MovieChat Forums > I Know Who Killed Me (2007) Discussion > 4 Categories of viewers. Which one are y...

4 Categories of viewers. Which one are you?

posted 15 years ago by Franco_Zed
27 replies | jump to latest

Some Spoilers ahead (if anyone happens to care about that).

Viewers are really split on this film -- in 2 different ways:

"Hated it" Vs. "Liked it" (the first one is the majority)

"Twin stigmata story" Vs. "A story imagined while being tortured" (the first one is the majority)

So the 4 categories are:

1. "Hated it" and "Twin stigmata story" (the majority)
2. "Hated it" and "A story imagined while being tortured"

3. "Liked it" and "Twin stigmata story"
4. "Liked it" and "A story imagined while being tortured"

I'm quite certain that the majority of viewers are in Group 1. I'm wondering if the other viewers are approximately evenly divided among the other 3 groups. Group 4 seems to be a highly vocal minority. There might not be very many people in Group 2. I happen to be in Group 3. How about you?

________
"I was an advertising librarian for a medical supply company."
"Oh. I have no response to that."

[–] josephrh311 15 years ago

Group 3 all the way.

"I thought you were the man with the big cigar. What are you packin'- a tiparillo?"

[–] Franco_Zed 15 years ago

It appears that you could be team captain for Group 3.

I have to admit that I am fascinated with people's extreme reactions to this film. I rarely watch horror movies, but I saw IKWKM on a whim very early in the run, possibly opening night. I liked it. I didn't love it or anything, and I might have forgotten all about it by now if it weren't for the general reaction. I got home afterward, came to IMDb, and was shocked that the rest of the world hated it so much: the vast majority of both the critics and the audience absolutely hated it. I don't get it.

sex + nudity + violence + pretty girl + originality = successful film

Clearly this equation did not pan out. But I can imagine the producers, studio, distributors, etc. thinking that this was a formula for success.

_________
"I was an advertising librarian for a medical supply company."
"Oh. I have no response to that."

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] superstarlet_04 15 years ago

[–] tomkara 15 years ago

group 4 as well

[–] DaniDeMorte 11 years ago

I definitely fall into 4. I didn't think it was a good movie but I did like it.

"If there is a beast in men, it meets its match in women"

[–] Crista480 15 years ago

I always find it scary that some people feel the need to put people in a category, label them and shelf them. I'm neither of the 4. Can't say that I liked the movie, definitely didn't hate it(probably mildly entertained by it). And I incline towards neither of the 2 explanations. I hope that doesn't upset your world view very much. But you can always invent a new category if it makes you feel safe.

[–] nikgnorge 15 years ago

Yet you don't explain your interpretation of the movie.

Group 3. I don't get the fuzz, the movie was really OK.

[–] Crista480 15 years ago

A story that she wrote, the one we saw her reading in front of the class. I think that makes the most sense, since we have the beginning where she is shown reading the story, thus creating the frame in which the action takes place.

[–] voided-1 15 years ago

Well, I don't hate it. It is derivative of superior movies and clumsy in comparison. Technically it is well directed. The script is overly ambitious and ends up stumbling. All in all, it's a bit of a mess but more interesting than a large section of Hollywood fodder(Shawshank).

Which camp do I fall in to? "Not bothered" A story imagined while being tortured."?

"Was there an autopsy?"

[–] Franco_Zed 15 years ago

"It is derivative of superior movies ..."

Which ones are your referring to?

"I lived 7 lives at once.
I was power and the ecstasy of death.
I was god to a god."

[–] voided-1 15 years ago

I'm thinking mainly of David Lynch's later work: Fire walk with me, Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive, Inland Empire. The influence is unquestionable. The director does a good job creating a Lynch pastiche at times. Also, Julia Ormond and Bonnie Aarons have both appeared in Lynch movies (Inland empire and Mulholland dr, respectively).

"Was there an autopsy?"

[–] Franco_Zed 15 years ago

i've never been a big Lynch fan. I haven't seen a lot. I've seen Mulholland.

When you say IKWKM is derivative of DL, do you mean narratively as well? Or mostly in terms of visuals and atmosphere?

I'm asking becuz I'm not aware of many films that tell a similar story to this one. Are there any Lynch films with a similar plot?

"I lived 7 lives at once.
I was power and the ecstasy of death.
I was god to a god."

[–] voided-1 15 years ago

Well, I mean all 3. The use of music/sound, the blending of imagery etc. Lynch's later work tends to show you a narrative that begins to unravel and the idea of a fantasy life created by the protagonist to counteract their hellish ordeal is pure Lynch. Lost Highway and Mulholland are classic examples.

"Was there an autopsy?"

[–] AbbyLaPokka 15 years ago

I'm Group 1.
As an identical twin, I thought the twin stigmata thing was HILARIOUSLY bad.

I don't think it was Lindsay Lohan's fault that the movie sucked, though.It was the screenplay and directing that ruined it.

[–] MissAngelCakes 14 years ago

3 - totally.

It was a nice, fresh story that we haven't really seen before. It also proved to be very interesting.

[–] jaysgurl2000 14 years ago