It was so ridiculous I just started laughing at how ridiculous it was. I don't understand how people can say this is a good film.
shareI'm with you on that. It was no different than the contrived "it was all a dream" device.
shareI guess it's not for everyone but I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. The twist wasn't anything mind blowing, and it's a bit of a stretch, but I thought it was an interesting portrayal of schizophrenia. I mostly enjoyed it for the atmosphere and mystery elements.
share[deleted]
It was dissociative identity disorder (DID)....Notice how he had multiple personalities? Quite different than schizophrenia!
shareWhich twist?
People are saying that there are two twists.
The first was given away far, far too early. The second was only a twist if one couldn't count.
The concept was good but, sadly, the execution was extremely poor.
I assumed the kid didn’t count. He was the 11th right? I think at some point I assumed he was the original host. They didn’t satisfactorily explain what happened to OG Fat Guy. Where is his personality?
share*Spoliers ahead*
Yes, the twist was rubbish for this film. They tried to lift a slightly above average slasher/thriller/mystery film above itself with a ludicrous twist. I've never understood all the praise for this film. The most ridiculous thing is that once the twist is revealed, the characters in the crazy man's mind continue on playing out the "suspenseful" story for another unbearable twenty minutes or so until the film reaches closure... but at this point, who cares about any of the characters you actually gave a d-mn about in the film?! None of them are real! Who cares what happens in this guys head? We never knew him, he's just part of this absurd plot twist. It's an overrused "all in the head" twist brought about in a slightly different way but derails the whole film, yet people act like the film is a masterpiece. "Oh, he lives out multiple personality isorder and hallucinations in his mind so each character is a part of him...so you DID learn all about him throughout the film." That is basically a defense for what I've said but it's absurd. Anyone can write a script like this, tack on a lame twist, then go back and toss in a couple red herrings. It's as lame as the twist for High Tension (Haute Tension) which came out a few years later. These types of twists have been beaten to death and have ruined films like Identity and High Tension. Enough already!
Disagree. When Cusack saw his own reflection, I flipped out as much as he did.
To me, it was a brilliant twist. So we'll have to agree to disagree on that I suppose...
------
Wait a minute... who am I here?
I'm with you. agree to disagree and after that reflect at the 7.3 out of 10. Some people are just hard to entertain I guess.
"And what was it last time? Didn't know what the box was?" - The Female Cenobite in Hellbound
Nah, I think they mean the kid being the killer as the burst out laughing part.
shareSpoiler
Yeah that was ridiculous. I almost expected the grown up Malcom to appear to kill off Paris. He couldnt be Paris anyway, so sth had to happen.
But then the brat showed up and I was like: lol, this is lame.
Now the brat was supposed to have killed all adults... yeah sure. Like a b-movie horror.
I know they were all different identities of one mind and not physical persons, thus it wouldnt matter whether it was a kid or an adult doing it... but still, it sucked. Downgraded the movie for me.
---
Lincoln Lee: I lost a partner.
Peter Bishop: I lost a universe!
I guessed the twist almost immediately... Well, after the 2nd death. I just thought what the connection was between the 2 stories and when I couldn't find any, I understood that it could only be happening inside the bald guy's head. By the way, I also guessed that the kid was the killer... just cos it was the least logical choice :)
shareI thought the twist was excellent. It was the last thing I was expecting!
shareI have to agree, after we found out that characters were in his mind i though " ok now she dies then he dies and its over, lets get over it" whne he told her to wait i though he intentionally wanted her to die, then kill the other guy and get domination :D
----------
"Common sense is not so common."
- Voltaire
Perfectly said, MisterMovieMan.
shareMisterMovieMan, you appear a bit jaded, eh.
Only two things are actually knowable:
It is now and you are here. All else is merely a belief.
You simply don't get it.....and the incredible thing is that it's right in front of your eyes....meaning this incredible twist you're talking about (it can be the fact that all these personalities are manifestations of his own mind, or that the child is the truly dangerous one) was written all over the movie if you can use logic.....they had the SAME BIRTHDAYS, and this was left as a piece of evidence for people to piece together the movie....Mind you, it took me some time to figure it out BEFORE they showed the bald guy, but it was right there in front of your eyes.....and movies like this are masterpiece's to some (maybe not you)....I thought this movie was brilliant, not only for the actual movie itself, but for the way it depicted the disorder and the unique way it tried to cure it...Then again, I studied psychology and maybe that's why it fascinated me so much!
shareDid he really kill some people that are shown on the pictures at the last-time discussion?
Also what happened at the end?
The characters were never real. It's a MOVIE. There's no difference in getting emotionally invested in characters in a movie than getting invested in characters in a movie that just happen to be in someone else's head.
sharethere is obviously a huge difference, as any film or psychology student can explain to you.
shareIt wold have been ridiculous had it been for real. But it was all his figment of imagination .The return of the boy in the end as the real villain shows that it was the loophole in the story created by Malcolm to kill all the other identities. Now he did that intentionally or not is left for the viewer to decide. This helped him to complete that story without it being a happy ending and allowed his violent identity continue its existence in him.
shareI thought the ending killed the movie. The evil kid walking past the explosion was so over the top and laughable. This movie had everything going for it, and an ending can make or break a film. This one broke.
shareWell,the first twist atleast had a nice build-up and Mangold wasn´t in a rush to reveal the truth.when Buseys prisoner runs like amile away just to see the Motel infront of him,I didnt go-Oh,he´s a fignent of someones imagination" I went"What?That´s bizarre." When bodies started disappearing etc...
Then I had a clue but wasn´t completely 100%...maybe cause the structure was so simple and clever;Just take Christies "Ten little indians" and instead of a serious whodunit, turn it into an entertaining,bloody B-slasher before derailing in a fittingly,dark,twisted manner...as the genre"It was All in his/her head)goes,Identity is definitely top-drawer.
The SECOND twist(There are THREE,if ya saw the film) had me in stitches, embarrassed and dint feel my intelligence was insulted as much s writer Cooney had without knowing it,painted himself into a corner.For some reason Peet and Cusacks characters hae telepathic powers once back at the motel and after Paris sees Rhodes file,we see what happened...Ed calms her down and says he´ll handle Rhodes.
Like what,hahaaha....WHAT reason would there be for Rhodes to bethe mainmurderer EXCEPT that he was played by Ray Liotta? A cheap attempt to in the last second typecast a great actor JUST CAUSE many will buy this illogical twist,cause it´s LIOTTA After all...
IF anyone bought it for a second,his name must be the only reason. I mean,we SEE HIM ALONE finding the key next to the dead mother,We SEE HIM finding the key under the prisoner,we SEE HIM ALONE out in the rain looking for the kiler,we SEE HIM waiting for Ginny one second after the killer tried to break into her bathroom,he WARNS Ginny and the kid not to get in the car that blows up....he was the most paranoid,suggesting they all stay in One room. He was determined to find the massmurderer;he was a killer,sure...just not THE KILLER!!There´s slight difference there....
So how the file revealing how he and Busey killed a cop while in custody in any way plays in with the point of the story,I´m sure I don´t know. No last words,no motive AT ALL,just Rhodes and Ed shooting at eachother until one was dead....Very cheap,very illogical,you cod tell a HUGE piece of the puzzle was missing...were We supposed to think that the story ended there?
As for the kid being the killer,it didnt matter to me at that point,I was partially inveted when Ed went back in despite them not being REAL humans but when fatty came to and was"Rehabilitated",the film had outworn its premise And welcome.
Since it was all in a psychos head,a kid walking calmly with a huge explosion occurring behind him or nonsensical murders like standing in the middle of the road so daddy can die trying to save him,I didnt really mind. Could ve been a 9 but it lands on a 7.2 for me.
Everyone in this thread is an idiot and wouldn't know a good film from a hole in the ground.
It is quite a stretch when you consider an 8 year old boy killing a group of adults, discreetly, but also consider that that's in the mind of the killer or his imagination. We don't know what he's tried for or that any of it isn't just made up as a justification.
Suspension of disbelief is okay for you when its Saw 2, one of the best movies of all time, but when its this movie, its not ok. Same for Hostel or anything else.
The fact that you missed all the artistic and psychological nuances just shows how philistine and uneducated all of you are, really. I'm upset at the American education system
^ Amen! I actually thought it was the most awesome twist in a movie in a looong time.. it suddenly changed the mood from a mystery/thriller to a sad drama, and I went through so many emotions during the finale, it's insane.
Like having the best sex of my life, after that I get beaten to a pulp, then a cute puppy dog comes and makes me feel all better. Then someone pokes my eyes out.
That's the closest example of what I felt, and it was awesome to me that an american big budget film could achieve that.
--X-marks_the_spot--tume-X--
i couldnt agree more... and also, these kind of movies need to have an absurd conclusion, i mean, how could it possibly end other then it did?, all suspense and mystery would be lost,not to mention logic, its either "shizo" or "it was all a dream", if you want logic, thats logical...so i really dont understand whats wrong with the ending... if you want a deep and philosophical expirience you watch a tarkovsky, bergman, fellini or jodorowsky film... you dont watch these kind of movies to feed your brain, yea, haute tensions ending didnt make alot of sense, but you cant deny that it is one of the most suspense movies...ever
i dont understand people who watch a horror movie and then complain about how it didnt make sense, how unreal it was, blablabla, all a horror movie should do is deliver the atmosphere, mystery and suspense.... its really more about the trip then the conclusion... most dont understand that you dont judge every movie by the same criteria, thats why genres exist
sorry for my english... im from croatia
I agree with you on what a horror movie is for and how it should be taken.
But conclusion to a story is as important as as the story itself, so a bad ending is as good as a bad movie for some people, if not all.
Your mind makes it real.share
"Everyone in this thread is an idiot and wouldn't know a good film from a hole in the ground."
So because this film had a tired, over-used twist brought about in a different manner that was also foolishly revealed a good 20 minutes before the film ended THAT means I am uneducated and stupid, especially when it comes to films? Wow. That's really thoughtful of you. Actually, I love intelligent movies. This one attempted to be clever and fell flat on its face but appeals to Americans who love to be drowned in unnecessary rehashed twists. Seriously, you are quite rude and way off.
"The fact that you missed all the artistic and psychological nuances just shows how philistine and uneducated all of you are, really. I'm upset at the American education system."
Thank you for clearing that up for me. Everyone who realizes how lame this twist is executed can now understand that we just weren't educated enough by our public school system to understand the character nuances and deep-psychology featured in Identity. Give me a break and please go back to school yourself... try and toss in a course regarding polite etiquette while you're there.
I happen to have respect for this film's director, James Mangold, but this film just stinks.
"over-used"
Please, give some us some examples.
"D-E-S-T-R-O-Y : E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G"
Agree with everything in the OP. This was the stupidest plot I've seen in years. There was no real suspense, with the constant downpour not moody, just irritating. Mangold's a good director but not here.
And I still have no idea who, other than the Doctor, was actually killed.
"Dogs bark . . . when the elephant passes." - - Sir David Lean
My educational level is just fine, thank you.
The twist was silly. It's just so much masturbation by the writers.
A good mystery is more than a series of bodies piling up, followed by a random unmasking of a killer with no credible explanation for what was going on.
It's exceptionally easy for a writer to say "it was all in his head". But that doesn't mean that it's a valid approach to filmmaking. Just what is the creator's intent here? To show that he can *beep* with the audience? Big deal.
What's particularly bad about this film is that all of the action that we spend the first hour watching takes place in a fictional world that obeys no known rules (other than the whims of the screenwriter). Bodies disappear? It doesn't matter - we're dealing with dream logic, not real world logic. But even as dream logic it doesn't work very well. (For a film that does a good job with dream logic, see something by David Lynch, e.g. Mullholland Drive.)
The basic logic of this film makes no sense to me. I don't believe it could happen, nor do I care if it did. Multiple personalities of a MPD killer battle it out at a secluded hotel on a rainy night? So what!
The best serial killer movies (Silence of the Lambs, Se7en, for example) work because there is some logic to what the killer is doing. In this film not only are we presented no logic to what the killer is doing, we don't even have any logic to the _existence_ of his victims?
So really, who gives a damn?
Were you joking when you said Saw 2 was one of the best movies of all time? I hope for your sake that was some kind of sick joke.
__________________________
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=40002059
" its Saw 2, one of the best movies of all time,"
LMFAO!!
*Spoilers ahead*
I thought the last line was the funniest, it sounded so stupid. I'd already known the boy was the killer, but I still think I would've suspected it, because he just disappears after the middle of the movie!
'but I thought it was an interesting portrayal of schizophrenia'
To this poster,
Its dissociative identity disorder(also known as multiple personalities), not schizophrenia; hence 'identity.'
The reason why I disagree with the assertion that the twist is too much like a "it's all a dream" twist is because the movie gives the reveal plenty of support for audiences to notice on a second viewing. For example, all of the characters have the same birthday, which indicates they were all created at the same time (when his identity was fractured into these different personalities). The last names are all states. Also, the fact that they all disappear after they were killed, demonstrating that when they die they cease to exist. Furthermore, this movie doesn't start out in the motel. It starts out with a psychiatrist going through notes and then throughout the film we have obvious hints of what is going on: the psychiatrist even states that the central character has disassociate personality disorder and that he needs to have all the personalities confront each other. A "it's all a dream" ending is so irritating because it often just neglects everything that happened. This movie sets up the reveal in such a way that it is not forced. In fact, the twist is almost telegraphed to the audience (why would the film go between the legal meeting and these strangers in a hotel?). A bad film throws in a twist and doesn't set it up. A good film, like this one, presents all the pieces for the audience and puts it together.
Furthermore, it's not all a dream. These personalities all believe they exist. The deaths mean something to these victims because they all think they are real. They have backstories, fully developed lives. Even though this is happening in his head, it feels real to the personalities in this one man. And this is why I think this movie is so great. When you stop thinking of the disassociate personality reveal and just consider it a look inside the mind of a man with several identities confronting each other, with one of them a murderer, it serves as an intriguing psychological study. I don't see this movie as a slasher flick with a stupid or "laughable" twist; I see it as a psychological thriller exploring the mind of a disturbed individual who has a violent identity that they are trying to destroy. I actually knew the "twist" before seeing the film, so I was able to appreciate some of the clues and the connection between the legal meeting discussing a prisoners mental state and the events at the hotel.
The reason why this film works is because it can serve as both an entertaining thriller and a psychological study. Being a fan of psychological films, I really enjoyed this story.
As for the final reveal (that the boy is the killer), once again I think the movie gives plenty of evidence to support this ending and not make it seemed forced. Of course, the film puts moments in the film where it is clear that this boy is disturbed (the moment where he essentially baits his mother into stepping back and in front of a moving vehicle) and a second viewing would suggest that he is the only one who could possibly do it (first, he seemed to disappear a lot and no one seemed to notice; second, his "death" was by an exploding car: no one saw him die; third, he was the only one in the room with his mother before she died). Now, since this is all in his head, the size of the boy doesn't matter. It is one violent personality killing others. The child was just a representation of this identity. When I saw the reveal, with the flashbacks, it didn't make me laugh. Instead, I had a "aha" moment where everything made sense. The film also gives us moments to explain why the child would be capable of such gruesome acts. Remember, the main character was traumatized as a child and this triggered the multiple personalities, including the violent one. I think the child represents the moment the central character became disturbed and that is why he is capable of such unspeakable acts. He was disturbed, and I think the voice over at the beginning and end of the film is meant to indicate the moment "the child" became evil.
I know it can seem silly for a child to be revealed to be a murderer, but I think this film earns this reveal. I only saw this film once, but I think in second viewing I could find further evidence to show that this murderous self was birthed when he was a child and that is why it appears as a child. The personality is still capable of terrible acts, but the form it takes is that of the moment evil entered his life. This film has amazing depth which raises it above the typical "slasher" flick.
Absolutly agree with you with everything.
Especially that thing about "it all being a dream". In 'those' tales, everything could happen, everything could be nullified at once because it's just a dream. You might wake up and ha ha ha it's over now, which could theoretically happen with EVERY movie. ALIEN: by the end they wake up hahaha it was a cryogenic dream, they actually just reached earth: happy ending. PREDATOR: hooo Arni was just unconscious because some asian enemy struck his head, there never was a predator alien ha ha ha. THE BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY: She wakes up after the split: oh she was always married to Clint, the other 'real husband' actually was the nightmare husband ha ha ha.
But with Identity, it fits and it's not a dream. Also, they confuse the viewer very well by having a cop delivering a criminal and knowing that the curt people are waiting for a criminal. Also I liked the idea that the little boy has grown into the old fat criminal, they look similiar enough. I also feel like they just put all the puzzle pieces together, not just throw some "wake up ha ha ha" stuff at the viewer.
I totally liked the twist. The thing about everyone having the same birthday date wouldn't fit that well into a dream-twist. Man, how I was surprised upon THAT twist ("Darn, I don't wanna die. Next week would be my birthday anyway." - "wait a sec... next week?" etc.) I was like WTF is happening now?? And then it takes some time for the general twist to come. So it's really well staged, not just kind of broken up.
So I agree.
"D-E-S-T-R-O-Y : E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G"
Here's why I didn't like it:
CONTAINS SPOILERS OBVIOUSLY
It was a perfectly good thriller without the multiple personality part. Having the criminal posing as a cop would have been a fine enough "twist." In fact, it's not even stupid enough to be a twist. It's just a good part of the story. From the moment he arrived, he didn't act much like a real cop.
Second, I love psychology, but the "why were they there?" didn't really add anything to the movie, and the birthdays thing didn't matter. They were all stranded at the motel cause of a flood. THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH. They didn't need to all have the same birthday.
Third, the stupid doctor talks about how he has multiple personalities but only one of them murdered those people. Well, evidently, he actually had THREE personalities who were murderers. The fake cop, the convict, and the little boy.
I hate that movies like these feel the need to have some deeper, trickier thing (which wasn't that tricky, to be honest) to be meaningful. Just tell the damn story. I love every bit of this movie except for the awful ending with the "he created them all."
Oh and one last thing
WHY THE HELL DOES THE PSYCHOLOGIST OPEN THE BARRIER BETWEEN HIM AND THE CRAZY PERSON? OH, RIGHT, SO IT WAS EASIER FOR HIM TO BE MURDERED. There was no reason at all to do that. It's not like they could hear each other better with that opened.
Ok, you're referring mostly to little logical flaws like the barrier and stuff that aren't really important in regard of the whole picture about a multiple schizo psycho man. Well those are in each movie almost but I can't ignore most of them neither. I don't really remember that scene clearly. As for the multiple personality solution thing, well it's question of taste and momentary stuff that makes people like or dislike things. For example I was bored to death by the recent psycho thriller ORPHAN because it's like any other evil-child-looking-cute movie out there with the exception of the twist at the end. So many people adore it, hail it and all, I just found it okay but it didn't make the movie better. But then I'd seen too many of the OMEN/TWO-FACES/child-psycho horror movies. Maybe in 50 years I'd adore ORPHAN.
However, maybe there's been to many of those cop-hunting psycho thrillers, maybe a change was needed back then. I feel that the solution here was a great idea. maybe because I sensed that this movie isn't really directly about some stranded characters and a killer, but that there's gotta be something common about them. Like with CUBE maybe where people ask themselves WHY ME, is therey anything special about me? With many thrillers you got the 'common thing', 'what do these victims have in common?' and stuff. In KNIGHT MOVES the victims have in common that they're being abused as chess figures, the places of murder are equal to a specific chess battle turns that is being re-used by the psycho killer. There's this aaaah look now moment to many Thrillers. With Identity I really thought wow, what's this now supposed to mean, same birthdays?? So I still feel it's a great idea. Most probably directly after watching PSYCHO, HIDE&SEEK and many others of this kind I'd feel differently. Anyway, they DID need to have the same birthday because of where the tale is going.
I just think it's funny how people on movie boards try to forcively convince others about their opinions. You wanted a solid cop thriller which this turned out not to be. I got that right.
"D-E-S-T-R-O-Y : E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G"
****SPOILER ALERT****
WHY THE HELL DOES THE PSYCHOLOGIST OPEN THE BARRIER BETWEEN HIM AND THE CRAZY PERSON? OH, RIGHT, SO IT WAS EASIER FOR HIM TO BE MURDERED. There was no reason at all to do that. It's not like they could hear each other better with that opened.
It is a common therapeutic tool to try to unite all splits and figure out what each of them was created for. I, Myself, have DID and that is what I am undergoing with therapy. Am I a psycho killer? no. Actually, this movie better depicts DID than other attempts in the past (cybill & Fight Club just to name a couple.) I don't know why the people always have to be depicted as psychos but this is pretty close.
And he's handcuffed in front.
shareFrom the first murder on I thought to myself "The kid's obviously the murderer, he exhibits every single annoying horror-film-child cliché there is" but then I thought "nah, the writer can't be that dumb, the kid must be a decoy of some sort." Turns out I was wrong though and in a way, made it a surprising ending... But it was definitely not the kind of surprise I cared for.
share[deleted]