MovieChat Forums > Upstream Color (2013) Discussion > Killing God is the only way forward

Killing God is the only way forward


The Sampler is God, presented as the ambivalent creator that such a higher power would likely be.

The worm is man's infectious and twisted interpretation of God. The depression, anxiety and suffering we put ourselves through while questioning the motives, or complete absence of, a higher purpose or plan.

God sees us as pigs, though not by insult. We are simply a creation with broad characteristics. He cannot comprehend or understand our complexity, because He is not us and doesn't understand what it is to be us. Just as we can never hope to understand what it is to be a higher power.

Our world is a free range (free will) yard with limited boundaries, where He is content to observe and only compelled to intervene when those boundaries are crossed.

He is just the creator, and not the guide. But the worm promises a different story. A story with rewards for obedience and blind faith. And when you find yourself alone and disoriented when life exposes the harsh reality and loneliness of our creation, you search for meaning.

It is telling that the worm is first inflicted on the young, who have yet to form their own world view and are susceptible to leaders. Other times, the worm is forced on broken people who are searching for answers in their tragedies.

Sometimes a broken person will catch a glimpse of God as He truly is. It is in these moments that we realise His lack of actual presence and control in our lives. This is a profound realisation for the creation, and a disconcerting one for the creator. He has always known this, but it is another thing entirely to see its recognition on the face of something you previously considered to be simply a creation of broad characteristics.

It is only after killing God that we can move forward in a meaningful way. Accepting a life without the assistance or guidance of a higher power means we are left to care for each other. It is in these final scenes of the film that we see once broken characters at their happiest and most compassionate.

With the worm dead, the Thief is exposed for what he is and left empty, with no further way to cultivate and spread the worm. Meanwhile, his impressionable followers look on in shock, and even try to help search for the thing they once believed in. But it cannot be found.

In the end, all we have is each other. It doesn't matter where we came from. We're all alone in it together. And once we all realise it, we can move forward together in unity.

reply

There's no question that it's easy to equate the worm with the dogma of organized religion. The only substantive difference between being attacked by the Thief and being converted to the Church of Scientology is that Walden is a much better book than Battlefield Earth.

But if the worm = restrictive, mind-controlling religious thought, then the Sampler is definitely not God, because God does not remove dogma from people and restore some semblance of free will to them. That is almost always something people do for themselves; there are almost no societal forces opposing dogmatic religious thinking and promoting rationality. And the Sampler as the rational side of people doesn't work at all. If he is symbolic, he is some force outside of people.

However, this is a movie about the reconstruction of personality after its deconstruction, and that does often involve religion. Now we have worm = all the self-destructive behavior that leads people to want to be born again, and Sampler = discovering Jesus or what you will (and note how important immersion in water, i.e. baptism, is in the movie). The ex-addict believes he was once a slave to his addiction, and now that he's born again he has free will, but in reality he has just exchanged one form of control for a milder and more benign one. The Sampler perhaps exploits and manipulates the memories and feelings of the Sampled, without their awareness, and that's an interesting take on the relationship of a church to its new converts. When the converts become aware of the degree to which the church is exploiting them, they rebel against it as well.

That works better, but if you start to go deeper, this allegory breaks down as well. For instance, Kris and Jeff mistakenly believe that the Sampler has some connection to the Thief, but no one believes that organized religion has a connection to substance abuse, and blame the latter on the former.

I think the bottom line is that there are conscious symbolic echoes and resonances, so that both the worm and the Sampler remind us of different aspects of organized religion. But no strict allegorical reading is going to work, and ... thank God for that, because strict allegorical relationships in narrative are almost always stultifying.

Prepare your minds for a new scale of physical, scientific values, gentlemen.

reply

I'm not gonna make the argument that this is what he was trying to say, but I definitely got a big-time creation vibe from this movie. Definitely worth a re-watch. And it's sort of been said in this thread already, but I'll put my little spin on it.

If you follow the allegory put forth in the original post, I don't think the movie makes the case that there is anything inherently wrong with god, so to assume that killing him is essential seems like an over-reach.

But I do like that the Thief is linked to the bastardization (such a fun word) of god and creation. Where it becomes used to service their needs alone at the expense of others. Halting production of the blue orchids/worms seems to be the better 'happy ending' than simply 'killing god.'

And I do see it as a happy ending.

reply

Exactly. 'Killing God' is just a metaphor.

It's not about becoming an atheist or devil worshipper or renouncing God in some other fashion.

It's about coming to terms with the concept that if there is indeed a creator, then it's likely that it's someone/something that has no real input into the course of our lives.

Therefore, our suffering is our own creation. We generate endless conflict based on interpretations of something that we'll only get the answers to once we're dead (if at all).

Depending on what you believe, there is either a creator, or there is not.

And if there is a creator, they are either powerless or unwilling to intervene in our free-will design, or they are all-powerful and they inflict random suffering out of cruelty, ambivalence or strategic design. It's an Absent Father versus a Present Torturer.

If a creator is powerless or unwilling to intervene, then there is no point making ourselves miserable over it. Putting our faith and charity in each other, as opposed to putting it into organized religion, will lead to a happier and more fulfilled life. You don't need religion to be part of an organized and caring community. In fact, humanity's greatest successes have come about from putting aside Theism to work as a community.

If a creator is all-powerful, then there is also no point making ourselves miserable over it. Because, as some will have you believe, it is His will to randomly kill, maim and destroy for His own reasons, just as it is His will to save, cure and heal for His own reasons.

In this world, nice things happen to nice people and awful things happen to awful people. However, some really nice things happen to some really awful people, and some really awful things happen to some really nice people. Therefore, this all-powerful creator's design seems to be one of chance (from our point of view) or pre-designation (from the creator's point of view). And in either case, the reality would be that you have no real control over your life, and that you could be rewarded or punished randomly, no matter how you chose to live your life.

So, again, the suffering is futile and true happiness and fulfilment lies in community removed from Theism (or Theism removed from community).

reply

What a bunch of senseless crap, totally missed every main point of the film.
Go watch the Shining.

Best unknown feature at IMDB.com
http://www.imdb.com/features/video/browse/

reply

[deleted]

I'm adding 2 more stars to this movie because of your interpretation. I think you hit it on the mark. My brain is so used to having everything spelled out for me that this movie now is a revelation.

thank you

--------
Woman: "Can we watch something else?"
Man: "No, I want to see how this ends."

reply

nicely put. Very logical.

reply

I'm not sure that this movie has anything to do with "God"...

reply

The facts don't fit that theory. What is more, being Carruth a self-proclaimed Christian, it doesn't make any sense.

"Carruth: I'm a Christian, I was raised in the church, and for a long while I've been very devoted to my quiet times, where I meditate on the Bible. So everything that I believe is informed by that, including this film" (talking about Primer)

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/octoberweb-only/shanecarruth. html?start=3

My Favourite Films: http://www.imdb.com/list/Mz5w_ypJ08o/

reply

What is more, being Carruth a self-proclaimed Christian, it doesn't make any sense.


Being a Christian, self-proclaimed or otherwise, doesn't preclude you from making movies that are critical of religion or of faith.

reply

Being a Christian, self-proclaimed or otherwise, doesn't preclude you from making movies that are critical of religion or of faith.


While this is true, knowing this about him does inform on the likelihood of what Carruth's intentions were. In some of his interviews he viewed the killing of the Sampler as a tragedy, not as a stepping stone for moving forward. There's no suggestion that this is the only way.

Anyway as for the OP: I appreciate the detailed writeup, I sort of agree with the metaphors, but not the overall messege. The sampler seems deeply moved by the memories of the people implanted in the pigs, which impacts his music. Now whether or not he's a bad guy for tapping into their memories and writing music about it, an indifferent god wouldn't be moved by their suffering.

As for why the Sampler throws the baby pigs if he knows it will hurt them, I think it is unknown. Whoever taught the Sampler how to do this probably instructed him to throw the pigs in the river to continue the cycle. But it is also possible that these psychic pigs having babies could give Jeff / Kris brain damage or something. I still lean towards the Sampler being a friendly observer.

The cycle had to be broken for these people to find some closure, but I don't think the Sampler getting killed was necessary or the best way things could have worked out. Obviously the best way would have been to follow the Sampler for a while, link him to the thief, and then break the cycle by taking down the Thief.

Frankly it sounds like one summary that a fan mentioned at a Q/A screening I went to that got a big chuckle from Shane and the audience. There's just something funny about summing up an entire movie with metaphors.

reply

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the obvious connection to The Demons And The Pigs (Matthew 8:28-34):

(from https://bible.org/seriespage/demons-and-pigs-matthew-828-34)
30 Some distance from them a large herd of pigs was feeding. 31 The demons begged Jesus, "If you drive us out, send us into the herd of pigs." 32 He said to them, "Go!" So they came out and went into the pigs, and the whole herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and died in the water. 33 Those tending the pigs ran off, went into the town and reported all this, including what had happened to the demon-possessed men. 34 Then the whole town went out to meet Jesus. And when they saw Him, they pleaded with Him to leave their region.

The Sampler is therefore a Christ figure, and thus, in the trinitarian view, would also represent God, as the OP suggests. However, I see the pigs as the pigs of the bible story, and the worms as demons, which occasionally possess us, and have to be cast out.

In the end, though, I believe the people realize that the demons are an integral part of who they are, since when they are separated from the demons, their essential personalities seem to be lost, as someone else may have alluded to here. In the end, the people go back to find their pigs and to reconnect with the missing portions of their identities, and they embrace the pigs (and therefore, their demons) with empathy and compassion.

By the way, I'm an apatheist, so this is meant to be no more than a literary analysis.

reply

Hey there. It's been many months since this posting you made but I'm STUNNED by it and, unless I'm mistaken, haven't read its echo anywhere else.

Absolutely fascinating. Combined with Carruth's self-professed religious identity and intimacy with the bible makes me think this is no small coincidence.

This notion of a healing relationship being forged between the victimized people in the film and the current hosts of their previously abusive entities being incubated in seemingly harmless and benevolent animals casts a new flavor to the final images.

When you speak about personalities being lost I'm not sure what to think though. This CAN be a product of a horrible past abuse, though, this losing the sense of who you are. I just can't tell if it's the people making peace with their own torment, or the people understanding that their torments are the manifestations of unseen manipulators, and therefore not actual evil. Which (i'm not super-familiar with the bible) is not exactly what demons are. Demons ARE evil, right?

Does the passage you quote directly state that the demons die in the water? It almost sounds like the demons are driven into the herd of pigs, then the herd of pigs die in the water, but the demons remain.

All the same, I find this to be a really productive and interesting comment.

reply

Interesting comment. Are you using this as a real life application? If so, are you saying that god is real, and then how do you propose we kill god? And to which god are you referring? If you are referring to the god of the Bible, then the Jewish leaders of the day already did that (because Jesus claimed he was God and for that was killed). And yet here you still are wrestling with the concept of god.

And your best advice is for people to realize "we're all in it together"? How do you propose we do that? So you plan to settle all the disagreements among world leaders and the hatred shared over hundreds of years between countries by telling them..."we're all in it together...so lets move on"?

reply

god help me if i have to be alone with you. what a simpleton. this movie is about a number of things, none of which has to do with your superficial theories and pretentious worldviews.

and no, i'm not a theist. i just don't like idiots giving atheists a bad name.

reply

[deleted]

Atheists give themselves their bad name.

reply

What a truly spiritual thing to say...

I have opinions of my own, but I don't always agree with them - GW Bush

reply

so please, tell us that number of things that this movie is about, mr complexton

reply

I like your interpretation! It gives an interesting spin to the 1st act, in which Kris basically acts like a mindless zombie and believes anything the thief tells her, because she's under the influence of the worm (= Religion). Also note how the worm in a lighter dosage (the drink they brew from it) can help the youngsters to connect spiritually. But the consuming the whole worm is disastrous. The Thief is basically a false prophet. "The water in front of you is somehow special" :D

reply

It's an interesting analysis. The story works as both a straight Sci Fi story and as a metaphor for destructive relationships because it's based on a real biological and social model of parasitism. The worms are straight up parasites with a three stage life cycle. The Sampler, Thief, pigs and humans have another type of cycle.

I also saw the Sampler as a stand in for the director and ourselves--sampling the lives of others.

"We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." Anais Nin

reply