MovieChat Forums > soggybottom

soggybottom (127)


Habitat Top-50 Darkside Darlings Double Trouble in The Darkside Does Anybody Wanna Tackle 'Mary, Mary'? Create a Better Ending for 'Trick Or Treat' Can Someone Please Help Me Understand 'The Moth' Seeing Double View all posts >


You're welcome Ahole. Hey moderators: Stop being cowards and deleting posts just because you're on a power-trip. All I did was help Ahole find his old IMDb-posts. I didn't say anything bad about MovieChat. So what rule did I break? Someone should start deleting all of your posts, and we'll see how you like it. Hooray WashingtonNative! The cave-lady's speech is the only part of the movie that makes any sense, so she'd better be real. Was she part of the role-play? It could go either way... Remember at the beginning when they show Teddy pictures of Rachel Solando? The FIRST one is of the cave-lady, so if she is just in his head (as Cawley says), then where did that picture come from? This suggests that she is real and part of the role-play. On the other hand, how did they know that Teddy would go down the cliffs, find the cave, and go in there? Cawley bragged that he knew every move that Teddy was going to make, but since it's the ONLY time that they let him have full reign of the island, it's impossible for even Mr. Know-It-All to know the exact path that Teddy would take. Let's say that he hadn't found the cave or decided to go in there. That's a lot of work on the part of the staff to set that all up for nothing. Sheehan didn't even lead him in that direction. Now, if she is not part of the role-play (and really is who she says she is), then how did she know so much? She immediately knew that he was the marshal, but he was wearing patients' clothes. And how did she know that Cawley thought that she was dead? She also knew that they were out to get him and wouldn't let him leave the island. If he is just a marshal looking for a missing patient, why would they stop him? Is she all in Teddy's head and just adding to his paranoia? Their conversation doesn't really support that. It's not like Teddy is leading the conversation, and the cave-lady is just agreeing. SHE is leading the conversation, bringing up stuff that he couldn't possibly know about (like Sodium Amytal and how pain enters the body), and he keeps asking questions and pushing back ("I'm not following you" and "I am a federal marshal--They can't stop me"). Everything that she says is factually correct too. He must be some kind of genius to be able to come up with that entire conversation on his own. Who started the fire? Teddy puts his hands near it to get warm, but if it's in his head, there's no reason to keep them there. The mind is a powerful thing, but it can't create heat. When Teddy assumes that she is the real Rachel Solando, she doesn't answer or even nod her head. If she is all in Teddy's head, and if he is so determined to be right, she is gonna say something like "Yep, that's me!" Even if she is part of the role-play and is supposed to go along with his delusional story, she would agree ("Yep, Rachel #2 of your fantasy-land reporting for duty!") If she isn't real, then what else in the movie isn't real? The whole thing? All us-viewers have to go by is what we see, and if it's all from the point of view of an unreliable delusional character, then it's impossible to prove what is real and what isn't. We have to decide all of that for ourselves, and therefore any interpretation MUST be valid. You're absolutely right Pepetoony (Good points by the way), but there are a helluva lot more things about this movie that don't make any sense than just those-2. For example, how can a guy who has been shot and killed go back to the past when it's not even 100% certain that he's even gonna be shot and killed in the first place? Donnie could've decided not to kill him, or shot and missed, or shot but not killed him, or shot and killed someone else by mistake. It kinda takes the whole excitement out of living your own life and making your own choices when it's all been pre-decided, and you have no say in the matter. "Yep, I'm gonna have to kill this guy because if I don't, he won't be able to go back in time and save me, and therefore I wouldn't even be alive right now." It doesn't get any more nonsensical than that!!! There are aspects of this movie that I really like (Donnie & Gretchen, the music, all of the clues), but whenever I try to make sense of it all, I'm left scratching my head. For example, we're supposed to believe that a jet engine falling from the sky creates an unstable Tangent Universe, and that the solution is to send ANOTHER jet engine back to the same spot? Since when did 2 wrongs make a right? It wasn't even the same jet engine. And I've never seen anyone provide any kind of half-decent explanation as to where it possibly came from in the first place (Do they just randomly fall out of jets like that as they're flying?) Wouldn't dropping another jet engine just create another Tangent Universe? Shouldn't there be 2 jet engines now? (creating 2 Tangent Universes?) What exactly stopped the first one from falling again? Or are we supposed to believe that the jet engine that fell at the beginning is the same one that he sends from the future at the end? (creating an infinite loop that isn't really infinite because he only survives the first loop, so he wouldn't be around to save future loops, and therefore the world would eventually end anyway...So much for Donnie being a hero!) I've read some people say that the Tangent Universe already started BEFORE the jet engine comes down, but if that's the case, then sending the jet engine back wouldn't solve the problem. I guess it might help, but something else must've started the Tangent Universe, and Donnie needs to figure out what that is and fix that too before he can save mankind. But this isn't brought up anywhere in the movie or in The Philosophy of Time Travel book or in any discussions that I've come across, so I guess that I'm just thinking about it too much. Whatever started the Tangent Universe isn't important as long as Donnie gets another jet engine sent back. That makes perfect sense to me! But I still like this film (Just go along for the ride and try not to think about it too much, and if you ever see a jet engine fall from the sky, run like hell and let someone else be The Living Receiver!) Okay, now you're really confusing the hell out of me. I have absolutely no idea. *thinks about it for a good-long while* I guess that I just never thought that I'd ever encounter an actual "Holly Baxter"! And if you want to know the truth Prelude, "Holly Baxter" actually makes more sense to me than "Holler-Back Girl" (which probably shows how much I'm out of the loop these days). So if a girl "hollers back", is that a bad thing? What if you're trying to get her attention in the first place? Wouldn't you WANT her to holler back? The only instance that I can think of in which you WOULDN'T want someone to "holler back" is when you're having an argument, and you want to have the last word... 'Hey, she never "hollered back". I guess that she finally realized that I was right.' Prelude, you can holler at me all you want, but just to make myself perfectly clear, "I ain't no holler-back girl", so please don't take it the wrong way if I don't respond. I used to think Gwen Stefani was saying "I ain't no Holly Baxter". (and I always wondered who Holly Baxter was and why it was so bad to be her) View all replies >