Forgive me, but, I DON'T GET IT...
Okay, so I'm actually watching the movie right now (it's on pause) and I don't get why Aviva is played by different actresses. Don't bother replying if you're only going to insult me. Thanks.
shareOkay, so I'm actually watching the movie right now (it's on pause) and I don't get why Aviva is played by different actresses. Don't bother replying if you're only going to insult me. Thanks.
shareFirst of all, you do not need to apologize for not "getting" the movie. I don't even know if I "get" it (or if my understanding of what I "get" is even correct). However, I think that PALINDROMES can be interpreted in many different ways.
Were you able to finish the movie? The answer can be found towards the end of the film - when Aviva (now played by actress Jennifer Jason Leigh) is talking with her cousin Mark (it's in Mark's speech where the answer can be found). If you're still having difficulty, post back and I (and I'm sure many other posters) can shed a bit of light.
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men."
Palindromes is a Minnepian Satire, much like Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels. The reason for having so many actors of different race, color, and creed play the same character is to show that what Aviva is going through and the way she acts isn't unique, but that we are all like her. Palindromes is about how no matter what you believe in, people act similiar to even people who believe in the oppossing beliefs. There is a scene in Palindromes, when the anti-abortion mother forces Aviva to kill the baby. So while it might seem that only people who are for abortions take away the lives of young ones, so do people who are anti-abortion. Rememeber when Bob/Joe/Earl by mistake murdered the doctor's child as well as the doctor. This scene could be construed as Todd Solondz trying to shock people by seeing a young child die, but I see it that even people who bomb abortion clinics and murder abortion doctors, aren't just murdering the doctor, but his children as well, since by murdering the doctor, if the doctor who got murdered wanted anymore children, his progeny is stopped becuase his life was cut short. So by having the child get murdered as well, Todd Solondz is showing that even the extremestes who think by murdering one doctor, they are saving many lives by stopping the abortions being preformed, they are also ruining many lives, not just the doctor, but the children the doctor may have had if he lived, as well as his children's children, and his children's children's children, and so fourth. So even though the people who bomb clinics think that they might only destory one life, by acting in such an extreme manner, they are just like the doctor. And this is true in many issues as well. For example, the destruction of the World Trade Center was bombed because the homicide bombers (not suicide bombers, since suicide involves only killing oneself, not killing oneself as well as others, because if the homocide bombers are considered suicide bombers since they killed themselves, than the man as Virginia Tech could be one long suicide since he killed himself at the end). Anyway, just like the homicide bombers murdered in the name of God, so to did the President. Even though President Bush thinks he is the opposite of the terrorists bombers, he also is similiar to them, since when he said, "God is on our side" when refferring to the Iraq war, President Bush is causing the deaths of others in the name of God, just like the homicide bombers destoryed the World Trade Center in believing in God and that they will get 70 virgins when they die, or so they claim.
So the point of Palindromes is to show that when people act according to what they think is right without trying to understand the other side, they end up becoming the other side, so by acting with your eyes and ears only open to what you believe in and think is right, all morality goes out the window.
What anti-abortion mother forced Aviva to kill a child? I don't remember that? Joyce was pro-choice, from what I gather. She aborted her own child as well. She compared a fetus to a tumor.
And I don't think Solondz was suggesting that when you kill an abortionist, you're murdering all his future children because those children don't exist yet, so you can't murder them. If you put someone in jail, you're stopping them from breeding as well. I think Solondz was simply saying that people do things that they feel are right but that doesn't mean they are good people. They may even resort to doing the very thing they are opposed to.
This sucks worse than I Heart Huckabees ----Stewie Griffin
This sucks worse than I Heart Huckabees ----Stewie Griffin
ofcourse a baby would say that... he's a dumb baby
That's my signature. I wasn't saying Palindromes sucks. Nor was I even saying I Heart Huckabees sucks. I just liked that line. I thought it was funny.
This sucks worse than I Heart Huckabees ----Stewie Griffin
Hahaha, what?
"Well we all shine on, like the moon and the stars and the sun..."
I really like the way you put...
"The reason for having so many actors of different race, color, and creed play the same character is to show that what Aviva is going through and the way she acts isn't unique, but that we are all like her. Palindromes is about how no matter what you believe in, people act similiar to even people who believe in the oppossing beliefs."
That really sums up how I felt about the character change. I had my mom watch the movie, and she thought I was crazy. Then again, she only likes movies like Hope Floats and Sweet Home Alabama...
Thanks for explaining this movie because i didn't 'get it' either. I usually dig off the wall movies, but this one was way off. I didn't hate it tho, just didn't quite understand it completely.
Thanks again.
Thanks to everyone who replied. It actually made more sense as I continued to watch it. I'm still not sure if I like it though. Todd Solondz is definitely a different writer and director. But I did enjoy Welcome to the Doll House very much.
shareI dont really "like" this movie...
i did appreciate the film in many ways, however i will probbaly not watch it again, and will not suggest it to my friends.I will leave it to the people who browse the foreign/independant section at blockbuster.
theres nothing wrong with saying you dont understand this movie, if you were saying you didnt understand titanic then id have to insult you! but this is a genuinely complex movie, when i watched it i really didnt understand why they were played by different actress's and the sequence of the film. The more you watch it though the more it starts to piece together, its certainly an interesting film, ive never seen anything like it.
Now try and explain Mullholland drive to me, possibly the most confusing movie ever, but yet i really like it!? Its odd, how you can like a movie you dont fully understand.
Most of Mulhulland is one long extended dream, so it's really pretty simple albeit extremely confusing if you don't catch on.
Lost Highway on the other hand is yet to be 'solved' and like you feel with M. Dr. I still love it.
...if your hand touches metal I swear by my pretty floral bonnet I will end you.
[deleted]
The complexity and abstract nature of Mullholland Drive and Lost Highway pale in comparison to Inland Empire. I somehow watched all 3 hours of Inland Empire without any break. There was absolutely no plot whatsoever. Any time there was some interesting scene, it would quickly drift off into the abstract. This film lacked cohesiveness altogether more than all his previous films combined. I was a bit stupified at the end as I had no idea what the hell I'd just watched for 3 hours. Even with the obscure and often incohesive quality of Lynch's films, I still enjoyed most of them and I thought Mullholland Drive was exceptional with stellar performances by the entire cast. However, I think David Lynch is the only one who has any idea what occurs in his films, regarding plot and such. You could make the argument that he is a true abstract expressionist. This film Palandromes by Solondz was quite abstract as well. Whenever you expected the plot to connect with certain scenes, you would realize there is no real plot. The scenes with the Sunshine family was really bizarre I thought. I look forward to seeing Dark Horse soon.
shareI know it's a bit late, but if you own the Mulholland Drive DVD, the insert gives you the 'clues' to help you solve the mystery within... and if you pay close attention to those scenes it becomes rather evident what is going on. To put it simply, Naomi Watts' character kills herself at the beginning of the film, what follows is mostly her dream. Her dream, however, is interjected with the high hopes she had when she initially moved to California, as well as the qualities she wished she possessed. Basically, it's an idealized vision of her life after the move... she's a great actress, brave, confident, in a position to help others, and most of all wanted/desired. In addition, her subconcious provides the reason why she never achieved that in real life... the big conspiracy in the casting process and all of the shady characters working behind the scenes in Hollywood. Deep down she knows what has happened, and her subconcious makes attempts to tell her, eventually leading her to Club Silencio where she discovers that this "is not real, it is all just a recording". At that point she finds the blue box representing the secret she had locked away from even herself, and upon opening the box, the reality of her situation is revealed to her. She is not the great actress we had seen earlier (in fact she is the waitress we saw earlier), she's timid, clingy, desperate, and she's ultimately more of a toy of Harding's than truly desired by her (at least by the time we see them). She's anguished by her treatment by those around her, especially Harding (whom she is in love with), which eventually leads her to find a hitman to rid her of the one thing keeping her around these people. The hitman gives her the blue key (which, in a sense, explains the reason for the little blue box) when the job is finished, and upon seeing the key her past aspirations come back to haunt her... the gravity of what she has done and has become hits her, and drives her to kill herself... which her fall to her pillow is where the film begins. Though it's perhaps my favorite film, it has been a while since I've watched it, so I'm likely missing a few details here and there, but that should explain most of the film.
shareI felt the same way about I am Legend. I liked the way they did the movie, its very different...but...it depressed me so much that i'd probably couldn't watch it again.
shareI feel the same. I saw it - and I just didn't enjoy watching it. I didn't get anything from it - except that it was a movie trying to tackle a difficult subject.
I'm not trying to bash it - because everything FEELS right about this as a film, it's just it didn't pull me in and made me care about the characters.
It's actually in the drama section at Blockbuster.
shareOh, this film is 'for the people who browse the foreign/independent section at blockbuster' is it? That's why it is not recommended?? Please avoid making such prejudiced comments, it makes you look like a dumb fool
share[deleted]
i loved this movie to the point where im considering to name it my favorite movie of all time! But i too will not suggest it to my friends. this movie breaks the boundaries of conventional filmaking and will not appeal to american mass audience pricks. Even though i loved it i will keep it to myself.
by the way a great movie that i loved is Y.P.F. [young people *beep* it is the most funny real and emotional sexual tale you will ever see. do not be fooled by the tittle this not made to act as porn. it is extremely funny comedy and it plays with your emotions as does palindromes.
[i do not suggest watching this with your kids]
[ however if you are ina relationship i greatly encourage you to watch it!!]
people who say they "dont get it" usually never will.
share..Not really, he/she said they didn't get why the characters were changing to different actors, then someone explained that it was to show there's other people all going through it/feeling the same, not much else to get?
shareIn response to the first poster, the reason why the actresses keep changing is to show how no matter how much people change physically, they are still the same on the inside. The movie itself is a palindrome, with Aviva starting as a little black girl with the desire to have a baby, then changing into different actresses, and finally ending up again as the little black girl who wanted to have a baby. The changes in actresses only stress the point that no matter what happens we always end up the way we began. as they say, people never change, they just learn how to hide it better.
sharei realize this comment is fairly old now, but i just saw this movie, and i just want to say that i think you got it absolutely spot on. nice catch noticing the film's clever structure. another poster theorized that the unique casting means that we all share Aviva's experiences (though i can't say i've personally shared many of them) - while i suppose this is one way to interpret it, i don't think it is what the film itself was implying. i believe the dialogue with Mark at the end of the film was very explicit as to the meaning - you could grow up, change your appearance, change your body, change your sex, and you still would have no control over the things that make you an individual. by the last frame of the film, Aviva, presented once again as an innocent, naive child with idealistic dreams of simple motherhood, really hasn't learned anything at all about maturity or the danger that comes with idealism - given all of the casual sex, emotional betrayal, and hypocritical religious ideals that she has encountered, one would expect some measure of personal growth in these matters. but it is almost as if her experiences, like her appearance, ultimately had no effect on her growth as a person. a bit of a bleak ending, i thought, though i'm sure others could take something different from it.
this is, excuse me...a DAMN fine cup of coffee
I guess that's kinda the funny part about the movie seeing all these diffrent people play one person.
shareIf you don't get it, don't worry. This movie is a bad attempt at art. Most people who can put the badly filmed pieces of this movie together will feel they are superior to others because they 'get it' and they will allude to a person having to be 'intellectual' or 'open minded' or something along those lines inorder to understand this one. THE TRUTH IS: The director purposely makes the movie as ambiguous as possible in order to seem as though he is including all this symbolism or allowing people to interpret this movie. In reality, he's just not a good director and he covers that up with a veneer that any eigth grader can see through. NO PLOT, NO Character development, and BAAAAAD Acting! Do not feel bad if you don't get it, I "Got it" but still think it's a pile of flaming donkey dung.
share[deleted]
The distributor Wellspring certainly would agree with you. During 5 months of it being shown in theaters worldwide, it averaged just over $100,000 a month.
shareallencurl-1, this is the dumbest thing i've ever read. he used different people to play the same character to show that many different people do the same things, are put in the same situations. i didn't like that cause it made the film seem disconnected. i liked the movie but would have liked it better if it was played by the same chubby white girl throughout. i especially didn't like the obese black girl.
one thing i didn't get is why her dad was alive after he was shot. and why was her family ok with her killing him. what other inconsistancies are there?
also, people with iq's above 119 realize that money is not a measure of success. i guess britney spears is an amazing musician huh?
It represented sameness in human beings. We are numerically unique in the sense of “X is not Y”, as Mark Wiener remarks towards the end of the film, but we all act the same and go through the same *beep* at the end of the day. “Ultimately, we’re all just robots programmed arbitrarily by nature’s genetic code […] Genes and randomness, that’s all there is an none of it matters”, says Mark.
I also felt that it was to challenge your ability to appreciate the story independent from any superficial attachment to the characters.
[deleted]