i defiantly preferred this over eternal sunshine.
Amazing movie!
i think stephanie really did like stephane ,but stephane was too delusional to realize it or he was afraid that his schizophrenia would get in the way.
Thoughts?
Stephane DIED, people, deal with it!
Concussion, anyone?
Hahaha are you kidding? Have you ever seen somebody get a serious concussion? People on my football team got them all the time (one guy on my team got a shot put thrown at his head by our school's best shot putter). If it's serious, people won't just stand up and say ow, and walk away. He'd be on the ground, barely conscious, and rushed to the hospital.
What, do you think they'd just bandage his head up if he got a life-threatening concussion?
I don't really see how Michael could come up with an idea that would justify making a sequel. as much as I love this movie, my respect for it would go down if a half assed sequel was made.
some reasons I believe a sequel wouldn't work (Some Spoilers):
*one of the charming things about the movie was how you don't actually find out anything about Stephane and Stephanie. There are numerous debates on the board talking about which scenes were a dream, and which were reality. if a sequel was made, it would, in effect, answer these questions.
*I'm pretty sure I'll get flamed for this, but this movie didn't really have a plot. I mean the movie was character driven, and that's what the story revolved around. it's kind of hard to explain. but because the movie was so character driven, we got a lot of character development. if a sequel was made, it would have to either develop a new character, or abandon character development for plot (at least that's the way I see it)
*The ending was intentionally left ambiguous, but also closed. The ending doesn't really imply a sequel, but it does allow every viewer to imagine what happened afterwards. whether some believe he died, some believed it was all a dream, and some believed that it was all rooted in reality. whatever you believed happened, a sequel would change it (and in effect, render the ending pointless in it's delivery). this goes hand in hand with the first point.
anyways, that's what I believe. I could be wrong. Michael Goundry could secretly be making a sequel as we speak, er, type.
Sequel?!! LOL! You must have grew up in the 80's.
Films like this don't get a sequel. Art doesn't need a sequel. I'm not saying the film is an artistic masterpiece by any means but it is not your typical "hey the first film made tons of dough so let's make a sequel" type of film. Sequels are a Hollywood money making scheme and unless the entire story was written beforehand sequels are rarely as good as the first.
My vote history link:http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=5504773
[deleted]
No way!! lf you look at dreams do have a dream-get up to go pee-back to sleep and the same dream....no. (at least l don't) So sequel would be a mess, not saying Michel wouldn't do a good job but l don't see him making one either. And would not watch it if a sequel was made.
shareI sometimes even continue the same dream the next day. i manage to keep it in and continue. i have a lot of control over my dreams in general, so this may be the cause.
--------------
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for enough good men to do nothing.
It doesn't need a sequel. It needs a prequel. sarcasm
>>>Only he is lost who gives himself up for lost.