What the Hell Was This Movie About? - King of California (2007) Discussion

[–] davidsmith666999 16 years ago

SPOILERS

The basic plot line was a guy from an institution bonds with his daughter as they go searching for lost treasure.

The deeper meaning is a father wants a better life for his daughter. He supplies that when he puts the treasure in that machine and made her buy it.

reply

[–] Razzbar 14 years ago

Please keep spoiling. What treasure, and what machine? And how come she was let go by the police so quickly?

reply

[–] emncaity 14 years ago

>> SPOILERS

The basic plot line was a guy from an institution bonds with his daughter as they go searching for lost treasure.

The deeper meaning is a father wants a better life for his daughter. He supplies that when he puts the treasure in that machine and made her buy it. <<

Well said.

What was it about? An hour and a half. About.

What was it not about? Big flashing lights and bright shiny objects. Many shooting guns and big 'splosions.

Had something to do with real humanity and people not treating each other with utter contempt and hostility.

Maybe that's why it seemed so unfamiliar and confusing.

reply

[–] burnmaker00 16 years ago

... dot dot dot ...

reply

[–] WireVille 16 years ago

Are you sure you were watching this movie and not getting a lobotomy?

It's not the air date that makes a spoiler, it's the content.

reply

[–] dhmason6155 16 years ago

I absolutely loved every waking second of this movie and saw it twice! Charlie was a mad visionary, like HG Wells or Jules Verne or Van Gogh or many other geniuses. He believed in his vision to the exclusion of all else. He marched to the beat of a different drummer, saw what nobody else saw and succeeded in the end.

The Wookie has no pants.

reply

[–] Nikon11 16 years ago

It's a fantasy that requires you to ignore almost all reality and common sense.

reply

[–] adam_denver_co 16 years ago

Most films are.

reply

[–] Nikon11 16 years ago

No, not really. You have to expect some suspension of disbelief. But this wasn't Shrek or Elf, where the whole premise is a fantasy. It was, I thought, meant to be based somewhat in the real world.

I guess if you like having the director/filmmaker just pull some magic out of his ass, then that's all right.

I thought that this was supposed to be a realistic look at this girl and her life, and it being affected by her delusional father.

reply

[–] adam_denver_co 16 years ago

Fail.

reply

[–] dhmason6155 16 years ago

Reality is overrated.

Somebody needs a happy meal.

reply

[–] zagelows 16 years ago

SPOILERS....

I came out here to see if other folks have the same question... what really happened. We think it's plausible that there was no treasure, and it really was the sewer line he hit. We only ever saw the treasure through Charlie's eyes. Could it just have been a dishwasher, with the gold glow coming from the normal innards of the machine??

reply

[–] dhmason6155 16 years ago

I have absolutely no doubt that there really was treasure. Why would the daughter get so excited about a dishwasher?

Somebody needs a happy meal.

reply

[–] phils_phan 15 years ago

and don't forget that Michael Douglas carrying around a stack of something that slid side to side and sounded like slate sliding on slate or something or red brick sliding against red brick. We were meant to think that it was gold bricks he found underground.

reply

[–] dhmason6155 15 years ago

This has become one of my favorite movies, about a mad dreamer (Roger Ebert called him "Whiskers McCrazy") who pursued his vision against all odds and criticism and disapproval and succeeded.

"We got a job",
"What kind?",
"The forever kind...".

reply

[–] C.S.Wood 15 years ago

I have absolutely no doubt that there really was treasure. Why would the daughter get so excited about a dishwasher?

Maybe she was just as nuts as he was? She did admit she would've followed him into the whole if she hadn't been tied up. Maybe she saw what he saw because she reached his level of crazy.

The movie was okay, but leaving it open ended fir the movie. Whatever you think happened happened.

"Action is how men express romance on film." --Kurt Wimmer

reply

[–] dhmason6155 15 years ago

Okay, but what was the yellow glow on her face when she opened the dishwasher door?

"We got a job",
"What kind?",
"The forever kind...".

reply

[–] C.S.Wood 15 years ago

I dunno, the same yellow glow Charlie swam into. I mean, yeah, there could've been gold, but it also could've been us seeing the glow through their eyes. That was the point of showing just the glow instead of the gold itself. If it was gold why not just show it to us to remove all doubt? By not showing the gold it leaves it open to interpretation.

"Action is how men express romance on film." --Kurt Wimmer

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dhmason6155 15 years ago

I want for there to be a happy ending. I doubt the yellow glow was their wishful thinking. Why would the daughter be so excited about a dishwasher? From a filmmaking perspective, it's much more effective to show the glow and not the actual gold. Knowledge of the presence of gold is more powerful than actually seeing it. This is a common technique. They did the same thing in Pulp Fiction.

"We got a job",
"What kind?",
"The forever kind...".

reply

[–] apocalypse_please24 14 years ago

Are you sure you were watching this movie and not getting a lobotomy?

Bahahaha.

Big Gay Al, it has recently come to our attention that you are gay.

reply

[–] Jumper021 14 years ago

It was very obvious he found the gold. There wasn't really anything open to interpretation. The only reason the actual gold wasn't shown is that our imagination of what the gold looks like, and how much there was, is better than anything they could have shown us on screen.

reply