Search FAQ

Login | Register


All times are UTC [ DST ]


It is currently 17 Aug 2017




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1133 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 53, 54, 55, 56, 57
Author Message

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Oct 2011
Notes left: 514
Last seen at: Phoenix
Yuki wrote:
It doesn't matter, though, if she's in or out of the Fog World. That's not the question. It is not a punishment: Rose is safe. The movie isn't passing any moral judgement on Rose, because Alessa has decided she wants to stay with Rose; it's not saying "Rose is bad because she sided with Alessa and thus she's trapped in the fog world," it's saying "Alessa loves Rose because Mother is God in the eyes of a child, and thus she's causing them to remain in the fog world."


Oh it matters that Rose is trapped in the Fog World. This isn't the type of story where she rescues the child from the cult and goes back to her life as it was. (Note how the creators knew of and rejected that ending from the video game). This their take on the "deal with the devil" story. It's not that a Jabez Stone is a bad person, it was that he had a tragic flaw that the devil exploited and overwhelmed him. The Dark Part of Alessa does the same thing to Rose, engineering the entire scheme with Sharon so Rose was terrified into joining her side for revenge. But there were consequences.


Last edited by tbonesays on 02 Mar 2013, edited 2 times in total.

Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 01 Aug 2006
Notes left: 11371
Last seen at: I'm here, and waiting for you
Quote:
Oh it matters that Rose is trapped in the Fog World. This isn't the type of story where she rescues the child from the cult and goes back to her life as it was. (Note how the knew of and rejected that ending from the video game). This their take on the "deal with the devil" story. It's not that a Jabez Stone is a bad person, it was that he had a tragic flaw that the devil exploited and overwhelmed him. The Dark Part of Alessa does the same thing to Rose, engineering the entire scheme with Sharon so Rose was terrified into joining her side for revenge. But there were consequences.


but that's not even damnation by the most vaguest definition. Damnation by even the losest terms of maledictation require a punishment element or atleast some sort of doom. Rose doesn't have any of that. From the perspective of Alessa, it's paradise, and she has the ability to make it paradise for Rose too. You're effectively saying the Lotus Eaters are damned. This isn't even logically coherent; you're just trying to force your prefered interpretation into a film that doesn't support it.

Also, don't imply that Rose's love for her daughter is a fatal flaw, that's disgusting.

_________________
BlackFire2 wrote:
I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Oct 2011
Notes left: 514
Last seen at: Phoenix
AuraTwilight wrote:
Quote:
Oh it matters that Rose is trapped in the Fog World. This isn't the type of story where she rescues the child from the cult and goes back to her life as it was. (Note how the knew of and rejected that ending from the video game). This their take on the "deal with the devil" story. It's not that a Jabez Stone is a bad person, it was that he had a tragic flaw that the devil exploited and overwhelmed him. The Dark Part of Alessa does the same thing to Rose, engineering the entire scheme with Sharon so Rose was terrified into joining her side for revenge. But there were consequences.


but that's not even damnation by the most vaguest definition. Damnation by even the losest terms of maledictation require a punishment element or atleast some sort of doom. Rose doesn't have any of that. From the perspective of Alessa, it's paradise, and she has the ability to make it paradise for Rose too. You're effectively saying the Lotus Eaters are damned. This isn't even logically coherent; you're just trying to force your prefered interpretation into a film that doesn't support it.

Also, don't imply that Rose's love for her daughter is a fatal flaw, that's disgusting.


Personal opinions are always welcome. Rose's tragic flaw is a love of Sharon in excess, because it drives her to do insane things like barrel through a chain link fence into a poisonous environmental disaster zone. It's good that you are aghast at the notion that love of a child can be a tragic flaw. That's the point, the flaw always looks good on the surface. And while you are watching the movie, you don't really notice it because Rose is always portrayed in a noble light. But it's there, the film is part of the genre.

Not sure what you meant by the analogy to the ancient drug addicts. I suppose in general there was a cause that lead to an effect; of being stuck in one place.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 01 Aug 2006
Notes left: 11371
Last seen at: I'm here, and waiting for you
Quote:
Rose's tragic flaw is a love of Sharon in excess, because it drives her to do insane things like barrel through a chain link fence into a poisonous environmental disaster zone. It's good that you are aghast at the notion that love of a child can be a tragic flaw. That's the point, the flaw always looks good on the surface. And while you are watching the movie, you don't really notice it because Rose is always portrayed in a noble light. But it's there, the film is part of the genre.


By your own description, then, the flaw isn't loving Sharon in excess, it's not thinking through her actions and being entirely reckless. That's entirely and completely different. The flaw is one thing, her motivation is another. The motivation feeds her flaw but the motivation feeds everything she does, and not everything she does ties into her character flaw.

You're not even arguing rationally, here.

Quote:
Not sure what you meant by the analogy to the ancient drug addicts. I suppose in general there was a cause that lead to an effect; of being stuck in one place.


The Lotus Eaters deny reality to be happy. Alessa denies reality to be happy. That's the analogy.

_________________
BlackFire2 wrote:
I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Oct 2011
Notes left: 514
Last seen at: Phoenix
AuraTwilight wrote:
Quote:
Rose's tragic flaw is a love of Sharon in excess, because it drives her to do insane things like barrel through a chain link fence into a poisonous environmental disaster zone. It's good that you are aghast at the notion that love of a child can be a tragic flaw. That's the point, the flaw always looks good on the surface. And while you are watching the movie, you don't really notice it because Rose is always portrayed in a noble light. But it's there, the film is part of the genre.


By your own description, then, the flaw isn't loving Sharon in excess, it's not thinking through her actions and being entirely reckless. That's entirely and completely different. The flaw is one thing, her motivation is another. The motivation feeds her flaw but the motivation feeds everything she does, and not everything she does ties into her character flaw.

You're not even arguing rationally, here.


I don't see the difference between motivation and flaw. Rose's excessive love makes it her only good. She is blind to any good besides Sharon. Rose even rationlizes it for us when she says "I thought it would help her." Rose spells it out that she loves her daughter so much that she'll do anything and damn the consequences.

Quote:
Not sure what you meant by the analogy to the ancient drug addicts. I suppose in general there was a cause that lead to an effect; of being stuck in one place.

Quote:
The Lotus Eaters deny reality to be happy. Alessa denies reality to be happy. That's the analogy.


I didn't see anything in the Odyssey that suggested the Lotus Eaters were denying reality. They just preferred life on their island to the rest of reality.


Last edited by tbonesays on 03 Mar 2013, edited 1 time in total.

Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 01 Aug 2006
Notes left: 11371
Last seen at: I'm here, and waiting for you
Quote:
I don't see the difference between motivation and flaw. Rose's excessive love makes it her only good. She is blind to any good besides Sharon. Rose even rationlizes it for us when she says "I thought it would help her." Rose spells it out that she loves her daughter so much that she'll do anything and damn the consequences.


And given that she never does anything EVIL as a result of it, I'm not seeing it as a flaw; a character's motive, in pure Shakespearean terms, is not the flaw so much as what they do to achieve that goal. In that sense, her flaw would be more aptly described with how she never really changes her mind once she's set on a path.

Quote:
I didn't see anything in the Odyssey that suggested the Lotus Eaters were denying reality. They just preferred life on their island to the rest of reality.


The metaphor of the Lotus Eaters is abandoning your entire life to pursue an illusory happiness, which is why they were basically getting coked up on the lotus flowers. It was essentially the same as hooking yourself up to a virtual reality machine or choosing to be on Ecstasy all the time.

_________________
BlackFire2 wrote:
I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Oct 2011
Notes left: 514
Last seen at: Phoenix
AuraTwilight wrote:
And given that she never does anything EVIL as a result of it, I'm not seeing it as a flaw; a character's motive, in pure Shakespearean terms, is not the flaw so much as what they do to achieve that goal. In that sense, her flaw would be more aptly described with how she never really changes her mind once she's set on a path.


Well the tragic hero usually does not do things that are overtly evil. The ancient lit is pretty amoral in portraying how the tragic flaw, of say Oedipus, leads him to do misguided things. AD heroes (Macbeth) tend more to be ovewhelmed by the weakness of the flaw and do something terrible.

You say that Rose's flaw is being stubborn instead of excessive love for Sharon? I would want to see Rose being stubborn in places not directly connected to Sharon. Rose is noticeably stubborn twice, on the phone with Chris and when fleeing the traffic stop. After those early moments, we don't see it for the rest of the movie. I'd agree that she is stubborn person but that's
after she's made the decisions, decisions motivated by desire to help Sharon.

Quote:
The metaphor of the Lotus Eaters is abandoning your entire life to pursue an illusory happiness, which is why they were basically getting coked up on the lotus flowers. It was essentially the same as hooking yourself up to a virtual reality machine or choosing to be on Ecstasy all the time.


Then that does sound kind of a damnation.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 01 Aug 2006
Notes left: 11371
Last seen at: I'm here, and waiting for you
Quote:
You say that Rose's flaw is being stubborn instead of excessive love for Sharon? I would want to see Rose being stubborn in places not directly connected to Sharon. Rose is noticeably stubborn twice, on the phone with Chris and when fleeing the traffic stop. After those early moments, we don't see it for the rest of the movie. I'd agree that she is stubborn person but that's
after she's made the decisions, decisions motivated by desire to help Sharon.


Unfortunately that's impossible, considering that she isn't motivated by anything else. But she is stubborn throughout the movie in the sense that she refuses to consider she's on the wrong path. She trusts every source of information until they betray her, she never considers that she's doing the wrong thing for Sharon or herself, and she's careless as hell.

Her flaw is a lack of critical thinking, really.

Quote:
Then that does sound kind of a damnation.


Damnation definitively involves suffering.

_________________
BlackFire2 wrote:
I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Oct 2011
Notes left: 514
Last seen at: Phoenix
AuraTwilight wrote:
Quote:
You say that Rose's flaw is being stubborn instead of excessive love for Sharon? I would want to see Rose being stubborn in places not directly connected to Sharon. Rose is noticeably stubborn twice, on the phone with Chris and when fleeing the traffic stop. After those early moments, we don't see it for the rest of the movie. I'd agree that she is stubborn person but that's
after she's made the decisions, decisions motivated by desire to help Sharon.


Unfortunately that's impossible, considering that she isn't motivated by anything else. But she is stubborn throughout the movie in the sense that she refuses to consider she's on the wrong path. She trusts every source of information until they betray her, she never considers that she's doing the wrong thing for Sharon or herself, and she's careless as hell.

Her flaw is a lack of critical thinking, really.


Who is imposing his viewpoint on the film? :wink:

There's an old Zone episode (quite SH2 like) where Gladys Cooper plays a stubborn woman. Although it's only 30 minutes long, they go out of their way to show her being stubborn in much of the dialogue with side characters. I didn't see anything noticeable in how Rose treats Cybil, Dahlia, and Anna. Rose is more or less aloof unless they demand her attention.

Quote:

Damnation definitively involves suffering.


Limbo! The virtuous pagans in Dante's Inferno are in limbo where they neither suffer nor celebrate. It's implied they just sit around all day. Silent Hill, as most art, draws from Infernal imagery, and the Fog World is basically a version of Limbo. Maybe you could argue Limbo was a version of Lotus Island.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 01 Aug 2006
Notes left: 11371
Last seen at: I'm here, and waiting for you
Quote:
Who is imposing his viewpoint on the film?


Not the guy who's paraphrasing DVD features. ^_^

Quote:
Limbo! The virtuous pagans in Dante's Inferno are in limbo where they neither suffer nor celebrate. It's implied they just sit around all day. Silent Hill, as most art, draws from Infernal imagery, and the Fog World is basically a version of Limbo. Maybe you could argue Limbo was a version of Lotus Island.


Limbo isn't damnation, though, considering the virtuous pagans will eventually be given an 'out' in the Times of Tribulations.

_________________
BlackFire2 wrote:
I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Oct 2011
Notes left: 514
Last seen at: Phoenix
AuraTwilight wrote:
Quote:
Who is imposing his viewpoint on the film?


Not the guy who's paraphrasing DVD features. ^_^

Quote:
Limbo! The virtuous pagans in Dante's Inferno are in limbo where they neither suffer nor celebrate. It's implied they just sit around all day. Silent Hill, as most art, draws from Infernal imagery, and the Fog World is basically a version of Limbo. Maybe you could argue Limbo was a version of Lotus Island.


Limbo isn't damnation, though, considering the virtuous pagans will eventually be given an 'out' in the Times of Tribulations.


Not in Dante's Inferno.

Rose's only escape from Limbo may be the time of serialization.


Top
   
 

Historical Society Historian
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 01 Aug 2006
Notes left: 11371
Last seen at: I'm here, and waiting for you
Quote:
Not in Dante's Inferno.


Er, not the Inferno specifically, but in other parts of the Divine Comedy. Ever get to the Empyrean?

In any case, Rose's case isn't similar to Limbo anyway. You're grasping at straws.

_________________
BlackFire2 wrote:
I thought he meant the special powers of her vagina.


Top
   
 

Gravedigger
 Post subject: Re: MOVIE ENDING THEORIES!
     
         
  User avatar  
     
     

Missing since: 15 Oct 2011
Notes left: 514
Last seen at: Phoenix
AuraTwilight wrote:
Quote:
Not in Dante's Inferno.


Er, not the Inferno specifically, but in other parts of the Divine Comedy. Ever get to the Empyrean?

In any case, Rose's case isn't similar to Limbo anyway. You're grasping at straws.


Fine, which part of the sequels to the Inferno indicates an escape from Limbo? And I said Rose's best chance to escape her imprisonment in Fog Limbo is a sequel that needs her out. That's exactly how Heather Mason escapes in Revelation, there was suddenly a magic seal that puts people where they need to be.


Top
   
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1133 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 53, 54, 55, 56, 57

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: