Just watched it. So disappointed about the ending. I wish we could know the truth at the very end.
shareEnding? There was no flipin ending! The writers should die horrible deaths!
shareThey should have cut the beginning of the movie and given us a proper ending if they were limited by time. If not, there's no excuse for the idiocy that is the ending.
The new home of Welcome to Planet Bob: http://kingofbob.blogspot.ca/
The problem I had with the film is the fact there's about 3 or 4 possible endings and realities to this film and none of them really make sense giving all the evidence. Either the whole movie was a coma dream of Theo's, which is crap, because "it was all a dream" movies suck. It's literally pointless because it's like someone else telling you their dream, who really cares, it didn't happen. Another possibility is that half way through their test something went horribly wrong and Dvorak and Bug are gone or dead, and only Theo and Emily experience the last days together. And they have some shared psychosis together. It's the least likely scenario given the evidence. Or, it's all a simulation, and hints suggests Emily maybe in on it, like giving shots while taking special medication herself, etcetera. Again this scenario seems very unlikely given the required magnitude of such a simulation, and the multiple deaths that occurred. The last possible scenario is that things occurred primarily at face value and there was a catastrophic event and it's the end of days, people die, and they are hallucinating too.
Again, I can find evidence to support all of these scenarios, and yet even more evidence to disregard all these theories too. Sure, once hallucinations are introduced into the plot it makes everything convoluted, and the audience no longer has a reliable narrator or point of view. Which is the whole problem with this movie, there are many possible realities, but they all have numerous holes that make none of them realistic outcomes. Maybe someone smarter than me can definitively determine the real plot of this movie given the evidence provided, but I suspect there isn't one.
The trend of making open ended movies without any real conclusions or answers has become real popular in Hollywood over the last decade or more. It's not that they are open ended and open to interpretation, but that no ending has a logical conclusion because too much evidence contradicts itself. This worked for the show "Lost" because it was all about advertising space and money, people watched trying to find answers. The creators and writers knew this, so they kept piling on seemingly unanswerable questions. When the show ended it didn't matter if the writers wrote themselves into a corner and couldn't explain over half the plot because they'd already sold all their advertising space and the show was over, who cares, it's off the air, they made their money. This doesn't work in a movie, or at least not in a good one. This is no "Catcher in the Rye"; there is no depth, no story within a story to be found here.
Solid, incredible solid analysis of the movie. Please, don't say you're not smart enough to read into it, you definetly proved that you're smarter than the writers of this movie, not only because all your points are valid but because not following a proper narrative, or setting proper rules about how we should came to understand the movie, they left everything hanging and that is a pretty poor effort on their end.
When writers prepare for a movie, the first thing they should do is setup strict rules on how the world is gonna be and respect them to the letter, rules are what make movies believable and I'm not talking that fantasy movies are not real, i'm talking about the viewer actually engaging with the movie.
If you take a closer look at the real good ones, they all have 1 thing in common, they setup basic rules that they follow to the letter, that is what gives the viewer a point of meassure and a way to get yourself into the story. This movie is a mess, they setup rules they contradict in the next minute, they introduce stuff that contradicts previous stuff and so, as you so properly explained, we dont'have any starting point for a theory.
At this point, this can all be summed up to poor writing.
Alex Vojacek
Alex, your quite the little movie nazi, aren't you? If film makers HAD to make such strict rules about their world it would be a sad 'real' world.
I do agree that a strong grounding(as you say strict rules to follow) or a believable set of guidelines makes a great contrast to anything scary/thrilling/entertaining, but to say you have to do that to make a good movie is ridiculous.
Is the lack of grounding way to prevalent in the vast majority of movies/tv? Absolutely!
Does that make them all bad? Absolutely not! They can still be entertaining.
Are you not entertained?! Possibly not! It's all subjective.
I am curious. What are all these great movies that follow such strict rules? They are very few and far between, and it still doesn't mean they are any enjoyable.
I don't think you need to be able to put together all the evidence to make some complete story. Isn't it fun to ponder. Can't it be a smash up of your last scenario, where It's taken at face value and still be part of a simulation. Maybe a small part or completely or some weird mix where it started out that way, sheet blew up on earth, everything went to sheet, and 'they'(Walter, nasa and crew) still had some power and wanted something from them.
shareI agree that the non-ending seems to have become the new ending in the case of too many movies recently. This one particularly frustrated me as I'd just watched another (albeit British) movie that didn't end so much as stop, as though they'd simply run out of film at that point. That one didn't even make a passing attempt at a conclusion, as this one did, at least. There was a scene between these guys, this character shown doing something, then to an exchange between two others, roll credits - wait, what??
Leave your audience thinking it's dumb, and you're teasingly brilliant, is that it? Or is it simply a case of a Naked Emperor?