Anyone noticed this triple flashback?
First most of the movie is told from N.Henstridge.
Then there is that scene we're told about the group that wants to free Ice Cube(2nd flashback). And then those criminals tell what happened before(3rd flashback). This has to be a record, or not?
[Sorry about the missing insight. I couldn't recall the names]
Einhorst
Good to see someone has understood it's all in the flashbacks. I t becomes more complicated when you realise that the only character that tells the story is a drug addict, so what's real in the whole story? Maybe she freed the ghosts and killed her team with the help of Ice cube to seem like the hero of the story?
Aishwarya
[deleted]
Good idea! Drug addicts are not a very reliable source of informations. But, however, this is often because they manipulate in order to get drugs, or money for drugs, or to avoid legal consequences... In Ghosts of Mars the drug seems to be rather legal, and she admits using it, so manipulation is not very likely. And we don't know if this drug induces halucinations.
And as for flashbacks... In 70's art movies flashbacks in flashbacks were not rare thing. Sometimes it looked as if the directors had competition who will make the story more complicate and unable to follow by using them. I am not sure (it was very long ago), but I think I've once counted seven flashbacks one in another (like babushka).
Ha ha! I love the idea that all 'drug addicts' are crazed homocidal maniacs who are all tripping out 24/7 and have no grip on reality whatsoever.
Not saying being a drug addict is a good thing, but I rarely meet any that fit with the mainstream media's perception (you know, the one that has old women stating that the problem with the world today is all those nasty drug addicts).
I t becomes more complicated when you realise that the only character that tells the story is a drug addict, so what's real in the whole story? Maybe she freed the ghosts and killed her team with the help of Ice cube to seem like the hero of the story?
That's a clever suggestion, but I think the flashbacks are showing us what really happened, not just illustrating the narrative of whoever is telling the story at that point.
The proof: we see Desolation handcuff Mel to the bunk, exchange a few lines with her, and escape when she deliberately refrains from shooting him -- but this doesn't match the story Mel tells at the discovery hearing. She says he must have handcuffed her while she was asleep.
----
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Maybe it was all a dream, fantasies from a drug-addict.
´¨¨)) -:¦:-
¸.•´ .•´¨¨))
((¸¸.•´ .•´ -:¦:-
-:¦:- ((¸¸.•.>> Porsché Lynn
John Carpenter stated in the audio commentary that one of the things he wanted to do with the story is to tell a tale from a person who is retelling a retelling of something that happened. So, Melanie's testimony is going off of what she experienced and what she had been told. This is true of anyone who would be in that situation. Think about it. That's what testimonies are about: what you know from experience and what you were told by a person or persons involved. I say he definately succeeded.
But this one's eatting my popcorn!
[deleted]