Did anyone notice during the interrogation scene a female patient asks for a glass of water, there's a quick cut of her taking a drink but she's not holding a glass but miming it? It then cuts to her putting the glass down.
Also as another poster said there seemed to be a few continuity errors between shots but i also wonder if this was on purpose.
I saw this when it first came out and rewatching it puzzled me a bit, I'm sure the end explanation scene with Leo,Ben and Mark had a few flashbacks showing the tell tale occurrences that backed up the doctors story. the one that sticks in my mind is the scene where they have to hand over their guns and Ruffalos character does it rather clumsily proving that he's not a real agent? Or maybe that's just my brain filling in the blanks!
Did anyone notice during the interrogation scene a female patient asks for a glass of water, there's a quick cut of her taking a drink but she's not holding a glass but miming it? It then cuts to her putting the glass down.
I think that brief scene is meant to be symbolic of the fact that Leo's character has an aversion to water due to his wife drowning their children. His mind has blocked out the water.
Another example of his dislike of water is the sea sickness he feels when they "arrive" at the island.
He basically spotted holes in both arguments, that he was a patient there and also he got corrupted, but he comes to the conclusion he got corrupted.
It is 50/50 and I think the director purposely made it that way, this movie will be talked about in 50 years time, and when you compare it to Avatar (for example) which was a blockbuster hit at the time, nobody hardly talks about it now. This is what makes a great movie, longevity.
If you love this movie try Gothika, another mind puzzle of a movie.
Not a bad film and a rather nice Hitchcock homage. Unfortunately I guessed the big plot twist in the opening cigarette scene on the boat. Still enjoyed the movie though. It is well made and interesting as a one off viewing.
He basically spotted holes in both arguments, that he was a patient there and also he got corrupted, but he comes to the conclusion he got corrupted.
It is 50/50 and I think the director purposely made it that way, this movie will be talked about in 50 years time, and when you compare it to Avatar (for example) which was a blockbuster hit at the time, nobody hardly talks about it now. This is what makes a great movie, longevity.
If you love this movie try Gothika, another mind puzzle of a movie.
The Aviator was amazing in my view and WAY better than this headache-inducing drivel which makes the viewer go mad. I don't even have the patience to "analyse it". What exactly is the great depth of it?
Overblown, ham-fisted rubbish from a director way past his prime.
As any film school Nerd will tell you this is a remake of the 1920s silent Classic the Cabinet of Dr Caligari. And THAT film did this whole plot more justice.
As any film school Nerd will tell you this is a remake of the 1920s silent Classic the Cabinet of Dr Caligari. And THAT film did this whole plot more justice.
The parallels are certainly there and the book is probably to blame. Shutter Island is a pretty faithful take on Dennis Lehane's novel, which I'd read some years ealier and found the twist rather obvious there as well.
Not a bad film and a rather nice Hitchcock homage. Unfortunately I guessed the big plot twist in the opening cigarette scene on the boat. Still enjoyed the movie though. It is well made and interesting as a one off viewing.
Scorsese's Cape Fear was supposedly a Hitchcock homage, and that was garbage too. All this does is underline their distinct differences. Hitchcock knew how to seduce and draw you in. Scorsese just pummels to quickly wearying effect.
Comments
Also as another poster said there seemed to be a few continuity errors between shots but i also wonder if this was on purpose.
I saw this when it first came out and rewatching it puzzled me a bit, I'm sure the end explanation scene with Leo,Ben and Mark had a few flashbacks showing the tell tale occurrences that backed up the doctors story. the one that sticks in my mind is the scene where they have to hand over their guns and Ruffalos character does it rather clumsily proving that he's not a real agent? Or maybe that's just my brain filling in the blanks!
Another example of his dislike of water is the sea sickness he feels when they "arrive" at the island.
Great film ... one of my favourites.
Check out this guy he's a top lad:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeQ7J9J0UIM
He basically spotted holes in both arguments, that he was a patient there and also he got corrupted, but he comes to the conclusion he got corrupted.
It is 50/50 and I think the director purposely made it that way, this movie will be talked about in 50 years time, and when you compare it to Avatar (for example) which was a blockbuster hit at the time, nobody hardly talks about it now. This is what makes a great movie, longevity.
If you love this movie try Gothika, another mind puzzle of a movie.
The Aviator was amazing in my view and WAY better than this headache-inducing drivel which makes the viewer go mad. I don't even have the patience to "analyse it". What exactly is the great depth of it?
As any film school Nerd will tell you this is a remake of the 1920s silent Classic the Cabinet of Dr Caligari. And THAT film did this whole plot more justice.
Yeah, the music was so ridiculously intrusive it was like watching a modern day Dr Who episode!
I didn't know the twist so I quite enjoyed the film, but I don't know if I could be bothered watching it again now that I know what happens.
Scorsese's Cape Fear was supposedly a Hitchcock homage, and that was garbage too. All this does is underline their distinct differences. Hitchcock knew how to seduce and draw you in. Scorsese just pummels to quickly wearying effect.