MovieChat Forums > The Lobster (2015) Discussion > Questions I still have. (contains spoile...

Questions I still have. (contains spoilers)


1. Does Colin Farrell die at the end when he tries to blind himself?
The movie is narrated by his girlfriend, who seems to be telling it as something that happened in the past. So she must live, but it makes me think he might have died.
2. The very first scene, where a woman drives to a field and just shoots a horse in the head. What was that all about? Was that some person who supposedly got turned into a horse, and it was someone she knew and she wanted to kill the person?
3. When the couples get "assigned" children, where are the children coming from? Are they maybe orphans because their parents broke up and didn't make it through the hotel coupling test, so they just reassign them new parents until they are old enough to be forced into couplehood?

reply


1. Dunno, and not sure I care.

2. I believe that horse was someone she was with previously.

3. Once again, dunno. This movie made no sense. It was also stupid, cruel and fascistic. 4/10. Awful.

reply

I think he chickened out and bailed, which is why she talks about him in a past tense manner.

reply

Like another said, I think he bailed on her hence the past tense narrative.

However, I was annoyed that the writers didn't feel like completing the story. Did he die, did they get caught, turned into lobsters, did he run away? I usually don't mind open-ended endings, but this one seemed to bother me. Maybe I've just watched a string of movies that don't have a complete story and this one stings a little more than usual.

reply

Personally I see absolutely no reason to assume or suspect he died. His character development made it clear that he was a callow and self centered sort. To me it was obvious that he was no longer in love with Rachel Weisz's character, couldn't go through with blinding himself, and abandoned her at the restaurant.

Naturally I can't say that is absolutely what actually happened, because it was deliberately left ambiguous. Yet it was obvious to me due to how David had been painted up to that point as a character. If there is anything specific you can point out to indicate anything to contradict my conclusion, by all means, I'll hear it out.

reply

You're getting weird answers from people that didn't understand that the film was not supposed to satisfy reality or give anybody closure. It was basically a film filled with the allegories of stupid things society does with relationships:

a) you need to be married
b) if you fail that, you're a loner that's put on trail and have a certain amount of time to resolve that to stay in good standing
c) you need to always find someone like you (right down to the eyesight)
d) any new relationships are on trail, which you can fail at
e) in real life, a lot of people have kids because they mistakenly believe it will "fix" their relationship (hence the child that the nose-bleeders were assigned)
f) to find people who accept you as a loner, you need to join a lonely out-cast clan. Get yourself off all you want, but no real flirting or sex with someone else, because then you wouldn't belong with the loners anymore.
g) pretend happy relationships with the parents back in the city
h) so many couples are shams, the headkeeper that would rather shoot his wife, the man who pretends to be a nosebleeder.
i) might as well dig your grave now, because if you're part of the loner clan, we get busy dying soon

etc. etc., I think you see where I'm going with this. I still have yet to reconcile certain scenes in my mind, but I'm relatively certain they fit in this framework

As for your questions, here's my take:

1) I think he abandoned her, couldn't go through with it. His devotion / commitment wasn't enough. But then, it's a farce that he needed to be blind to continue a relationship with her anyway.
2) Good question on the horse/donkey. Probably someone she knew -- just an animal now (and people turning into animals is yet just another allegory of the sorry existence some of us have).
3) too literal, it doesn't matter. See point e) above.

More questions:

4) what's the significance of the yachts?
5) why are the shooting each other with tranqs?


Eh?

reply

This was a really great reply. I saw the allegory in most of the film and enjoyed it but if you wouldn't mind sharing your take on a few moments that I didn't grasp, I'd appreciate it.

• When the two loners took the woman to get blinded (I took it that these girlfriends were trying to poison their relationship?) when she realized that she was blind she stabbed one but as soon as she did the other friend mimicked being stabbed and died too, I didn't understand why.

• Why were the loners so abusive about other loners being intimate with each other to the extent of cutting lips and private parts to punish them?

• What was the symbolism behind single people tagging loners to get more time to find a partner?

Thanks!

P.S. I think the Yachts symbolized that you were successful, 'you made it' as it were. People wanted to be like you, envied the relationship you had, that you seemed to have it all together while they were still stuck on the shore.

reply

• Why were the loners so abusive about other loners being intimate with each other to the extent of cutting lips and private parts to punish them?

There are two groups. The hotel people that insist you have to be half of a couple, or they turn you into an animal. And the loners who insist you should be single.
The hotelers go to the woods, and force the loners to match up.
The loners go to the hotel and break up the couples.
Both groups insist that their way is the only right way.

reply

When the two loners took the woman to get blinded (I took it that these girlfriends were trying to poison their relationship?) when she realized that she was blind she stabbed one but as soon as she did the other friend mimicked being stabbed and died too, I didn't understand why.

Since Rachel's character was blind, the leader thought she could convince Rachel that she was dying if she lowered herself so that her voice sounded like it was coming from the same body she had just stabbed. Presumably Rachel didn't know there were two other women with her in the woods.

reply