Confused!


So who was it that died at the end - was it Simon or James? I saw this with 3 friends last night and opinion was divided 50/50. We were thrown by the fact that the person handcuffed to the bed already had a cut on his neck (which made us think it was Simon). But then we thought it must've been Simon jumping off the roof because he knew where to jump to make sure he only hurt himself. And we didn't know why he cut his cheek? (Or why James cut his neck in the first place).

Or have we missed the point entirely and there was only ever one person? We're confused!

Great film though!


reply

Okay, perhaps you could have put "spoiler" in the title. Anyway, to ensure that no one accidentally sees my reply I'm hiding mine below too:

Okay so, Simon James is the protagonist. James Simon is the doppelganger.

Simon punches James at his mother's funeral and that's when it is finally made clear for certain that there is a strange connection between the two of them. They aren't just two people who happen to look alike. When Simon punches James, Simon's nose is damaged.

James put a cut on Simon's neck before. It turns out that, as with the broken nose, they also share the injury to their neck.

Simon cuts his face and the cut appears on James' face too. The connection is certain. What's more it means that blood is left in the sink making it more likely that people will attibute James' eventual injuries to suicide. Why would James be injured? Well that will become clear....




So here's the situation:

- Simon knows from the beginning that there is a way to survive the suicide fall. You can survive so long as you are picked up by an ambulance nice and quickly. But if medical assistance doesn't come quickly, you'll die.

- Simon also knows that any injury he receives will also be received by James (and vice versa of course).

- Simon wants James dead. He needs to get rid of the doppelganger in order to regain his life.



It should now all be pretty obvious, but just to finish. Simon cuts his face ensuring that the connection between the two of them is clear, but also making the injuries seem likely to be suicide.

Simon has handcuffed James to the bed so that he cannot go anywhere.

Simon has called an ambulance in advance for himself.

Simon jumps off the building so that he bounces off the tarpaulin and will survive when the ambulance turns up.

Meanwhile James receives the same injuries from the fall, but there is no ambulance for James. He is left dying and handcuffed to Simon's bed.

Now everyone will think James is Simon and that James has committed suicide (presuming that anyone misses Simon at all). Meanwhile Simon can go into work as James and finally get all the proper credit for all the things he's been doing at the company.



I'm sure it's possible to explain that more concisely and simply, but I wanted to make sure everything was spelled out clearly.

reply

Thank you! Much clearer - it all makes sense now :-)

reply

That all makes sense but why doesthe doctor call him Simon at the end when he's in the hospital?

reply

That all makes sense but why doesthe doctor call him Simon at the end when he's in the hospital?

reply

because he is simon !

reply

Interesting theory but one thing bothers me at the end:

Doctor: "There aren't too many like you, are there Simon."
Simon: "I'd like to think I'm pretty unique."
(Cut to end.)

So why does the doctor call him as Simon? Maybe after he commits suicide and his doppleganger dies, everything went back to normal just like before. So after James' death Simon acts like James and their roles have changed back. It's just a presumption cause I don't think there's a clear answer for this ambiguous ending.

I read an interview with Ayoade (it's not in English, so I can't post it here, sorry) where he said he's got his own theory for the ending but it's not superior to any interpretation so he won't share. I guess he wanted to mess things up a bit and let the viewers to decide what really have happened.

reply

Just to clarify a point made above. That isn't in the hospital. That is in the ambulance.

Why would the Director General of the company be in the ambulance? I'd say his appearance at that time is most likely hallucinated.

At that point in the movie Simon needed to indicate his individuality, even if it does seem like he's going to need to live as James after that...

reply

Point taken. The ending was so fast that I didn't realize the "doctor" was actually the Colonel. Maybe you're right and it's just a hallucination.

reply

i still dont get it lol

reply

hey its ok, godzilla is comin out tomorrow

Werd 2 ur mudda, bruddafcker

reply

@mikeyflatley:

hey its ok, godzilla is comin out tomorrow


Hahaha, well played.


I had an imaginary friend but he won the lottery & went to Brazil, that jerk!!

reply

He was calling him by his first name. Otherwise, he would've said "Mister" first. Not to mention that HANNAH would've reacted to that.

reply

That "pretty unique" line was really bad.

The meaning of the word "unique" is "only one". It's right there in the word: "un" (or one). A thing is either unique or it isn't. There's no gray area.

reply

fatpie 42, thanks a lot. I understood parts of what you explained myself, but you connecting all the parts that matter most.

thnks!

reply

fatpie 42, thanks a lot. I understood parts of what you explained myself, but you connected all the parts that matter most.

thnks!

reply

[deleted]

It's slanted reality. Physics and logic that work in real world don't have to work in film world. Just take it for what it is.

reply

[deleted]

Interesting thing about films like this is that they can have more than 1 plausible explanation. If yours works with you, then stick with it. I personally don't agree with it.

reply

I agree with everything except one small thing.

Simon cuts his face ensuring that the connection between the two of them is clear, but also making the injuries seem likely to be suicide.


I think Simon cut himself to make sure James wakes up and be aware that he is about to die and he can't do anything about it. At this point James is a wooden boy and Simon is in control.

reply

[deleted]

That's one way of looking at it. The other would be that the two of them are linked. If they're the same person, why did everyone else see James and consider him a great worker. Then the whole subplot of stealing Simon's life is impossible. Your explanation would make everything that happens in the film irrelevant and I don't like that.

reply

[deleted]

"That's the underlying shortcoming of the film -- it's almost too open to interpretation. Definitely not a common grievance with today's spoon fed, formulaic films... so, perhaps it's a good thing in the end."

If people are encouraged to use their imagination and look a little deeper into things, not just demanding everything be underlined and served up on a platter, then I think it's a really good thing. Why have an imagination if you don't use it.

reply

[deleted]

I also took it that way. I thought it was about schizophrenia and James was the person Simon (and his mother) wanted to be. That is why they had the confrontation after his mother died and their injuries were exactly alike, because the injuries were to himself all along. The story is Simon's perspective and watching what his confident self was doing. The digs at Simon from his co-workers was the digs he faced all his life until James took over and all the praise was heaped on his confident self. His confident self got carried away and as he was so noticed by people he cheated on Hannah but the guilt over it was overwhelming.

I think the ending was open to interpretation over who actually died, Simon or James (the shy introvert or the self confident extrovert)

reply

[deleted]

moved to the "Another Theory on 'The Double'" Thread

reply

The source material for the film certainly lends itself to the concept that it is maybe a single person who has a second personality that he acts out yet is not consciously aware of. The "original" will go to a café and be landed with the bill of "the other", the original is aware that his peers have found something he has done distasteful but he is sure that his behavior has been sound, with the implication that it has been "the other" that has been behaving discourteously and rudely. This chain of events doesn't discount that there could actually happen to be two people rather than one person with a hidden personality. The original is carted off to an asylum at the end, but again that doesn't necessarily prove he was only one person who was mad, but it does suggest it.

The problem with this movie is how massively the film deviates with the ending. It is far harder to reconcile the fact that there might only be one person.

reply

thanks a lot fatpie42 i think i wasn't smart enough to get everything without your explanation.

reply

Thanks for the explanation. I was thinking that they were just one person and Simon created James in his head, and this coincided with how everyone barely noticed him as Simon and noticed him as James. I like your explanation better and the clincher is where Simon jumped. Of course, all this "in his head" stuff is a plot cop out, so it pleases me that there's another explanation.

reply

This explanation works for me, too.👍

reply

I know its a year later, but thank you for this explanation. This tied up all the loose ends that I had. I was certain the two characters were not the same,but had some connection regardless so I've been searching for a while to find an explanation that made sense. Great analysis

reply

I know its a year later, but thank you for this explanation. This tied up all the loose ends that I had. I was certain the two characters were not the same,but had some connection regardless so I've been searching for a while to find an explanation that made sense. Great analysis

reply

I know its a year later, but thank you for this explanation. This tied up all the loose ends that I had. I was certain the two characters were not the same,but had some connection regardless so I've been searching for a while to find an explanation that made sense. Great analysis

reply

I know its a year later, but thank you for this explanation. This tied up all the loose ends that I had. I was certain the two characters were not the same,but had some connection regardless so I've been searching for a while to find an explanation that made sense. Great analysis

reply

We're confused!


I think there is a clue in that lol ;)

PS: I hate spoiler tags, they flicker all the time and make my eyes hurt! I have this silly habit of tracing the lines with my mouse cursor while reading.

reply

What I find interesting is that for about 90% of movies, everyone on the IMDB boards has a theory that none of it ever happened and it was all in the person's head. When this is officially debunked\denied by "The Voice of God" they then fall back on the premise that movies are open to interpretation and there is an implication that they think the "it was all in their head" theory makes them more intelligent than everyone else.

Now here is a movie where you could actually plausibly say that it did happen in his head....and the IMDB regulars are now stumped for theories that make them seem more intelligent as their catch-all theory no longer works.

I think this is just an interesting movie, I don't think it has, or is supposed to have, a logical explanation. A lot of this opinion comes from the novella that it was based on. In the novella the two characters actually have the same name. It's a Russian novel (obviously) and Russian civil servants are graded in bands, or ranks, which is why the head honcho is called the colonel (nothing to do with KFC), and the "mandatory party" was originally a grand ball (as was keeping with Russian society of the age). So there was the odd nod to the original work, but that's about where the similarities end. However in the original work it was never really explained if the doppelganger was real or not, but the protagonist of the novella gets carted off to an insane asylum at the end so that kind of maybe suggests the doppelganger wasn't real, but was a schism of the protagonist's mind.

As already noted, there were similarities with other movies, but as well as those noted (The Machinist, Eraserhead, Fight Club) I think there was also a bit of American Psycho where everyone is kind of anonymous and no-one really knows anyone anyway. Other characters were duplicated in the movie too such as the security guard, and there were others too. The director has also said that he has tried to create a world where people don't really care, or notice, and society is generally closed and cold. People that initially thought of the character as James started calling him Simon toward the end of the movie, and there were various other hints toward this too.

Were they the same person? A figment of each other's imagination? It's just a movie...it was just things that happened and you should just enjoy it for what it was. Having read the source material I'd err to the side that it was simply madness, but when the IMDB regulars get wind of this you'll start to see them insist that it was actually two different people because some people think that having an interpretation that differs from the orthodox makes them "more intelligent" than you.

reply

I watched this film and kept waiting for some kind of revelation that Simon/James was actually one person who had been sectioned to a secure ward in a psychiatric hospital. It seemed likely that it was SUPPOSED to be along those lines the entire time.

When other members of the cast started showing up in various other roles, I was like "Ah ha! I get it! He's actually had a nervous breakdown in the 'real' world; something has happened and he's suffering with multiple personality disorder and the people he's seeing are imaginary versions of the real people around him.

For instance I believed for a bit that the security guard who was constantly being a pain might have actually been a real security guard from a psychiatric wing, and the reason that Simon was having so much trouble constantly getting through is either he wasn't supposed to be trying to get past, or that the guard was trying to establish what 'personality' Simon was that day.

The annoying boss I believed was going to turn out to be a psychiatrist who was more interested in "James" than "Simon" (because I'd assume to a doctor, James would be the more interesting case due to his seeming more stable, social and direct than Simon who was like a breakdown waiting to happen). I expected to find that Simon's constant need for his Boss's attention was likely due to his desperation to prove himself sane enough to be released into the real world, to be noticed and approved of as sane.

The other characters, like the diner waitress could have been easily a substitute for hospital cafeteria food service provider, and the other workers (including the other staff around him) easily substituted for various orderlies and nurses, etc, who found James more agreeable than Simon).

Simon's mother is also what led me to think these things, as it seemed to me she was suffering with psychiatric issues too, or clear alzeimers, something along those lines where her memory or her thought processes weren't clear. It seemed Simon could be suffering the same things. The other woman at the home that Simon sees I thought could be a representation of the other side of his mother, another personality he sees as well as "James".

I believed Hannah to also be in a similar position as Simon in some regards...I believed she was sectioned also because she was suicidal and delusional about how people followed her around (the way she went off and got quite annoyed when she spoke so quickly of it struck me she wasn't completely together as she had first appeared). At points she gets quite high strung and emotional rather quick and I thought it reasonable she too could have had a nervous breakdown and ended up in the same hospital.

The parts where Simon is on the "train" I thought was more likely some sort of symbolism for the drugs he was on, he took that train every morning before work, and every evening after (much like one might take medication) and it wasn't until afterwards, things started occurring in the story (such as James showing up on the train for the first time, or him seeing Hannah on the train, etc. It seemed slightly symbolic that perhaps the briefcase scene where it snaps away in the doors of the train meant something was 'breaking' in Simon, it was this day he got told by James (whose face we didn't really see properly) was 'in his place'. It's this day he 'loses his ID card' and effectively, starts to lose his identity at the same time (perhaps the James personality was coming through more and more, trying to stifle the Simon personality).

Pretty sure none of that is accurate however, or someone would have bothered explaining it in the film. At the end when none of this happened, I just found it completely disappointing. I know not every film HAS to have some kind of explanation, but it helps to give reason to the hour and a half you watched when something at least makes sense, lol.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We've become a race of peeping toms.

reply

[deleted]

I had the exact same thoughts as you- i don't see how these scenes can be explaiend in the generally accepted stance that its two people!

...

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

Coz lifes too short to listen to Madlib

reply