If you don't want to know the ending, stop now.
When Jude Law puts himself in that incination machine, he just switched it on and let himself get burned alive? who the hell does this? I know he didn't want to leave any evidence of his existence but couldn't he set a timer or something, give himself some pills, pass out and THEN the machine would kick in. I really never understood how someone can do that.
This is one of my favorite movies. I just rewatched again and had the same issue.
I think the movie is pretty perfect. But it does bother me that there is no sign of Jude Law's/Jerome's horrific and painful death by fire (which honestly there would have been -- paraplegia not withstanding).
I took this as Niccol's determination to show that the movie was about our higher selves, our best selves.
Yet -- STILL -- I still think he could have shown Jude's character swallowing some meds and getting woozy for a few seconds and only THEN hitting the switch at the very end, for humane reasons. I mean, seriously, what a brutal and horrible end for a guy we end up caring about.
I still love the movie but I always pretend these measures in my head for poor Jerome.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I keep thinking I'm a grownup, but I'm not.
Hi. I'm just glad I'm not the only one who thought this.
No one goes out in that fashion. Too brutal.
I know, right? <sniffle> But still. A wonderful character and an unforgettable moment.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I keep thinking I'm a grownup, but I'm not.
No one goes out in that fashion. Too brutal.
Exactly.
shareI think they didn't have him dull himself because he had come to terms with his situation, and faced his decision bravely. Took a lot of guts to face that with no prep. Plus, it showed how he didn't do it under the influence, but it was a clear and conscious decision.
sharebut couldn't he set a timer or something, give himself some pills, pass out and THEN the machine would kick in.
Until the fire started to consume him. Then, believe me, he would have said "Bloody hell, what did I do to myself?"
Roasting alive (I know it was the only way because he couldn't leave a body behind), but really???
Not feasible in my opinion. I'm glad others are replying. Makes it interesting.
Bloody good movie
Well, it is obviously feasible. People have set themselves on fire in real life.
As for realistic for this particular character, I would disagree. I felt it's something he would do. There's a defiance in both our leads, that's part of what makes them who they are.
But seeing as they fictional characters and one is in space and the other is dead, I can't prove anything, ha ha...
Just my take on the character and how he ties into the themes of the film.
The bus thing wasn't an accident?
shareI think this is mainly because we're watching a 1997 movie with 2016 eyes.
The point (unlike today's movies) is not the actual suffering, so that scene was not meant to express agony. Really the scene shows flames start and then a fairly quick scene change. The purpose was to show that perfection, perhaps, and it's inherent burden of falling from it is not a life worth living.
I don't think the agony was a question in '97, but it is today with such violent and action driven movies as we have in 2016.
I absolutely love this movie.
The flames were so massive that it's likely he just bleeped out. No time to feel anything.
shareI could have done without that bit of visual poetry.
shareAlso those electricity bills are gonna be overdue, which will lead to turning off the electricity and spoiling the samples in the fridge.
shareHe could never accept his being second best. In his mind his body had betrayed him, he literally wanted nothing to do with his body, so he destroyed it.
shareI think you are reading too much into it. He wanted to guarantee his death. If it was a matter of "wanting to destroy his body", he wouldnt have jumped in front of a bus the first time.
share