MovieChat Forums > Orphan Black (2013) Discussion > Rachel's Lying Eyes

Rachel's Lying Eyes

posted 8 years ago by billebrooks
13 replies | jump to latest

In episode 410, The Messenger (played by Géza Kovács) appears in front of Rachel and tells her not to waver. My question is...was he really there, or was he projected by Rachel's eye? The issue is complicated by the fact that no one else saw him at the time. I believe we also saw The Messenger at the same compound where Delphine was located.

"Who are you going to trust, me or your lying eyes?" is a quote that appears to date back at least to Chico Marx in the movie Duck Soup. If you had an eye that filters input in the way that Rachel's does, it would indeed be difficult to know when to trust what you see.

[–] Cosima324 8 years ago

This is a good question.... I need to see the ep again, but doesn't the messenger stand in the living room area and walk behind a wall when "PT Westmoreland" knocks? If so- does that mean he's there, or is it her lying eyes? This is a really interesting question!

"This organism and derivative genetic material is restricted intellectual property."

[–] sarahkrafft 8 years ago

When Rachel asked Susan who that man was, Susan said, "he's a messenger." So I'd say he was physically there.

[–] billebrooks 8 years ago

Huh. Well, that's even more confusing then. If he was there, and Susan met with him separately, assuming Susan didn't know who he was from a description, and if he wanted Susan stabbed, why didn't he do it himself, instead of relying on the crippled young woman (Rachel) to do it?

[–] sarahkrafft 8 years ago

I honestly don't know. All I know is that he told her not to waiver. that doesn't necessarily mean he wanted Susan dead, but I'd like to think he knew what rachel would do.

[–] billebrooks 8 years ago

that doesn't necessarily mean he wanted Susan dead

There were also the visions of the beheaded swan. That's the part that implied violence.

I'm even more perplexed about whether Susan was supposed to be dead or injured. Similarly to the Delphine situation, if they wanted Susan alive, stabbing her was a big risk. If they wanted Susan dead, sending a crippled woman to kill her was a big risk.

My other point was that if Rachel was the only person actually physically present, using her as an assassin is slightly more understandable. But then, the whole incident could have been a grand experiment to see if the Neolutionists could control Rachel through her eye. The Neolutionists are capable of that sort of thing, e.g. the monitor program.

[–] sarahkrafft 8 years ago

Your theory on this actually makes the pieces of the puzzle fit. I like the thought of it being a test on rachel to see if her eye could control her.

[–] guitarfile 8 years ago

My understanding was that Rachel acted alone and on her own motivation in attempting to kill Susan. She was not going to let Susan take over Neolution and be pushed aside.

I thought the goose had to do with the picture on the opening page of the Neolution book by Westmoreland. I think the answer about the goose is on that page that was shown in the eoisode where Rachel finally makes it up the stairs and Susan first shows her the book.

[–] Franco_Zed 8 years ago

The bird is a swan. Project Leda is named for a mythological person who turned into a swan. Therefore the swan represents project Leda. Susan was the head of project Leda.

Rachel interpreted "cut the swan's head off" to mean "kill the head of Project Leda".

__ __

All terrorists are MEN, so let's stop letting MEN in, until we figure out what's wrong with MEN.

[–] billebrooks 8 years ago

And why was the swan (you said goose) beheaded?

[–] guitarfile 8 years ago

Yes, a swan, not a goose. In Greek mythology Leda is the mother of Helen and Castor. Leda with a swan was a popular image during the middle Renaissance era.

Even with the idea that the swan represents Project Leda we cannot assume that killing the swan means killing Susan. Evie was going to kill the Leda program anyway during these visions and it would seem that was more direct to the vision.

I viewed the season 4 episode visions literally and not representing something else. Why make it figurative?

Here is the issue I have. Why would Westmoreland code Rachel's visions if she was the only one seeing it? Why wouldn't he just put in big text "Kill Susan now!" It lacks simple logic. Did the writers overlook this in order to be fancy? Or did they miss a tremendous opportunity to develop the depth of Rachel's charachteŕ by not showing her struggling to come to grips that she is to become a murderer.

[–] billebrooks 8 years ago

Evie was going to kill the Leda program anyway during these visions and it would seem that was more direct to the vision.

That Evie might have had some involvement with the swan visions is an interesting idea, but I can't make sense of it. She died before the punchline. Well, Nealon appears to have been working for Evie, and he played a role in Rachel being delivered to get her artificial eye. It has never been clear how loyal Nealon was to Evie; he might have been more like Van Lier.

I viewed the season 4 episode visions literally and not representing something else. Why make it figurative?

Because no literal interpretation makes sense. Are are expecting a bird hunt in season five? Maybe Delphine wants foie gras?

Why would Westmoreland code Rachel's visions if she was the only one seeing it? Why wouldn't he just put in big text "Kill Susan now!"

My best theory is that the Neos were running an experiment to test the efficacy of Rachel's eye for manipulation. There is no proof of course. It certainly could be that the goal of the swan message was more general, and Rachel saw Susan as an impediment to that goal. There hasn't been much explanation thus far.

[–] guitarfile 8 years ago

Are are expecting a bird hunt in season five? Maybe Delphine wants foie gras?

Great amswer... True, if we did have just a little more explanation on everything it would make more sense.

[–] Chromwagner 8 years ago

Rachel's visions are quite dream-like and blurry whereas the Messenger looks very real as well as he puts his hand on Rachel's shoulder so I'd say he is there.
We just have to wait and see, don't we?