« Hellboy: Attack of the Two-Hour One-Liner | Main | New SuperPope Graphic »

August 06, 2004

Comments

Bill Wiltfong

I loved the movie, but I had some of the same problems with it you did. I wanted "the truth" to be revealed that the creatures were real, even though all the evidence, even halfway through, pointed to them being a ruse. I guessed about 8 or 9 different possible underlying plots through the course of the movie, but most of them revolved around the village being set in modern times (the only time anyone said "God" was when Ivy's sister said "Thank God" and it seemed like a writing oversight) and the creatures being a fabricated method of control. The fact that I guessed this about the movie from the get-go made it a little dissappointing that M.N.S. didn't surprise me.

But what did surprise me was Noah. Incidently, I adhere to the O.S.Card school of character naming in that every character should have a reason to be named that way. Why was he named Noah? Could it be that M.N.S. gave him that name because Noah was the only one out of the whole town to know the truth on his own, like Noah was the only one on earth worthy to save humanity?

But the worst, most horrible thing I've ever seen in a movie is when Noah stabs Lucious. That broke my heart, and when I saw the movie a second time, I left the room for a bit, as soon as I saw Noah enter Lucious's house. I couldn't take seeing it twice.

I also found it surprising that Noah had dressed up as one of the creatures. The fact that he had made the end very exciting the first time around. I didn't know if Ivy was imagining the creature or if the town elders were wrong, or if in their deception the belief of the townsfolk gave life to the concept of the creatures.

In the end, I think my favorite part of the movie, and the thing that sticks with me the most, is in trying to understand why the town elders did this thing at all. So much can be said about their justifications and reasonings, and I don't think they were entirely in the wrong.

The Little Red Riding Hood elements were also pretty fun. The border patrol man's name, Lupinski, hinted to the fact that to the elders, the modern, outside world was the REAL big, bad wolf. Ivy's surprise at Lupinski's kindness goes to show a little of how misguided the elders might be.

I've seen few movies that give me so much to think and talk about (Lost in Translation was one of them), and for that alone I think it was a great movie. Also, Bryce Howard is just totally hot.

SuperPope

I hadn't caught the Lupinski name. Good eye for symbolism.

I'm afraid I don't agree with you about Bryce Howard being good looking, though.

Because my wife reads this blog.

led grow lights

@DrStevePerry our markets are flood with china goods. It's hard to find anything Made In America
led grow lights http://www.fledlights.com

zgbofcnfi

azgbofcnfi
[url=http://www.g91xje44mv4v367hh7r41l9z172ma1rms.org/]uzgbofcnfi[/url]
zgbofcnfi http://www.g91xje44mv4v367hh7r41l9z172ma1rms.org/

The comments to this entry are closed.

Favorite Books

  • Ravi Zacharias: Can Man Live Without God?

    Ravi Zacharias: Can Man Live Without God?
    An amazing book that makes the case for God not by citing the Bible or great theologians, but by analyzing the philosophies of famous atheists and showing their flaws.

  • C. S. Lewis: Mere Christianity

    C. S. Lewis: Mere Christianity
    C.S. Lewis was an atheist for much of his life. Appropriately, this book makes the case for the existance of God first and Christianity second with carefully outlined and surprisingly simple reasoning. I consider this required reading for anyone searching for meaning.

  • C. S. Lewis: Space Trilogy

    C. S. Lewis: Space Trilogy
    Religious Sci-Fi Fantasy: A very tiny genre. In "Out of the Silent Planet", "Perelandra", and "That Hiddeous Strength", C.S. Lewis manages to tackle difficult theological questions as we follow Dr. Ransom in his adventures on Mars, Venus, and back on Earth. My favorite science fiction series by far.