about this stuff.
I was at first annoyed at all this confusing stuff, but now that I got this 2002 is heaven point I find that this movie will be VERY interesting to watch again and try to figure things out. Thanks for the input!
There is also an interesting take from someone later, who thinks literally instead of metaphorically. What if the ending actually is literal. Paul and Simon did survive. The wine bottles are Simon coming back to their family home over and over and over again because his memory does stink, due to the affects of the accident. Thinking about the ending that way you can draw a ton of different conclusions about all the time frames and characters. Although most are undoubtedly still in Simon's mind, primarily with Simon's delusions that he actually can go back and change the past. Very interesting!
One thing for sure, this movie leaves enough holes and open endings that telling anyone that they are totally and utterly wrong for what they think the movie meant is well, totally and utterly wrong. Nobody knows except the writers, and they may, too, have had open ended ideas as they did leave the movie in fact open ended.
And Copagirl, I think the Doctor in 2002 that is a representation of his father is Dr. Truman. The real doctor, in 2000, is Dr. Newman, if I remember correctly. So in effect, his REAL doctor's name, from his REAL experience in 2000, is Dr. Newman.
reply
share