about the camera....


Isn't strange that in 2006 Rachel doesn't had a modern digital camera?.Instead of this she was using an old fashioned one and she had a relative modern cell phone.She was succesfull and rich then why couldn't she afford a digital cam?Another strange fact is that Sharon didn't have a cell phone.Remember when she called her the robot answered and then Rachel said to the old man that she's not at home...Sorry for my english

reply

Just because we're in a technological age does this mean everyone has to have a mobile phone and a digital camera?

The only reason I have a mobile is because of the car. I've broken down before and had to walk a long way and I'm not doing that again. I also have an "old" 35mm camera as well as two digital cameras and it's as much fun to use as the digitals.

reply

She also had a typewriter instead of a notebook/computer. Maybe she just didn't like technology.

reply

Not everyone is a slave to technology. It can be more of a hindrance than a help.

reply

[deleted]

Sharon did have a cell phone. There are scenes where she is using it and talking to Rachel.

"There are only two states an oven can possibly exist in - heated or unheated."

reply

Plus it fits right into the plot.

SPOILER AHEAD


Had it been a digital camera, Patrick would have had to destroy it, that is not so easy to do when you have to make it look accidentally.
Theoretically Patrick could have taken out the memorycard, but that would have made Rachel even more suspicius.

I have a friend, when his old camera did not work anymore, he chose to get a new regular one instead of a digital, probably because he is not very good with a computer.

reply

if it were a digital camera couldn't he just have removed the memory card? it would seem easier to remove than a film, since film is usually wound to the little piece of metal on once side of the camera (of course this wasn't shown on the film, it was shown as if patrick rewinded the film and then through it out)

also, i think it just may have said something about the character in the film.

reply

[deleted]

Regarding the camera, if you look carefully it's a Leica, these are very expensive and have the very best lens. Even the best digital camera today (2009) can only just match the quality of the optics and prints. A modern small digital camera could have been used and instead of throwing away the film, the smart-card could have been ejected.

The manual typewriter is an always "on" device. It never needs to be switched on and is vastly more reliable in remote areas. Also, in remote areas can a power supply be relied upon. Suits the purpose in the film also.



reply

It was probably for a few reasons, the main one being the plotline. Rachel doesn't use a computer, therefore is unlikely to be a huge fan of technology. Also Patrick needed to be able to remove the picture quickly, it would have been a bit obvious if he had been looking through the pictures to delete the one of him.
Also, not having a computer available makes it a bit harder to look at your pictures in detail when you have a digital camera.

reply

In earlier part of the movie when many newspaper cuttings of Rachel was shown to introduce her character one said 'No laptops for Rachel' (or something similar). I guess that was to explain why she sticks to a typewriter and a film camera. It's her character and of course to suit the plot.

reply

[deleted]

Yes, it is strange as so much in this film is, which I liked - tends to be very contrived in parts. But it's not so much a question of why she was using a camera like this, but more of what she did with it. In the past, with an old-style camera, I automatically rolled on the film after having taken a photo and it was the same if it was the last picture on the roll. In that case I changed the roll immediately. Then everything was always ready for the next picture and in this part of Scotland (actually filmed in Wales) it's not unusual to be confronted with a huge basking shark or something similar when out on the sea. So why wait to roll on the film in the camera? But as the film had been removed she would have discovered the missing film immediately and for Patrick to find an excuse in the situation would have been almost impossible. So really this would never have happened in reality, as it was just too dangerous and not absolutely necessary at this point of time anyway. But then there's much more in this film which can't be explained and just has to be accepted unless you want to spoil the story.

reply