So when did you, honestly now, realize the new painting was from Edward?
I absolutely adore this film. Waiting for some great pulp all year long and finally a film that totally delivers on so many levels.
Thank you Tom Ford.
10/10
Right now
shareFrom you. Thank you. And his revenge was subtle and psychological and haunting.
I liked this movie as well. I loved the performances not only by the leads, but also by the smaller roles. And the location of West Texas was perfect. Single Man was a favorite of mine too. I think Colin Firth's best performance. Yes, thank you Tom Ford.
And his revenge was subtle and psychological and haunting.
Well, he couldn't kill her or imprison her like Oldboy. She already had guilt and emptiness. A schoolgirl would not be haunted by this. Only a lonely unloved woman who went a different direction than the one she started out in her youth and one who lost a great love by becoming some of the things she despised as she despised in her mother. It is hard to fathom that she could ever suffer living in this beautiful place and having all these beautiful things - that would be the hard part for most people to figure out. When he stood her up at the restaurant - that was the best part of the "revenge." I don't think she ever suffered as he did.
shareSure - if you find that little morality tale of yours satisfying, stick with it.
shareYeah, I like the movie. I liked Michael Shannon and Aaron Taylor Johnson's performances. I think one or both will receive Oscar nominations. I like the visual. I like the style and pace of the movie, and I like the art and casting. I like the allusion to Hitchcock and to the Coen Bros. I would see it again. Morality tale - I am not getting that much morality to this for me. She did what most young people do with relationships in their youth. The story within the story is what is electrifying, but the "outer" story is compelling too and both were told well.
shareI also have a soft spot for nested stories and admire the film, although I have a very different interpretation from yours.
I used the term 'morality tale' because you implied Edward's 'revenge' was intentional, and it had worked to some degree. Personally I don't believe the Revenge aspect ever existed, and Susan fully understands this when she's sitting in the restaurant.
All this babble about her being forever crushed by Edward's non-appearance is the stuff of cheap melodrama. She's 40-something, beautiful, successful and about to receive a substantial divorce settlement. Don't worry about Susan, she'll get over Edward's no-show - especially if he's still alive.
Keep trying pup.
Susan is crushed. Everything is falling apart in her life. She just found out her husband is cheating on her and was hoping to rekindle an old flame. She dresses up, takes off the ring, shows off the tats, she's ready for something special and then BAM!!!!!!! the truth sets in.
CRUSHED.
a dish served cold indeed.
Your lack of knowledge concerning Susan's emotional state shows a great distance between you and the film. No one has to actually what happens to Susan because most know exactly how she feels. but you seem to have no idea? Maybe you simply haven't been through a relationship like this? Your experience here is quite telling. It's quite virginal.
Susan is crushed. Everything is falling apart in her life.
Imperfect and happy vs. perfect and unhappy
Well, she's going to be unhappy for about 6 hours at most.
I'm not sure what you mean, because she was unhappy all along . .
Farshnoshket, please stop assuming that tigerfish doesn't understand something because of their own real life. This movie is NOT remotely close to real life. Maybe in an extremely broad sense that people can become unhappy with their lives or people can use loss as a form of artistic inspiration, but Tom himself said that he adapted the original source material into a melodrama "for film" so it's intentionally not realistic.
If I were Susan I'd be sadder about the state of the rest of my life than being stood up by Edward. Then again, I don't see how reading a book by an ex is supposed to make you fall back in love with them (outside of a contrived movie plot).
But tigerfish, you're not being a great sport to them either, you guys can have a discussion without making it personal. If we can't play nice they'll take the boards away--oh, wait.
Actually, they both will be fine. Edward, too, will have a successful book based on a doomed and painful relationship - but successful we are led to believe. Would he have had that without knowing Susan? We all should be so lucky,
Edward wanted to let her know that it was painful for him. He succeeded in his manuscript. Whether the affect really hit Susan hard isn't the question, but that it did do some awakening in her that she was now interested in him. He had the last word with the no-show and it really was enough for the end of their story.
I suspect Edward will be fine too - although he's certainly dying, and quite possibly already deceased - as are both his alter egos in the novel: Bobby of cancer, and Tony from an accidental gunshot wound.
These two deaths can't be ignored. As in life, so in art - as in art, so in life.
What? Edward is not dead or dying? No character is dead - just in the sub story. Maybe it felt like death to Edward and he had no say about their pregnancy - but I have no reason to believe that he's dying or that he he sent a manuscript and then died.
shareWhat? Edward is not dead or dying?
Yes, I will be fine too. Tony died in Edward's manuscript but Edward is alive to write the manuscript and profit from it, as well as use it to enlighten Susan and turn the screw. This guy isn't going to commit suicide either.There is nothing about Edward dying In the book or in any of Tom Ford's interviews about this story. This character is alive and masterfully played Susan. In the sub story - yes, in West Texas, he fell on his gun. In the sub story, everyone dies - his wife, daughter, all the bad guys, and Tony and eventually the cop.
shareYes, I will be fine too. Tony died in Edward's manuscript but Edward is alive . . .
So, if Jake didn't play Edward - maybe 15 minutes of screen time, and went with Tony character - what actor would play.Edward? And then why would Jake accept just the part of Tony. You can't split these roles with two different actors? You would lose your star power. Susan is a main player - not Isla Fisher. Edward is an invisible main player. And then there's Tony....
shareEdward never actually appears in the primary world of the frame story. All scenes with either Edward or Tony are Susans' recollections and imaginings respectively. She is imagining Tony as Edward.
shareShe is imagining Tony as Edward.
Yeah, she is. He's written himself into his own story and this is stated directly in the flashback. My point is that the film follows Susan for the entirety. You are shown a 3rd Person objective view of Susan in the present, flashbacks which are presented by device as her recollections in the present, and her imagined visualization of the manuscript's narrative. There is no 3rd person objective view of Edward. The Edward presented to the audience is via Susan.
shareI agree with you. I also enjoyed the movie.
shareDidn't her employee say she bought that some years back?
shareWhich painting? The one that spelled "REVENGE"? Was it ever mentioned? I don't recall.
shareTurns out the painting was actually bought by Susan, she just didn't remember.
shareWhat new painting??????
Oh the revenge one in Susan's gallery?
#harshtruth
http://barbie-verified.tumblr.com/post/147223710383/