MovieChat Forums > Jacob's Ladder (1990) Discussion > Fragments of interpretation

Fragments of interpretation

posted 11 years ago by Zeppelinskies
2 replies | jump to latest

Just watched this movie and thought it was wonderful - in fact I can't remember seeing anything this well crafted or thought provoking in a long time.

My view on the Elizabeth Pena character was that rather than a demon per se she represented the animalistic part of Jacobs mind i.e. the purely instinctual that strives only to live in defiance of all odds, represented in the dream by the fact that her relationship with Jacob was based almost exclusively on the basic passions of lust and sex, rather than the intellectual pursuit of love. I think this is why in the dream she tried to turn his attention away from what he feared was his future - no relationship with a previously adored wife, no great relationship with his children etc. and thats why as Jacob becomes more at peace with himself, he instinctively moves away from her character. I took the deleted scene showing her transformation into his corpse as a sort of last ditch effort of his animal mind warning him of his fate in order to get him to fight.

I also think the entire sequence regarding the drug was not intended to be taken literally although I suppose it's open to interpretation - I took it as a dying man feverishly trying to justify why he had been bayonetted by a member of his own squad, and it naturally took the form of a drug as immediately prior to the attack, the soldiers were all smoking pot except for him.

Either way; beautiful film - not scary at all in my view, and I thought Tim Robbins was perfectly cast; his performance of bemused detachment mixed with bouts of furious terror perfectly captured both how we act in dreams generally as well as the various stages of acceptance of death.

[–] hal-9010 11 years ago

I also think the entire sequence regarding the drug was not intended to be taken literally....

I like you interpretation better than what I think the filmmakers actually intended. Your way is more beautiful although two things contradict it: One is that we see the soldiers die off strangely before he himself is bayoneted. A way to rationalize this is to say that even the Vietnam bit is versioned by him in his final hour, but this would be a shame imo. as the flashbacks in the end shows us to be the actual real time, and not flashbacks - a thing a beauty I would miss. Also notice that one of his joes is shaking his head in similar manner like the daemons – however, a realistic shake, iow; not a fantasy and a foreshadow to why his daemons shake their heads this way in his visions... Secondly, is the fact that we are giving the data on what BZ really is in the credits, and this alone shows us the drug issue was to be taken literally. That being said, you way is better

___________
• I'm normally not a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me Superman •

[–] hal-9010 11 years ago

Upon reflection, one thing that actually supports your version is the Chemist, the man who educates us and Jacob on theses drugs... how would Jacob know if it is from his mind? Impossible, ergo sum your version fits. Again to rationalize, the Chemist would alternatively have had to have been a supernatural power - an outside angle, which is not a fabric of his hallucination, and thus the Chemist would know what Jakob does not. This then raises the question too, why this Angle does this - for what purpose? Obviously the answer it to help Jakob let go and accept his fate and unjust death.

In other words, the consequence of the film makers intention is that the angles and daemons are real, and not pure hallucinations.

___________
• I'm normally not a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me Superman •