Did anyone else find there to be a couple "go nowhere" scenes?
First off, I really liked this movie. Just about every aspect was fantastic and appealed to my tastes in a major way. What I had a problem with was something I complain about all the time, for the opposing reasons. I HATE when a show focuses on a piece of background or a prop that would be meaningless and would otherwise be cut from the scene. If it weren't important later on. Like, if you're watching a "Who done it?" and you see a detective's desk where there is a mug with red lipstick on it. Then, later in the film, you see that a suspect wears the same lipstick and that was a clue you knew would connect her to the crime, otherwise... why show the lipstick stain on the mug at all? So, just like saying, "You'll love the twist in this move!" puts your mind to work trying to see the twist coming, when otherwise you wouldn't even expect it and therefore it loses all impact on you. Even if it's written well, you spoil the experience by showing the lipstick or mentioning the twist.
What this film does, is the complete opposite. I think there was a scene with a "The Flaming Lips" poster in the garage where the band practices. Sam makes some comment and asks a few questions about it. The later, Sam sees Quinton with his mom, which doesn't really go anywhere either, except for maybe a bit of backstory on the character. Then, Quinton gets upset with Sam when Sam mistakes Quinton's mother for a prostitute. All these scenes have no purpose to the overall story or plot. It's like a magician saying, "Remember this card!" then he does a trick and walks away, without ever finding your card or using it for any purpose at all. You're left thinking, "Why the hell did I need to remember that card?" It's not really a bad thing, just kinda frustrating.
Did anyone else think that, or was it just me?
Also, this is one of those stories that only has conflict because the people involved didn't react like normal people would. I don't mean the main character's overall actions. I just mean when it comes to the ex-girlfriend. If he were truly confronted by her about playing those songs I feel like he would fight harder to explain himself and she would probably be more understanding of what he was doing. If your son died and you could find any way to interact with him beyond the grave and led others experience a postive aspect of him, you would do it. I think anyone onlooker would see his actions as maybe not righteous, but definitely understandable. She might have been more venomous than a regular friend or bystander to the whole thing might be, but I don't see the rationale behind the sabotage. If she were really looking to escape the memory and any involvement with her dead Ex, she would never talk to his Dad again.
The greatest story ever told in six words. "For Sale: Baby Shoes, Never Worn." - Ernest Hemingway