MovieChat Forums > Upstream Color (2013) Discussion > Those who figured it out, question for y...

Those who figured it out, question for you...


What's the motive behind the Sampler killing the piglets? And I don't mean in metaphorical or symbolic way.

If he was unaware of the flower company collecting the blue orchids near the stream, or the Thief what is the real life reason/ motive for the Sampler to kill the piglets there?

Carruth has said the humans are unaware of each others' connection with the life stages of the grub/flower/drug.

Was this ever explained? Because if it's random that the Sampler kills the piglets in this manner without knowledge that their dead bodies release the blue toxin that gets absorbed by the blue flowers collected by the company then this whole movie falls apart.

reply

I think it's intentional that the Sampler's role is ambiguous. What is important, narratively speaking, is that we see no direct contact between the Sampler and the Thief. When Kris shoots the Sampler it's because she believe he is at the root of the events that have turned her life upside down but she doesn't know of his intentions and neither do we.

I assume the Sampler disposes of the piglets because they are of no use to him as, being wormless, they do not provide the visions that inspire him to produce music. Why he dumps them in that particular river is anyone's guess.

Only the closed mind is certain.

reply

yeah that's what I figured.

It means that this story/metaphor/cycle is really not that well thought out. If it had some internal logic as to the characters' motivations I would have respected the film more. As it is now, things seem obfuscated not to elevate the film but because Carruth could not mesh his thematic concerns with the characters' behaviors and basic plot. No matter how great your ideas are, if you are forcing characters to connect plot points then the writing is weak. And for those who argue that it might be some meta commentary about characters and plot, it would have been much more effective if the Sampler had a specific reason for disposing the dead pigs in the river but we the audience realize the ramifications of what he is doing to the overall narrative if he doesn't. Carruth should have let this one percolate a bit longer in his head before committing to it.

reply

I assume the Sampler disposes of the piglets because they are of no use to him as, being wormless, they do not provide the visions that inspire him to produce music. Why he dumps them in that particular river is anyone's guess.


From my "old person" point of view, disposing of piglets this way is/was just normal farmer behavior (standards are changing, and the younger population has become squeamish about what the older population just did as a matter of course). The method of disposing of the piglets doesn't seem to me to have anything at all to do with the blue stuff.

Farmers are typically very wary of animal reproduction. It's a slippery slope from a few animals one year to lots of animals every year, at which point you have such a severe population explosion you can't even afford to take care of all your animals any more. Looking over the Sampler's shoulder from his porch at all his pigs, we can see there are no piglets. And as he doesn't even know that parent pigs typically become very aggressive and has to be told by a neighbor, it's clear animal births seldom happen on his farm.

So if there are babies despite one's best efforts, what do you do with them? Hopefully some neighbor has a use for them and will take them for free. Otherwise, they have to be disposed of. The standard way to do that is to throw them inside a gunny sack and tie the sack and drop it into deep water.

One doesn't want shallow water, one doesn't want to get your boots muddy, and one wants to simply drop the sack rather than "throw it". Pretty much the only way to meet all those requirements is to drop the sack off a bridge. And there aren't a whole lot of bridges in the countryside - in fact that railroad bridge is likely the only bridge around for miles. So that place gets used again and again by all the nearby farmers.

Whatever river the infected animals were dumped in, blue orchids would grow somewhere downstream in that river, and the Orchid Ladies would eventually find them. And once the Orchid Ladies found some, they'd keep coming back to the same place. So the farmers are always throwing out animals at the same place. And the Ladies are always looking for blue orchids at the same place. And the two places remain on the same river. So the cycle works, and there's no mystery.

reply

Here's what I think....it's true that the people that continue the cycle are unaware of each other as far as who is doing what....But I think the only people who don't know SOMETHING is going on are the orchid collectors....they are the only innocent part of the cycle. The sampler doesn't know the details of who is using the worms and getting them into people..., but he knows that something obviously goes on so that the people end up in the state they are in with the worms in them so he is able to summon them and "help" them....he doesn't know who the thief is but he definitely knows that these people had this happen against their will and he can eventually see how ruined and sad their lives are when he "peeks" into their lives through the pigs. I would say that he's not as directly evil as the thief, but he is letting these people suffer by continuing the cycle...he participates in his part of the cycle for his own purposes..I think he is, in a way, addicted to being able to see into the lives of these people and be in some kind of control of them through the pigs and he knows that as long as dead pigs end up rotting in the river, the cycle can continue. I think a really creepy thing about this movie is thinking about how long this cycle has gone on and how it started....maybe the organism itself started it psychically somehow.....we, the audience, are coming in after this has already been going on for a long long time for sure. I think there was someone doing the sampler's part before him and it's somehow been passed on to him....as well as the thief having to find out about how to do his part...the knowledge has been passed on somehow from person to person for who knows how long........so I think the sampler's routine has always been to get pigs rotting in the river to keep the cycle going.....perhaps, in the past, he hasn't done it with piglets...maybe he does it when a pig dies...or maybe he sacrifices an older one sometimes. I think he uses the piglets this time because their birth has caused the parents to act out violently, break the fence to try to escape, etc. so he wants to get rid of the piglets anyway and so he throws them in the river...to get rid of them and continue the cycle as always....I think this is the first time he has used piglets and not a dead or adult pig...and this change of routine ends up being the downfall of the cycle because it causes this chain reaction of events, starting with the separation of the parents from the piglets and the feelings this causes for the humans linked to them.

reply

Here here! Good answer bravo.

reply

Your post is an intelligent one Robert, but very difficult to read. Next time please throw in a few paragraph breaks to make it easier to read. Thanks.




Schrodinger's cat walks into a bar, and / or doesn't.

reply