BakingNath wrote:Hi,
I saw the film yesterday (see "review" on the flat)... and by browsing this topic, i got some answers (the main one being why did he kill his bodyguard ?)
I still have some interrogations :
Who is the woman he speaks with while they are passing the riots ? someone from his staff ?
From what i have read here, the end seems to be different, because there is no movie set and naked wife... when does this occur ?... from the answers i may have other questions..
If you have (detailed) questions on the film feel free to ask.
kelbel75 wrote:BakingNath wrote:Hi,
I saw the film yesterday (see "review" on the flat)... and by browsing this topic, i got some answers (the main one being why did he kill his bodyguard ?)
I still have some interrogations :
Who is the woman he speaks with while they are passing the riots ? someone from his staff ?
From what i have read here, the end seems to be different, because there is no movie set and naked wife... when does this occur ?... from the answers i may have other questions..
If you have (detailed) questions on the film feel free to ask.
no naked (or rather nearly naked) movie set?
I had a feeling they might cut that scene because it was rather strange, but that disappoints me
eric stumbles into a movie shooting in the street, where all the people are in their underwear
it's a heavily emotional scene tho because eric lays down with them ( they're supposed to be dead for some reason) and it's so calming to him. he connects to it in a very big way and I think it finally brings him some clarity
his wife just so happens to be there as well, and so after thay share that experience together they stumble off into an abandoned building and finally have sex. eric actually "feels" something during it, for once, and I was so glad these two characters got to share that
![]()
I assume the woman he talks to during the riots is from his staff, but I can't really remember. from what I've read in interviews and whatnot, the location of some of the scenes has been changed. the movie has almost everything taking place in the limo, whereas the book has him out and about more.
BakingNath wrote:No definitely no movie set... does it happen after or before he gets a hair cut / is left by his driver near the limousine garage / finds who wants to kill him ? And does he actually, "explicitly" get killed in the book ?
kelbel75 wrote:BakingNath wrote:No definitely no movie set... does it happen after or before he gets a hair cut / is left by his driver near the limousine garage / finds who wants to kill him ? And does he actually, "explicitly" get killed in the book ?
it happens before all of that. and he doesn't get "explicitly" killed in the book.(does he in the movie?) he sees a "future shot" of an unidentified dead body in his high-tech wrist watch, that he realizes is him. he's come to terms with it tho, and the story ends with him silently awaiting the shot from the gun that will kill him.
BakingNath wrote:kelbel75 wrote:BakingNath wrote:No definitely no movie set... does it happen after or before he gets a hair cut / is left by his driver near the limousine garage / finds who wants to kill him ? And does he actually, "explicitly" get killed in the book ?
it happens before all of that. and he doesn't get "explicitly" killed in the book.(does he in the movie?) he sees a "future shot" of an unidentified dead body in his high-tech wrist watch, that he realizes is him. he's come to terms with it tho, and the story ends with him silently awaiting the shot from the gun that will kill him.
No sign of the super high tech wrist in the film too.. even if at some point he asks why he sees things in advance... only the inside of the limo has high tech gadgets. The movie ends
There’s a lot of crazy scenes in this… what were your favourite and least favourite scenes to film?
"The prostate exam scene got cut down, the last line of that scene was [Eric saying] ‘I wanna bottle-fuck you slowly with my sunglasses on.’ I remember reading that scene [when reading the script], with a doctor’s finger up your arse – and having absolutely no idea how to say that. Or even if I could get on set and have a camera in my face and say that. But that fear is what made me want to do it."
Eric and his wife never touch in the film – in the book they take part in a massive public orgy, which doesn’t make it into the screen version. What’s your reasoning for this?
Cronenberg: Well, I didn’t feel that they ever touched in the book, frankly. And the scene in the book of the filmed orgy, hundreds of people in the streets of New York, I honestly thought when reading it that it was Eric’s fantasy of reconciliation, and a rather juvenile one at that. And the way that Eric is rather infantile in some ways I didn’t believe that it was real. And I thought on screen it would be laughable, you’d never buy that, it could never happen. So I thought, no, he disconnects from his wife and he never does touch her, and they never do have sex. It’s over, and that’s one of the things that leads him to destroy himself. There are several moments – it’s the death of brother Fez, it’s the break up of his marriage, it’s the killing or Torval, it’s these moments that lead him to the end, which is a kind of suicide, really. He’s going back to his childhood, and then beyond, before his birth, which is to say death.
kelbel75 wrote:Eric and his wife never touch in the film – in the book they take part in a massive public orgy, which doesn’t make it into the screen version. What’s your reasoning for this?
Cronenberg: Well, I didn’t feel that they ever touched in the book, frankly. And the scene in the book of the filmed orgy, hundreds of people in the streets of New York, I honestly thought when reading it that it was Eric’s fantasy of reconciliation, and a rather juvenile one at that. And the way that Eric is rather infantile in some ways I didn’t believe that it was real. And I thought on screen it would be laughable, you’d never buy that, it could never happen. So I thought, no, he disconnects from his wife and he never does touch her, and they never do have sex. It’s over, and that’s one of the things that leads him to destroy himself. There are several moments – it’s the death of brother Fez, it’s the break up of his marriage, it’s the killing or Torval, it’s these moments that lead him to the end, which is a kind of suicide, really. He’s going back to his childhood, and then beyond, before his birth, which is to say death.
it irritates the HELL out of me when interviewers try to set themselves apart with interesting questions, but FAIL to do their homeworkit was not a public "orgy". they were filming a scene in a movie where everyone was supposed to be DEAD!
then eric and his wife wander away from the set to have sex
I dont agree with cronenberg's take on this scene, but a book like this is open to all kinds of interpretation
![]()
speaking of which: did those of you who read the book think it was "about" wallstreet and capitalism? I'm sooo sick of reading this assesment in interviews. I think that is so off the mark, that it makes me sad; they've clearly missed the whole substance of the storyaside from the rats and the reason for the riot, of course
I do like that cronenberg pointed out that eric was commiting a type of passive suicide tho, I thought that as well
![]()
kelbel75 wrote:THIS interviewer actually knows what she's talking aboutwatch rob's reaction when he realizes he can actually have a real conversation about this movie with her; so cute
![]()
Time: which is another reason they shoudn't have cut the wrist watch scene; just sayin'![]()
MariaCecilia wrote:kelbel75 wrote:Eric and his wife never touch in the film – in the book they take part in a massive public orgy, which doesn’t make it into the screen version. What’s your reasoning for this?
Cronenberg: Well, I didn’t feel that they ever touched in the book, frankly. And the scene in the book of the filmed orgy, hundreds of people in the streets of New York, I honestly thought when reading it that it was Eric’s fantasy of reconciliation, and a rather juvenile one at that. And the way that Eric is rather infantile in some ways I didn’t believe that it was real. And I thought on screen it would be laughable, you’d never buy that, it could never happen. So I thought, no, he disconnects from his wife and he never does touch her, and they never do have sex. It’s over, and that’s one of the things that leads him to destroy himself. There are several moments – it’s the death of brother Fez, it’s the break up of his marriage, it’s the killing or Torval, it’s these moments that lead him to the end, which is a kind of suicide, really. He’s going back to his childhood, and then beyond, before his birth, which is to say death.
it irritates the HELL out of me when interviewers try to set themselves apart with interesting questions, but FAIL to do their homeworkit was not a public "orgy". they were filming a scene in a movie where everyone was supposed to be DEAD!
then eric and his wife wander away from the set to have sex
I dont agree with cronenberg's take on this scene, but a book like this is open to all kinds of interpretation
![]()
speaking of which: did those of you who read the book think it was "about" wallstreet and capitalism? I'm sooo sick of reading this assesment in interviews. I think that is so off the mark, that it makes me sad; they've clearly missed the whole substance of the storyaside from the rats and the reason for the riot, of course
I do like that cronenberg pointed out that eric was commiting a type of passive suicide tho, I thought that as well
![]()
I did think that the Wall Street and capitalism theme tended to get a little over-emphasised in the comments on the movie, but I haven't seen it yet, just snippets here and there. I find the book more an existentialist exploration about what happens to a man when he gets unlimited access to everything a man's supposed to want: wealth, fame, sex, success, and it doesn't make him happy, not at all. Instead he implodes into this mixture between a completely cut off and isolated, cold person existing solely through his mind, trying to shock his mind into feeling something and a small child, completely bewildered by the world around him.
The mirrors of the high-rise buildings and the windows of his car and the shop fronts are all empty, because he can't find his reflection anywhere: he has completely lost sight of himself and nothing makes sense anymore, and so he tries to kill himself in different, convoluted ways, saying goodbye to everything that connects him to the world in that one day when he travels across town. I guess DeLillo is trying to make a statement about our time as well, how it can be narcissistic and void of meaning, when we begin to believe the lie that everything can be bought, and then everything becomes value-less.
Sorry to rant on,I just happen to think it's an interesting book, and I really, really want to see what Rob makes of this!
MariaCecilia wrote:And did you hear that he was going to do a movie about the hunting down of Saddam Hussein? Can you believe it? Robert Pattinson does a Matt Damon and goes Jason Bourne on all of us?
BakingNath wrote:Hi,
I saw the film yesterday (see "review" on the flat)... and by browsing this topic, i got some answers (the main one being why did he kill his bodyguard ?)
I still have some interrogations :
Who is the woman he speaks with while they are passing the riots ? someone from his staff ?
From what i have read here, the end seems to be different, because there is no movie set and naked wife... when does this occur ?... from the answers i may have other questions..
If you have (detailed) questions on the film feel free to ask.
amynkansas wrote:
ALl that being said, I kind of found the movie to be boring. I just kind of kept waiting to care about SOMEONE in the movie and that didn't really happenfor me. I didn't feel a connection with anyone. I didn't hate anyone or love anyone or understand anyone. I had no emotions for any of the characters.
amynkansas wrote:-my thoughts on why he killed the bodygaurd was that it was his only way to be free to "be killed" later.
kelbel75 wrote:amynkansas wrote:-my thoughts on why he killed the bodygaurd was that it was his only way to be free to "be killed" later.
do you think that was a conscious reason tho, or was the bodyguard just preventing him from carrying out his reckless behavior? It seems that the movie has a slightly different tone than the book, and I haven't seen the movie yet, but I never felt like eric set out to get himself killed that day.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests