Cool News
VANILLA SKY Easter Eggs!! And Amenabar Speaks Out About The Remaking Of His Film!!
SPOILER ALERT !!
Hey, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab.
VANILLA SKY. Already, it's become an intensely divisive subject for film fans. Some people have really responded to Cameron Crowe's remake of the arthouse hit OPEN YOUR EYES, and some people haven't. I've heard people dismiss it as a vanity project for Tom Cruise, but I think they're crazy. If a movie star is looking for something that's going to make him look good, something that is entirely motivated by ego, there are more obvious projects to pick than one in which you are playing the raging asshole version of yourself, your public image gone poison. And there are certainly better times to do it than the year you go through a very public divorce with your wife, who ends up practically sainted by the press during the divorce, especially since you're already dating your co-star from your movie. Oh... and in the film, your very famous good looks should be covered by makeup and masks for as much running time as possible. That's playing it safe. Riiiiiiiiiight.
Recently, "Tech Support" wrote to me with a guide to watching VANILLA SKY, a list of things to look for that might help people enjoy a second viewing of the film. If you hated the movie, then this obviously isn't for you (although it might be if you were willing to try it again with an open mind). This is more for people that enjoyed it, and are still chewing on it, and who feel like trying to get more out of it. And if you found all of these your first time watching the film, then good for you. Means you were paying attention. Not since FIGHT CLUB has a major studio movie worked harder to play with the edges of reality for its full running time. Here's what "Tech Support" had to say:
David Aames (Tom Cruise) is looking, like all of us for what is "real" in his life. Everything in the movie is placed to convey meaning. Have fun spotting clues to what is "real."
- The sky changes colors to signify a possible dream. Watch the sky in the scene after David wakes up in the street.
- All television sets and monitors contain clues. Watch to identify which movies are on the monitors of Times Square.
- Notice the movie that plays on the TV. set in the prison scenes. It will return later as a story point.
- Listen for the sound of a computer modem connecting. Where do you hear it? It's important.
- Early in the movie you can spot a famous movie star from the 1950's. She's been compared to Penelope Cruz. She represents the emotional longing that will soon be fulfilled in David Aames.
- Codes to the movie's secrets appear on blackboard and all graphics. Look for them.
- There are phrases said to David Aames by David's psychiatrist and a man in a blue jacket that later return to reveal all to David. Listen for them.
- Listen carefully to the man in the restaurant. He may be telling the truth.
- Listen for a casual phrase, spoken by David at his birthday party that announces the secret of VANILLA SKY.
- Watch for posters on David Aames' bedroom wall. They all convey messages to the movie's secrets.
- Listen for the phrase VANILLA SKY. It will return later to change David Aames forever.
- Album or CD covers that appear within the movie all contain clues. Look for them.
- Pay attention to a very special dog named Benny
- Listen closely to everything said in the elevator. All will be revealed.
- Watch for the cameo appearance of Steven Speilberg.One of the complaints some people have is that "the original is better," and that's sort of a knee-jerk thing. Normally, that's true. NIGHTWATCH and THE VANISHING and LA FEMME NIKITA all were horrifically mangled by Hollywood when being remade, and I can imagine that any fan of the original OPEN YOUR EYES would be skeptical of this new big-budget version. But when I recently found myself arguing with someone who called it an "abomination," I asked them if the opinion of the original director would mean anything to him. "Sure," he said, "and I bet he hates it." Well, it just so happens that Amenebar released an official statement about the new movie, and I wanted to reproduce it here, since Vinyl Films was kind enough to pass it along:
"Sogecine"
"When I learned, quite some time ago now, that Cameron Crowe was going to write and direct the film based on Open Your Eyes with Tom Cruise in the leading role, I felt honored. Now that I have seen Vanilla Sky, I couldn't be more proud. Cameron has all my respect and admiration. Respect, for having plumbed the deepest meaning both of the story and its characters and, might I add, the underlying philosophy of the work. Admiration, for having sought new viewpoints and a fresh approach to the mise-en-scene, giving the film his own unmistakable touch. Vanilla Sky is as true to the original spirit as it is irreverent towards its form, and that makes it a courageous, innovative work. I think I can say that, for me, the two projects are like two very special brothers. They have the same concerns, but their personalities are quite different. In other words, they sing the same song but with quite different voices: one likes opera, and the other likes rock and roll."
"Alejandro Amenabar"That's as smart a comparison of the two as I've heard so far from anyone, critics included. On that note, I'll get back to working on my 2001 year-end list...
"Moriarty" out.
-
+ Expand All
-
thats the reaction i had, despite everyone and their mother that i know trashing the movie. GREAT FUCKING FLICK, thanks alejandro
-
I only have so much money, and now I have to see this again. It's not a problem quality-wise, it was a very good film. But you're taking money away from my LOTR obsession. Lord, I need some help here.
-
Critics hate this movie (hell they even bagged it in the New Years fireworks display in Oz - moron compare Richard Wilkins if anyone is interested). Here's my theory why. The "elevator scene" takes away alot of the mystery and as such limits their "wanker" talk around coffee shops and their smarmy need to discover the "true meaning". Sure this scene is weak but the movie is not... there's heaps more to it than that. Cruise should be encouraged to do more like this. If it fails dismally then what studio is going to green light another "risky" movie (when we all now they usually turn out to be the best). Hell, I'm even thinking of changing my id to "The saddest girl to ever hold a martini" (said in a wicked Spanish accent)...whatcha think??
-
and even though "Vanilla Sky" is his weakest movie since "Singles" I still think so.
-
I think. Damn, I LOVE Easter Eggs inside a film that hint at it's meaning (not a dvd egg)!
-
I liked Vanilla Sky enough, I don't think it's better than the original though. For one, it's too long; the blatant exposition at the end is pure Hollywood underestimating the intelligence of the audience; and Cameron Crowe's sappy soul-searching tone didn't sit as well with me as did Amenabar's creepy, freaky, scared-straight tone did.
The two best changes/additions Crowe made were Cameron Diaz (very underrated actress) and the pop-culture stuff that influenced David's new world. And those supposed easter eggs that guy sent in are completely obvious and don't need to be pointed out by some holier-than-thou contributor here. Figure it out yourself. It's clear enough, at least by the end of the movie, that there is more to it than most might first have thought; maybe it takes some reflection or a second viewing, but there's no need to condescend and try to clue people in to the movie's more intriguing, hidden points. That's for each person to discover themselves. The movie is okay, I just prefer the original's tone. Crowe can be too wishy-washy for me. For once I'd like to see him ditch his wholesome, sentimental side and go all edge. He has a better chance at greatness than Ron Howard, at least. -
categorically list what you find out about these easter eggs.
i'm interested but not interested enough to watch that boring movie again. -
He says he
-
I enjoyed the movie quite a lot until its cookie-cutter, hollywood dumbed-down, explain-everything-and-leave-nothing-to-interpretation ending. Not having seen the original, I don't know how the ending was handled there, but I'm hardpressed to believe it was worse than Crowe's. A well-above-average movie, sure, but not a cinematic masterpiece and certainly deserving of some of the criticism it's received.
And by the way, most of these "eggs" are obvious as hell. Benny the dog? Anyone who missed that wasn't watching the damn movie. -
He has? If so, he has taken it down again. Or are you maybe thinking of Harry?
-
Nice handle. And to quote a great movie: "For once, you and I are in total agreement." See the original. Not dumbed down, and creepy rather than sappy. Check my above post. And whoever made the Benny the dog comment, AMEN. Get your HEADS out of your ASSES and pay attention.
-
Slight Spoilers so don't read if you want anything at all spoiled:**************************** I've seen the movie three times... enough to *think* I understand it. The elevator sequence explains alot. But what strikes me still and I haven't been able to explain 100% is the first voice... what explains the first voice??? How does the first voice tie into the rest of the movie including what is said at the bar and the elevator sequence? The first voice I am referring to is at the beginning of the movie with the Radiohead song playing and Tom Cruises alarm clock awakes him w/ the voice that says "Open Your Eyes" and what's interesting is... the voice isn't Cameron Diaz's voice here... but Penelope Cruz's voice that has left the message on his alarm clock "open your eyes" (at this point he hasn't even met Penelope Cruz yet...). I'm interested to hear any theories people have on this.
-
That is a great way to describe the differences between the two films. I liked both for different reasons.
-
When David first sees Sophia turn into Julie on his bed, you can hear whispering sounds of the scientists that are monitoring his dream. It goes on throughout that scene and the next police station scene.
-
I really loved the original film by Amenabar. While I didn't dislike Vanilla Sky, I felt that it didn't add enough to make it worth watching. It's really sad when the best thing about a film is the soundtrack. Maybe if Crowe and Cruise spent less time trying to legitimize their film with respected cultural signifiers like Dylan and Radiohead, and instead focused more on delivering an emotional picture, it would have been easier to accept. But the whole pop culture critique is so overdone, and really, what did they say that was so profound? As for Harry's comments about Cruise defacing his image, the guy in the original looked A LOT worse after the accident; think The Elephant Man. Tom was still pretty recognizable, and that shows a lack of conviction, if not with Tom than with the studio or Crowe himself. There's one thing about the dialogue that pissed me off as well. To write a great line like "saddest girl to have a martini" and then to continue to call attention to that line is a little self-congratulatory. We don't need to have great lines pointed out to us, Cameron. What happened to the guy who would just let the words flow and sink in? "Don't make me remember this chili dog for the rest of my life".
-
It's in the scene after the night club, and sophia has just walked away. Tom Cruise and Jason Lee are having a little arguement, and there's a shot of Tom where someone walks by in the background, and I swear he/she has a mask hanging on the back of his/her head like tom does when he's not wearing it. I've only seen the film once, but I'm pretty damn sure thats what I saw. Can anyone confirm this? Any rabid Vanilla sky watchers out there, or anyone going to see it soon who can look?
btw- I thought the film was absolutely fantastic -
So just go away if you didn't like this movie.
-
Spoilers here so don't look if you don't want to know.....In another Talkback a hypothosis was put forth that the person is already in a coma. Now this could be David and the film starts after the car crash, and the last shot is him waking up. Now, one person put forththe following: the eye in the last shot may be David's father, which puts a whole new spin on the film and REALLY messes with you. Just for the record, in my market the films by Lynch, Coen bros., and "Waking Life" all opened and closed in one-two weeks after Sept. 11th so I was unable to see them. "Memento" was 35 miles away in the spring so that one was out too. Of films I've seen in theaters so far for 2001, "Vanilla Sky" is third on my list, behind #2 "Moulin Rouge" and "LOTR:FOTR".-----later-----m
-
Whoever said it earlier, yeah, I saw the guy with the mask walking behind him in the street both times I saw it. But it's just slightly out of focus enough to where you can't make him out. Also...maybe slight spoilers...whenever something bad starts happening to him, you can hear a voic ein the background repeating the numbers 3 0 3 1 9 over and over again. Also, whenever he is in jail and talking to his lawyer, that bell starts ringing. Both of them slightly look up like they heard it, then just keep on talking as the bell keeps ringing. What the hell is that all about? BTW...I really liked the movie. And on top of that, I usually can't stand Cameron Crowe flicks.
-
Not quite. Rob williams crooning rat pack standards, that's vanity. I would even go as far and claim, that this is Cameron's greatest work to date. Someone said Singles was his weakest, I think not. Jerry Maguire was. Spielberg always gets flames for being sentimental - look at Maguire and Almost Famous. Suryp - still, I love AF. Maguire was the most mainstream Hollywood Crowe has done to date, in a bad way, but now Cruise/Crowe-team have redeemed themselves. It's the first time that picture of this sub-genre (you figure out a name for it, I mean flicks like Jacob's Ladder, Fight Club, Truman Show. Purple Rose OF Cairo. The Matrix, heck-even The Last Action Hero etc.) that emotions are handled WELL. I don't mean Neo Anderson's world-angst for the nature of his horrific reality, but that feeling you get when you fall in love, and want to stay there...anyone who has ever felt it can relate to it here, because Crowe really makes the chemistry between his leads work. And then they find out: shit! it's not real. That's what made VS work for me - heartbreaking stuff. And Ms. Cruz's voice in the beginning? Moebius strip, really. Final laugh from Crowe - so you thought you know what's real? Wrong. Vanilla Sky is not the most intelligent reality-bend out there, but IMO the most heartfelt. And for all you yanks who wonder who the hell is Robbie Williams, all I can say he ain't Mork.
-
In fact, why can't Harry deed this site over to you? Just kidding. But I finally saw VS 3 nights ago here in Korea (where I teach English at a university), and, well, I wasn't sure if I liked it. Not unlike my feelings after seeing Blue Velvet, ShortCuts, or Bringing Out the Dead....But what I DID recognize is an artist bringing forth a personal vision in all these...and I don't have to like something to appreciate it (to all you fanboys out there who hate Britney Spears but would cream in your pants if she walked into the room)...heheheheh...Personally, I would have made a few changes in the film...a fairy tale ending, for instance. But that's me, and I'm at a point in my life where I believe in happy endings...it doesn't mean I can't appreciate what goes on the screen in front of me. Crowe and Cruise and company made a great, disturbing, bad dream sort of film that is surpassed only by Lynch or Svenmaker or Trier (of the directors I've seen)...It's the FEEL WEIRD FILM OR THE SEASON!...It's been two days and I'm still digesting it...BUT the car crash has got to be the most realistic/effective I've EVER seen, including Bullit and Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry (or whatever that toxic Peter Fonda car chase movie was). ....the Klaw is a Klaw....
-
I liked the concept. For the most part, the story and the directing were well-done and interesting. But to me, the final product was so obnoxious and unenjoyable. Sure, I was curious to see what was really going on. Sure, the payoff made sense & satisfied all the mysteries that had been established. But who cares when the main character is unbearable to watch? I have nothing against Cruise. I think he's a good actor usually, whom people often criticize simply because they confuse him with his egotistic, showboating characters. But this was just painful. Not because I felt the characters' pain, but because the character's actions and performance were just stupid. I got so sick of watching him make bad decisions, throwing tantrums, and acting "trippy-confused." I have no interest in dumb, self-indulgent, emotionally stunted characters--especially in a mystery/thriller! It's the #1 rule of storytelling: Make your characters interesting. If David's actions (and especially Tom's performance) hadn't been so overblown and repetitively stupid, this could have been an enjoyable, enthralling movie.
-
Just wanted to also say that I *am* impressed by the multi-layered clue-dropping used in the storytelling. I wish that made the film enjoyable enough for me to appreciate it on the whole, but alas...
-
...for being open-minded & courteous. I see that all-too-rarely in the Talkback forums here.
-
...and I saw Vanilla Sky 3 days ago, and I like VS better. But maybe my memory is still a lil rough, I don't remember the elevator seen adding as much extra exposition as everyone here seems to be complaining about. Just a little bit of stuff about Sofia, but other than that (and this is a serious question cause I honestly just don't remember) what other exposition did it add that Abres Los Ojos didn't?
-
and are these really easter eggs? I mean seriously, just watch the film with your eyes open (no pun intended).
-
Dec 31, 2001 4:53:49 PM CST
I liked Vanilla Sky, and I think I know why people don't lik
by nflrefugee
Tom Cruise. You don't like the fact that Cruise is in a hip movie. Kind of like when the football jocks play alternative music. That music is made for the disenfranchised, not the 'beautiful people'. If Bruce Campbell, or Chris Walken were in Vanilla Sky it would deemed a masterpiece.
-
1.Sophia wears a St. Rose t-shirt the night they are at the club, which symbolizes her being David's savior.
2.At Davids funeral, Sophia wears the same jacket as the movie star she is shown as bbeing parellel with in Davids dream explanation.
3.When Davids face is being repaired the text on the computer monitor reads Beth Isreal hospital (hmm...)
4.The movie opens with Radioheads song Everything in it's right place playing while David rises from bed. The chorus is "Yesterday I woke up sucking on a lemon", which relates directly to Jason Lees sweet and sour speeches.
5.Davids consciense plays tricks on him the moment his dream begins when Cameron Diaz appears for a split second and says boo!!!
6.The man who walks behind David after the club IS wearing a mask like his.
There are other things I've noticed but Im writing this off the top of my head, maybe Ill post more later and others should do the same. This is the movie of the year in my opinion (Hell, Ive seen it five times now) and Im sure there are others that agree. Have fun.....
-
Ok... my brother and I are debating about this ending. I'm talking about the last three seconds of the movie. How many of you people think that he was waking up from being cryogenically frozen after dying in the car wreck? We both thought this immediately leaving the film. The sci-fi geek in me WANTS to believe this. Then my brother had to say something that changed my whole outlook. IS THAT HIS ALARM CLOCK GOING OFF IN THE LAST THREE SECONDS OF THE MOVIE? That means the car accident never even happened. His eye is not scarred. Did he pass out after the party at which he met his new fling and then have a terrible nightmare? In that case, the entire car wreck, tech support, psychologist, and other plots are totally irrellevant to his life. The bottom line is, he went to a party, got drunk, met a new fling, had a bad nightmare about her and his current main squeeze. End of story. So someone please tell me, is it his alarm clock going off or a scientist waking him up?????
-
It is indeed a scientist waking him up, but it is 150 years after the night he killed himself by drug over dose. His face is in perfect shape because tech support asks him if he has any last wishes while on top of the building. David replies mentally, and recieves his last wishes. He gets to see Sophia once more and his face is repaired by the touch of her hand. Sophias voice is also on the alarm clock at the opening of the film because in Davids mind, she is his savior (this is later revealed to him)... and it doesn't matter whether or not he's met her yet, it only further explains why he is so uncontrolably attracted to her when they do finally meet.
-
I totally got that from the movie as well, Obiwan. But... tell me why this scenario could not also be true... He goes to the party, meets Sophia, thinks about her all night, gets drunk, passes out, has a TERRIBLE nightmare about girlfriends, car wrecks, cryogenics, and tech support guys. his alarm clock goes off... "open your eyes." he wakes up. we are shown in the opening scene of the movie that he is prone to having nightmares. is this not possible?
-
.....I dont know, just dont seem to make sense to me, oh well.
-
For the casual filmgoer this film should be just fine.But after watching films like LOST HIGHWAY and JACOBS LADDER this film just doesnt cut it.VANILLA SKY tries very hard to be hip and cool but falls flat with that spoon fed ending.
-
Dec 31, 2001 7:03:21 PM CST
BE THE FIRST TO POST THE CORRECT ANSWER TO THIS VANILLA SKY TRIV
by 33.3rpm
Who is the actress that plays the voice of the nurse at the very end of the film? She is credited as "The Future" in the end credits AND she is a world class piece of ass! I'm super hot for her, but I don't think she has had a big
American role yet.
ANY TAKERS??? -
Please read my two posts above and tell me what you think...
-
SPOILERS AHEAD
-
The voice = The Future = Laura Fraser. Where's my prize? --Be seeing you
-
I gotta go with ObiWan on this. Because the voice at the end of the movie is a new voice (with a slight Scottish accent, actually) I have to think this is a new character, i.e. we are somewhere we haven't been yet -- the future. I also agree that Penelope Cruz is as much of a savior figure as she is a chick from New York. Metaphysics, theology and science fiction are inseperable in this insane and beautiful movie. Sorry I'm not as much of a genius as Knumberskull and wasn't able to catch every single clue the first time. I love people that feel compelled to post the fact that they are either smart, or cool. Cause, you know, everyone that knows them missed that the first time.
-
Yea, that "this is a dream" has been done before. Yea, the end has exposition that clearly lays out for us what was the dream and what wasn't.
But I don't see why people are getting so wrapped up in the end. This isn't the Sixth Sense or The Usual Suspects. VS isn't being set up just to "blow our minds" at the end. To carry on with the Fight Club comparisons, Fight Club had a big twist at the end too, a twist that really required a big suspension of disbelief and truthfully, a twist that wasn't a mind blowing as the 6th Sense or the Usual Suspects. But a lot of us (including me) still love FC, and we do it in spite of the ending, not because of it. Simply because FC wasn't a movie that was set up on the twist at the end. It was a movie that's plot led to the twist at the end.
In FC and VS, the movie wasn't about the twist. They aren't entire movies set up to lead us to one startling discovery. The end is simply another plot element to reienforce the messages/metaphors/symbolism that were already weaved throughout the enitre movie. The movie is aiming for a message, its trying to express ideas, it's not trying to trick us. The end is an answer, not a revelation. Just like Fight Club, the end is there to add weight/impact to the characters, story, and the film's philosophy. It's a subtly different goal than complex twist-driven films like The Sixth Sense and The Usual Suspects (two other films I immensly enjoyed). -
As you can see, your prize for getting LAURA FRASER right is being dissed in the previous post for comparing one of my top five movies of the year to an episode of Dallas. Congrats! And yes, you're right, Waking Life WAS a lot like that third season episode of Mama's Family where the slutty daughter in law dropped the kid's acid on accident.
-
I was originally going to rebut the replies to my post with further reasons as to why I found VS to be so objectionable. But, you know, if you enjoyed the film, who am I to try to take that enjoyment away? It
-
Taking the high road, huh? A dirty trick. You win. To each his own. I just think VS is unique enough to check out. Soon, there won't be such a thing as an R rated movie left. What will kids be sneaking into? Do they do that anymore?
-
I'm sure the fact that Cruise produced The Others doesn't have any affect on his comment's sincerity. Nonetheless, it's no reason to declare that Vanilla Sky is a good movie if you don't like it. I thought it was okay... of course having seen Open Your Eyes first gives the original a distict advantage for me. I agree with the poster who felt OYE had the better tone... it was much leaner and more efficient as well. I can't relate at all with the hero of either film, so Cameron's valiant attempt to really get us to care for him fell flat. Amenabar's straight forward Twilight Zone approach is exactly what the story needed.
-
Convince me more that this is not a vanity film for Tom Cruise. My sister said Tom Cruise is so vane he's unsexy. Then again, she likes Russell Crowe, so there's the opposite.
-
Convince me more that this is not a vanity film for Tom Cruise. My sister said Tom Cruise is so vane he's unsexy. Then again, she likes Russell Crowe, so there's the opposite.
-
I agree with Black Hair that Abre los Ojos was great because it was true to it's form. I saw it a few times on IFC before I saw Vanilla Sky. But, it's interesting you bring up the "Twilight Zone feeling" that the first film had. In the famous Times Square sequence in V.S., as Cruise gets out of his car, what is on the Jumbotron? The Twilight Zone! It's that episode with Dennis Weaver about dreams and madness and murder. I think Crowe is playing us all and I think he is deeply aware of what he's doing. The thing I liked better about Vanilla Sky is this- it has a sense of humour. Like life, even when things get fucked up and shitty, some things are still gonna be funny, no matter how much we don't want them to be. I like Cameron's taste in music better, too. I know I'm stating the obvious, but do we have the right to take that for granted. I could just LISTEN to that movie for hours.
-
This is no stretch for him at all.
He's always an asshole who has to connect with his inner "nice guy."
Early on, he didn't, but ever since
"Rain Man" that's the mold for Tom.
They're all basically guys who 'come of age' and learn a lesson.
I used to like him, but I'm still nursing the festering wound that I got from watching "Mission Impossible 2" and I'm starting to not like him so much. I acknowlege
his acting ability, but he's very predictable, mask or no mask.
-
well, actually, the divorce happened AFTER Tom is halfway already in filming this "vanity" project (as you call it), so the timing is irrelevant. But it sickens me as well that Nicole seems to be reaping the benefits of it (with RUSSELL CROWE riding her wave).
-
Vanilla Sky remake of Abre Los Ojos, rip-off Total Recall
-
Abre los Ojos is NOT arthouse. The TV listings magazine for christmas described Women on the Edge of a Nervous Breakdown, in a mini Almodovar season as arthouse at its most accessible...
Abre los Ojos is not arthouse in the slightest - it is typical mainstream cinema, Spanish cinema imitating Hollywood is NOT arthouse. An imported film with subtitles isn't arthouse, in the same way that a Hollywood film in subtitles in a non-Anglophone country isn't arthouse...
Not to take anything away from Amenabar - but he is commercial cinema. That's not arthouse - regardless of its distribution, it doesn't mean you can compare it to other foreign cinema that is 'Art' cinema, rather than just commercial.
So there. -
Jan 01, 2002 5:40:25 PM CST
Vanilla Sky is really about being in a coma, not cryogenics
by fitzgeraldo
I haven't heard anyone mention this idea yet (maybe I haven't looked hard enough), but I think the real twist to the film isn't the cryogenics. It's the coma. I don't think David Aames even reached a cryogenic chamber.
He dreams lucidly in his coma, and everything he experiences, although nightmarish (not surprising given the trauma of being stalked then getting into an accient), is ultimately a form of wish fulfillment.
On some level, his mind realizes that he is in a coma, and invents the comforting fiction of cryogenics (with lucid dreaming option, no less). Since he was rendered comatose by the crash, his mind extrapolates the disfigurement, and all of the attendant grapplings with his board of directors. David Aames really only has two things going for him; looks and a majority share of a firm he inherited - in waking life he must be aware of how tenuous all of that is, and it's not hard to imagine his comatose mind would be, too.
In my opinion, his decision to take the plunge doesn't represent wanting to leave cryogenic freeze, it represents his readiness to exit the coma, to face whatever awaits him in the waking world. In that final shot of him waking up, he's arising from his coma, not a cryogenic capsule.
Thinking back on the film, I can't think of any holes in my theory. Some evidence I can present: 1. The "tech support" guy telling him it's a 'revolution of the *mind*." 2. The whole thing thing with Benny, while supporting the cryogenics idea, is pure hyperbole (frozen for three months? yeah, right). 3. It also seemed too easy at the end - 'yeah, it's 150 years in the future, not only will you wake up but our technology will also make you whole again. Another case of wish fulfillment.
4. Lucidly dreaming in a coma maps pretty well to being in cryogenic suspension with a "lucid dreaming" option.
Anyone agree/disagree with these ideas? -
It almost works, but I think there's one little hole in your theory. I'm not a doctor, but I do believe that it's very hard to do complex plastic surgery during a coma. In the last frame of the movie, you'll notice that his eye is not scarred whatsoever. This is what makes me believe that he never even got into a car wreck and that he is waking up from a dream he had the night of the party. What do you think?
-
Great visuals, performances that were top-notch (unlike Harry, I only saw C Diaz as a goddamn nutcase, and what made P Cruz so much more desirable than Diaz was that she was incredibly warm and funny caring), and the storyline was an enjoyable ride. The message of living one's life to the fullest of their potential and not letting things pass one bye are old, but this tells it in an interesting way.-----------------------------------I agree though, Vanilla Sky is one of those movies people either love or hate. I'm the former. Some good friends of mine are the latter. Such is life; I think one needs to be in a particular mindset to fully appreciate this film. Folks who have gone through some personal hardships lately will probably read the movie better than those who are going to go see it for pure escapist entertainment. -------------------------Oh, and JRKerr... so the character of David did nothing selfless during the whole movie. So what? Sometimes, we must take care of ourselves. Sometimes at the near expense of friendships. After all, we are our own most important being. I gather from your screaming about how it was Randian that you feel that people are national resources that should be constantly thinking of others than themselves. While we should allways keep in mind politeness, and treating people as we want to be treated, thinking of nothing but others makes for a hollow person with no "self". Not all experiences are for 'the people'; sometimes they are for 'the individual'. Get over it or go back to the comune. Bah.
-
That's probably the biggest "hole" in my theory, but keep in mind that I said that he was in a coma right after the moment of impact. He could not have known about the disfigurement, but his lucidly dreaming mind extrapolated it.
-
Remember when Kurt Russell tells Tom Cruise that he was heard saying "Ellie" over and over again in his sleep? It somehow leads to LE but the film never (to my knowledge) explains who Ellie is? Am I hearing the name correctly? Somebody let me know. Also, I believe Tom Cruise deserves an Academy Award nomination for his work. He chose an edgy role that definitely put his image at stake and he didn't care. Couple that with his poignant portrayal of disfigured David and it's definitely one of the better performances of the year. Penelope Cruz is a doll and I wish her a long career in Hollywood!
-
you answered your own question. say L, then say E. there is no one named ellie in the movie.
-
I wasn't really wondering about why all this was happening to tommy cruise's character while watching this movie. why is that? beacuse cruise's character is totally unsympathetic from beginning to end. he's an ass from start to finish. I couldn't have really cared less why the events of the story occurred. a big problem with the film as a whole was the tone. I really object to the music used. It was played in large part as a romantic comedy with a sadistic psycho in the form of cameron diaz and a hideously deformed anti-hero in the form of tommy thrown into the mix. particularly wrong was peter gabriel's 'solisbury hill'. not that it is a bad song, just that it was so totally out of place. it belongs in almost famous or jerry mcguire. anybody agree? disagree? what kind of easter egg is stephen speilberg? beacuse he made A.I. which also had an unbeleiveable sci-fi ending? and why would you list 'easter eggs' without explaining them here? everyone's obviously seen it. finally, if tommy had been 'spliced' back into his own life why would he go back on THAT morning and not the morning he would have crashed with Cameron Diaz? wouldn't you want to avoid that ever even happening. anyway, now I hope Crowe goes back and writes something new and original. ew, and lastly I have to disapprove of the pauly mac song over the credits. its like he took the movie's title and wrote, like three other words around it. a missed opportunity all around.
-
Why did Cameron Diaz hit Tom Cruise at the apartment with the
phone. That was soooo stupid. By the way, screw the Easter Eggs, a well directed movie does not need those and that is the problem with the movie, bad director. Has anyone seen the original movie ? -
I saw the movie, and I liked the movie (in my own words: VS was Lost Highway with an ending). And I think the underlying thought to it wasn't "what happened to david?", but rather "what did I pull out of the film?". like it or not, it's something to think about; and being a film you can take from it what you will.
-
Fuck that Syd Field "how to write screenplays that sell" garbage that your "protagonist" must be sympathetic. Assholes are fun to watch, too. I liked Vanilla Sky.
-
Vanilla Sky is a masterpiece. Simply brilliant. But the best thing about this film is the fact that both Tom Cruise and Cameron Crowe at the very pinicle of their respective careers chose to make a picture that challenges the audience rather than one that is safe and expected. Cruise and Crowe could crank out picture after picture for the next 20 years that delivers exactely what their core audiences want from them. Instead they chose to explore new avenues and expand their canvas. They chose to take chances and explore their own artistry. I was knocked out by the sheer creativity and daring on display. Cruise's performance is easily his most challenging since his work in Born on the 4th of July and he works his ass off in this movie. Cruise is simply brilliant. Crowe's direction is a quantum leap from his prior work. The film is so smart and hip. So cool. So filled with extraordinary profundities. Vanilla Sky is a great picture that will grow in stature in time. Can you imagine the DVD? Wow Knock me out.
-
HUGE SPOILER! SO IF U DON'T WANT TO BE SPOILED DO NOT READ THE FOLLOWING!The ending of Vanilla Sky is very simple. Nothing in the story actually happens. Not the car accident, not the horrible disfigurment, not the bizarre last act. Nothing in the motion picture is real but the last shot. NOTHING! EXCEPT when Aames wakes up in the last shot of the movie. The entire movie is a dream or should I say a nightmare. In the beginning of the film Aames is sleeping and his girlfriend attempts to wake him up by saying "Open your eyes." He then slips into a fever dream which encompasses the entire film including all of the third act. All of the Cyrogenic stuff is just part of his dream. Aames is not frozen he is just dreaming he was frozen. Dreams are the most vivid in the morning right before wake up. Then at the end of the movie Aames actually does wake up by oepning his eyes. End of dream and end of movie. And what a mastepiece Vanilla Sky is.
-
SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!
Personally, I found Kurt Russell's adamant desire to prove he was real to be one of the best parts of the movie. Sure, movies like the Truman Show and The Matrix question the nature of reality, but I'm not sure I've ever seen a film which analyzes "What is real?" from the perspective of an imagined character. Granted, it was only a couple lines of dialogue, but it was pretty cool nonetheless. -
The coma theory I think is very interesting. To the person who says that the face reconstruction couldn't have happened while he was in a coma, I agree... But I think there's a good chance his face was never disfigured to start with. What does he care most about? His looks --- His ability to be a playboy? That's what he loses in his lucid dream while in a coma --- I think the things that happen during the dream are the worst fears of his subconcious coupled with a fight to try and wake up from his coma. Do Julie and Sophia keep changing identities because... In the end, he is just a playboy and Sophia would have been the same to him as Julie was? (remember when he talks about being a "pleasure delayer" and how he has his whole playboy scheme set up to the psychiatrist) --- or is it, that he feels guilty about the way he treated Julie? --- Anyways... my theory is --- he went into a coma after the accident but his face wasn't particularly disfigured --- that was just his worst fears playing out... the stuff about staying in the dream or waking up... pertains to a coma as well as the Lucid Dreams thing.
***
Another point --- in a lot of ways I don't think it matters if he is in a lucid dream or in a coma --- what's important is how the elements of his subconcious play.
***
I think the people who think everything was given away at the end... don't have a clue. Like an above poster mentioned --- This movie isn't really about ONE TWIST --- it's about all these things --- this movie has a lot more depth than just one twist. This movie besides playing with the element of "what is reality?" --- it also works on a more emotional level... I think the chemistry between David and Sophia was very well done --- the feminists i've talked to that have watched this film have seen it from a totally different angle... that everything that happens to David is his punishment for the way he treated Sophia. --- I somewhat disagree with that - Sophia is clearly nuts, you don't try to kill yourself and someone else just because your relationship was just sex --- I didn't see David ever say it was anymore than that.
***
There are so many elements to this film --- that's why I think it is a truly great film and it's my favorite of the year --- it's been a couple of weeks and I'm still thinking about it --- I plan on eventually watching it again.
-
in my above post towards the end i said "how he treated sophia..." obviously i meant "how he treated julie"
ect
-
If another brain-driven wanna-be screenwriter uses the term "dumbed down" again I'm going to throw up. You are the same fools that were using the vapid "edgy" a year ago & "jaded", "over-the-top" & "alternative" before that. Shoo, & think for yourself on the way there.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 439 total posts 159 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 144 total posts 142 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 155 total posts 140 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 55 total posts 45 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 196 total posts 45 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 35 total posts 35 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 34 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 127 total posts 32 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 513 total posts 29 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 118 total posts 27 posts