MovieChat Forums > The Last Will and Testament of Rosalind Leigh (2013) Discussion > The newspaper clipping *spoilers*

The newspaper clipping spoilers

posted 11 years ago by tipopwilliams
9 replies | jump to latest

I have several points I want to bring up here, so I'll try to keep things organized.

1) The clipping is a report about the suicide of a cult member, and how the cult was cleared of any wrongdoing. On my initial viewing of the movie, I assumed it was Leon's father who killed himself. We're lead to believe that by his mother's voice-over saying "after your father did… what he did", but they ever actually SAY he killed himself.

We keep seeing the bridge whenever his father is mentioned, and in the initial monologue the camera slowly pans across a bar. I suspect the father simply got drunk and ran his car off that bridge. If that is the case, then the newspaper clipping is about his MOTHER'S suicide. This became more clear on my second viewing, since I knew she committed suicide.

If the above line of reasoning is correct, then WHO cut the clipping that Leon finds in the magazine?

2) The photo in the article shows the founders of the angel cult, twin brothers. They are dressed like pilgrims, and the photo appears to be ancient, like late 19th century technology. However, we later see the two brothers in a black & white video, apparently the same age and still dressed like pilgrims.

Ok, perhaps it's just a poor-quality photo, and there's no discrepancy there. But then when Leon dropped his fork, someone came to the door. ("If you drop a knife, it means a man will come to your door. If you drop a spoon, it will be a woman. If you drop a fork, it will be neither man nor woman.") If we accept this at true, then whoever Leon spoke to at the door was neither man nor woman.

The camera never reveals who Leon is speaking to at the door, but listening to the voice it sounds exactly like the twin brother we heard on the video. He warns Leon about the creature. He asks to come in, but Leon denies him. Later, when *something* is coming for him, he looks out the window and sees the two brothers coming towards the front door, still dressed in their pilgrim outfits. Are they coming to save him?

Are the twin brothers, founders of the angel cult, themselves angels (neither man nor woman)? If so, that adds another level of symbolism to Leon denying the voice at the door.

[–] ecranos2 11 years ago

Great catch! So much more to this movie than meets the eye. Will definitely be watching again.

[–] tipopwilliams 11 years ago

If you do watch it again, let me know what you think of the bridge (both in the flashbacks and the freakin' PAINTING on the wall) and th newspaper clipping.

[–] MadRotaryOne_DDCgod 11 years ago

what are you talking about??? none of it was even real, so it
has no meaning, her ghost is just dreaming:

The mother killed herself since she waited decades for her son to attempt to reconnect, yet he never did. Her eternal soul lives on in the house (which the son never returned to even after finding out his mother committed suicide). She was in a sisyphean version of hell where she has to endure the same task over and over - constantly imagining him returning to the house and trying to communicate with him through supernatural forces so that he finally believes that religion and souls are real. Her goal is for him to try to reach out to his mother and tell her he misses her (aka the scenes of him listening to that "communicating with the dead" tape, her asking "Do you miss me as much as I miss you"), and every time she thinks she's succeeding (getting to the top of the hill with the boulder) and he seems to be believing in souls, the boulder falls back down and Leon lets the last candle get blown out to prove he has no interest in souls being real and his mother still existing, as he doesn't care to communicate to her ever again.

http://www.facebook.com/mike.d.keith?ref=profile

[–] tipopwilliams 11 years ago

That's certainly one interpretation of events. See the other thread I started here for some other viewpoints.

[–] MadRotaryOne_DDCgod 11 years ago

nope, there isn't. it's called a DC and he explains the
movie. so the director has the only viewpoint.

http://www.facebook.com/mike.d.keith?ref=profile

[–] tipopwilliams 11 years ago

LOL. I'm guessing you never took an art appreciation class. Once a piece of art is released into the world, it's meaning is entirely up to each viewer/listener/reader/whatever. That may have been his *intent* but in the end it's just HIS interpretation of the story, not the only possible one.

(Before you get all worked up about this, you should go read that other thread I mentioned.)

[–] MadRotaryOne_DDCgod 11 years ago

I did read the your other thread plus the others on this board.
It doesn't change the fact that you are wrong. Art?? so now this
is like some poem? no, it's a movie, with a clear screenplay.
Its like saying there is more than one meaning for the ending of
"The Titanic", did the ship sink? or did it make it back to port??
Ya, no, there isn't. This isn't an art house movie, just another drama/mystery.

But you keep thinking whatever you like. Thats on you.

http://www.facebook.com/mike.d.keith?ref=profile

[–] virustwin 11 years ago

as a creator myself, movies ARE considered and artform. its no use debating that, you are dead wrong. your opinion on the movie is derived from the director's commentary, however, there are many directors who deliberately create a script and screenplay and still leave it open to interpretation,even by themselves. vince gillian (creator of breaking bad) himself has formulated opinions on the nature and extent of characters HE created. he has always said that the characters exist and you and himself can derive what opinion about them that you/he will. so because someone creates something does not mean that it is cast in stone. many of the characters and scenarios i have created are uncertain in their nature and result. and we are sharing opinions here so you cant negate or discredit someone else's opinion in lieu of yours/the director's own.
ps. the titanic analogy is just trite and i think you know that.

[–] MadRotaryOne_DDCgod 11 years ago

You are still using these other directors and/or your own set of self
created rules and somehow applying it to this movie and this director,
when in fact, regardless how it is an "art form" or not, you have absolutely
no idea how THIS director sees his own work. If you go talk to him and
he personally tells you that his film/screenplay is open to interpretation,
then you are right. But if he says no, this is the way it is, and if you
personally want to see it differently than me, than you are just making
up some fan fiction, but its all you, and nothing else. It's as simple
as that. So unless we have the director here in this thread, than neither
of us can say we are right or wrong....

http://www.facebook.com/mike.d.keith?ref=profile