Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

I'm Thinking of Ending Things [Netflix]

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    kerplun k
    Registered Users Posts: 2,385 ✭✭✭kerplun k


    deaglan1 wrote: »
    Well imo, that is an absolutely terrible description of Jake. He is a genuine soul with nobody to turn to for conversation, friendship, or as a soul mate

    I’m on the fence.
    There’s no doubt that he has delusions of grandeur, often claiming other artists work as his own, Academia, poetry, art, etc

    For me Kaufman leaves just enough in here for me to think Jake wasn’t totally innocent. Some examples,

    His angry outbursts at the dinner table.
    The scratch marks on the basement door.
    His fathers refusal to look him in the eye.
    The way he lingers at the young student during the play rehearsal.
    His interactions with the bruised girl at the ice cream shop.
    The ballot sequence where the Janitor stabs Jake.
    The Janitor himself has a scare on his chest
    Parallels are drawn between Jake and Jud Fry from Oklahoma, a character that could be considered dangerous.
    Kaufman alludes to the Janitor being the maggot infested pig.
    I think the Janitor may have had a sickness that drove him to do bad things.


  • Options
    #33
    cdgalwegian
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    deaglan1 wrote: »
    Well imo, that is an absolutely terrible description of Jake. He is a genuine soul with nobody to turn to for conversation, friendship, or as a soul mate
    Hmm. A fantasist loser with lofty ambitions and being a genuine soul are not mutually exclusive, but, nevertheless, one might question why someone with a genuine soul has nobody to turn to for conversation, friendship, or as a soul mate- perhaps being painfully shy, or maybe in addition, being creepy and prone to violent outbursts.
    The film is more overt than the book in hinting at Jake being a
    peeping Tom; the book just has the janitor apparently standing staring at the two getting in on in the car outside the school; the film though has a flashing image of the janitor spying through a peep-hole, unconnected with the scene
    . Jakes's subsequent reaction indicates guilt- and self-loathing, but it's never clear if it's based on anything beyond this in the film. However, the very end of the book is far more indicative of something sinister going on (and therefore having gone on).


  • Options
    #34
    johnny_ultimate
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,200 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    My problem with the book's ending is that I feel it settles
    into a slightly clichéd, slightly icky 'he did a violent thing because he was mentally ill' territory
    . Now, it's messier and a tad more nuanced than that in action, but that was the general gist I came away with and it was disappointing after what came before.

    The film is IMO sadder and more melancholic.
    The final shot of the snow covered car, against a rare burst of sunlight (I think only the opening and closing scenes are set during the day?), is an eerie, sombre moment to end on - it's fair to say our janitor probably didn't have a happy ending, but it's less gratuitous and exploitative than it is in Reid's book. There's also the scene of the janitor naked, being led down the corridor - a striking image (not just because of the animated pig in the mix), but something I felt powerfully underscored the idea of this fragile, sad, exposed elderly man. It is also a film about how cinema as a whole portrays mental illness - the Pauline Kael / Woman Under the Influence monologue to me very much centres that angle very overtly.
    Kaufman has always been a master of mood - mixing the absurd with the poignant; the surreal with the familiar. In some ways, the ride here - with all its tonal diversions and tangents - is as important as the destination. There's a Rorschach like quality to the film, particularly in the house scenes. As said, even if it wasn't Kaufman's ultimate intent, I loved how the film played (to me, anyway) as a deconstruction of how identity and personality are formed, and the messy way we perceive those around us.

    The dude's a funny bastard as well, which doesn't hurt :) As much as I laughed the punchline at the end of the rom-com parody, I do agree with the review I read that that scene is also quite poignant in its way - I don't think Kaufman is judging the character for enjoying that piece of ridiculous entertainment. Even at his most caustic, there's always a sense of humanity in Kaufman's work that elevates it beyond being a mere conceptual or intellectual exercise.


  • Options
    #35
    deaglan1
    Registered Users Posts: 236 ✭✭deaglan1


    Kerplunk and CD Galwegian: Thank you for those insights. maybe I should go back and look at it again as you raise some interesting points. I may have to shift to the fence but
    I feel that any guy who has nursed his parents cannot be that bad. His outburst at the table may indeed suggest a sense of superiority but could equally represent pent up frustration of the stifling home environment. His father not looking at him could suggest his paternal disappointment of the son he has rather than the son he had hoped for maybe? The scratch marks are odd but does that mean they hide something sinister about Jake or could it be equally applied to his father or to his mother? The lingering stare - is it a lingering stare or just a stare at the set when there is very little else to look at in the hall; yes, he could be fantasizing innocently of his lost amour which the young student converts into a personal sense of unease at being watched by an old man. The bruised girl at the ice cream parlor - OK, I do not get that and it is the most compelling suggestion of a sinister element in his character along with her warning to the idealized girlfriend - but if this type of action had taken place at the school sometime int he past, would he still be employed there? The ballet sequence could be interpreted as the real Jake, the janitor, being responsible for the "killing" of the young Jake and his potential happiness - the role of being a lowly janitor has destroyed more lofty ambitions and a better chance of meeting his ideal partner? The janitor has a scar - OK that is not good, but again is it self harm inflicted by frustration at the life lived - it is inflicted on himself, not anyone else - still, not good but perhaps there is mental illness inherited from his mother? The peeping Tom bit - not good, but he himself feels the shame and guilt by his own internal characters informing him by their repulsion.
    OK, I better go and watch it again!!!


  • Options
    #36
    Sardonicat
    Registered Users Posts: 12,379 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    So, am I to take it that unless you have read the book upon which this film is based it doesn't make any sense whatsoever? Because I watched the whole thing and think it's a heap of unpenetrable sh1t. I don't want to have to read the book to even grasp the gist of the film. Who the hell wants to watch something they have no way into? Oh hell yeah, it was phenomenally pretentious


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    kerplun k
    Registered Users Posts: 2,385 ✭✭✭kerplun k


    I wouldn’t say that. I didn’t even know it was based on a book and figured out the “twist”. It wasn’t until it was over and was left to ruminate on it for a bit that I pieced it together. Well my take on it anyway.

    Unfortunately the ending was a bit chaotic. Kaufman is throwing a lot at the audience to unpack. I think in the hands of a more skilled director, it could have been handled better. But still, I thought it was a valiant effort from a guy who has just made his second attempt at at directing a live action.

    I’d actually put this down as one of my favourite films this year.


  • Options
    #38
    cdgalwegian
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    Postmodern writer/directors like Tarantino and Nolan, like all artists (and all people), tend to have their own distinctive way of looking at things, but their expression of this tend towards the subvertive- normally of the fractured narrative timeline, and often of identity and memory (hence the unreliable narrator). Kaufman has all that here, but veers towads absurdism and exisitentialism, prevalent in much of his films, making it a harder watch than the postmodern 'blockbusters' (except the recent Tenet, in a colder techincal way). If Nolan wants to increasingly make you work at engaging in his films as an immersive experience, and work things out at the same time, that's his version of entertaining you. Kaufman's more 'human' version, brought to the fore here (based on the novel of course), is to force us to look at how we judge people: to examine ourselves, as we judge Jake. This is uncomfortable- like many of the scenes in the film- which I think is his point.
    Tarantino and Nolan are among my favourite directors, but Kaufman is now right up there with this film. Haunting melancolia doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement for a film, but it is when it is executed like this.


  • Options
    #39
    limnam
    Registered Users Posts: 9,152 ✭✭✭limnam


    Sardonicat wrote: »
    So, am I to take it that unless you have read the book upon which this film is based it doesn't make any sense whatsoever? Because I watched the whole thing and think it's a heap of unpenetrable sh1t. I don't want to have to read the book to even grasp the gist of the film. Who the hell wants to watch something they have no way into? Oh hell yeah, it was phenomenally pretentious


    I don't think reading the book would change much.


    It's just a pretty bad film and all the reading of all the books won't change that IMO.


    If you have to read a book to get a film then something wasn't done right


    Like people that tell you read the 101 books before reading Ulysses :pac:


  • Options
    #40
    Sardonicat
    Registered Users Posts: 12,379 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    kerplun k wrote: »
    I wouldn’t say that. I didn’t even know it was based on a book and figured out the “twist”. It wasn’t until it was over and was left to ruminate on it for a bit that I pieced it together. Well my take on it anyway.

    Unfortunately the ending was a bit chaotic. Kaufman is throwing a lot at the audience to unpack. I think in the hands of a more skilled director, it could have been handled better. But still, I thought it was a valiant effort from a guy who has just made his second attempt at at directing a live action.

    I’d actually put this down as one of my favourite films this year.

    There was a twist? Congratulations for figuring it out. How do you know you've figured out a twist and not just putting your own interpretation on random,weird events that don't actually mean anything?


  • Options
    #41
    Sardonicat
    Registered Users Posts: 12,379 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    cdgalwegian wrote: »
    Postmodern writer/directors like Tarantino and Nolan, like all artists (and all people), tend to have their own distinctive way of looking at things, but their expression of this tend towards the subvertive- normally of the fractured narrative timeline, and often of identity and memory (hence the unreliable narrator). Kaufman has all that here, but veers towads absurdism and exisitentialism, prevalent in much of his films, making it a harder watch than the postmodern 'blockbusters' (except the recent Tenet, in a colder techincal way). If Nolan wants to increasingly make you work at engaging in his films as an immersive experience, and work things out at the same time, that's his version of entertaining you. Kaufman's more 'human' version, brought to the fore here (based on the novel of course), is to force us to look at how we judge people: to examine ourselves, as we judge Jake. This is uncomfortable- like many of the scenes in the film- which I think is his point.
    Tarantino and Nolan are among my favourite directors, but Kaufman is now right up there with this film. Haunting melancolia doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement for a film, but it is when it is executed like this.

    How do you know what Kaufman"s trying to do or say? It's completely impenetrable and can be interpreted to mean absolutely anything or nothing at all. You have no way of knowing if you understood it correctly or not, unless Kaufman tells us. If it turns out your particular interpretation is correct do you get a prize or something?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Beersmith
    Registered Users Posts: 1,395 ✭✭✭Beersmith


    Whats the whole deal with everyone having to know the exact meaning? Its OK to interpret art differently and maybe that was the goal. Even if not the goal you still can enjoy it!

    I really like it except the end as I was completely lost then.

    I loved the acting, the camera angles, the tension and some of the more interesting locations.

    Was I quite lost on first viewing, yes I was, having read a little about the interpretation and rewatched it I enjoyed it all the more.


  • Options
    #43
    Sardonicat
    Registered Users Posts: 12,379 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    Beersmith wrote: »
    Whats the whole deal with everyone having to know the exact meaning? Its OK to interpret art differently and maybe that was the goal. Even if not the goal you still can enjoy it!

    I really like it except the end as I was completely lost then.

    I loved the acting, the camera angles, the tension and some of the more interesting locations.

    Was I quite lost on first viewing, yes I was, having read a little about the interpretation and rewatched it I enjoyed it all the more.
    I have no problem not knowing the exact meaning but I do have a problem with something that doesn't make any sense at all. I enjoyed the acting, especially Collette who is just so compelling, the visual impact, the tension. All of those things were fantastic. I just don't have the foggiest what the film was about. Well, I do now I've read some of the spoilered posts on here. And that just annoys me. Apparently you need some insider knowledge to appreciate what has been achieved here. To me, that's just a vanity projet.


  • Options
    #44
    kerplun k
    Registered Users Posts: 2,385 ✭✭✭kerplun k


    Sardonicat wrote: »
    There was a twist? Congratulations for figuring it out. How do you know you've figured out a twist and not just putting your own interpretation on random,weird events that don't actually mean anything?

    I don't :)


  • Options
    #45
    cdgalwegian
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    limnam wrote: »
    I don't think reading the book would change much.


    It's just a pretty bad film and all the reading of all the books won't change that IMO.


    If you have to read a book to get a film then something wasn't done right


    Like people that tell you read the 101 books before reading Ulysses :pac:

    https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/im-thinking-of-ending-things-book-and-film-differences/


  • Options
    #46
    limnam
    Registered Users Posts: 9,152 ✭✭✭limnam


    cdgalwegian wrote: »
    https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/im-thinking-of-ending-things-book-and-film-differences/

    Not sure what this has to do with my point.


  • Options
    #47
    cdgalwegian
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    limnam wrote: »
    Not sure what this has to do with my point.
    Your main point...
    limnam wrote: »
    I don't think reading the book would change much.
    ...was quite clear in sub-heading of the piece:
    "Iain Reid’s novel I’m Thinking Of Ending Things and Charlie Kaufman’s movie adaptation have significant differences and the two work together gloriously."

    I'm not sure how you could have missed that, or misinterpreted it.


  • Options
    #48
    kerplun k
    Registered Users Posts: 2,385 ✭✭✭kerplun k


    Upon re watching, I'm back on the fence regarding Jake being anything more than an incel.

    Thinking back on the dance scene, I think this is nothing more than the janitor killing off his fantasy. I think the ballet sequence is the life that Jake imagined and wanted, and what could have been if he had the courage to approach the woman at the bar. The Janitor stabs the dancer killing him and therefore shattering his allusions.

    I think the evidence is inconclusive as to whether there's something more nefarious going on with Jake, and I'm thinking Kaufman deliberately left this ambiguous.


  • Options
    #49
    limnam
    Registered Users Posts: 9,152 ✭✭✭limnam


    cdgalwegian wrote: »
    Your main point...

    ...was quite clear in sub-heading of the piece:
    "Iain Reid’s novel I’m Thinking Of Ending Things and Charlie Kaufman’s movie adaptation have significant differences and the two work together gloriously."

    I'm not sure how you could have missed that, or misinterpreted it.


    My point is the film is tripe and no reading of any books would change my opinion.


    You linked to some blog post explaining the film.


    I'm not sure how it's related to my opinion on the film been tripe ? :)


  • Options
    #50
    cdgalwegian
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    limnam wrote: »
    My point is the film is tripe and no reading of any books would change my opinion.


    You linked to some blog post explaining the film.


    I'm not sure how it's related to my opinion on the film been tripe ? :)

    Yeah, there were different points being made- it looks like i assumed a different main point (though it did far more than just give an explanation). If that's the case, no amount of reference, views, context or aids are gonna make any difference to your view that it's a pile of dung; to each their own.

    As an aside, and talking about the main reason i had wanted to watch the film, I read somewhere that Brie Larson was all set to start filming Jessie Buckley's role, and Jessie Buckley stepped in shortly before shooting on set began. Some achievement, considering her performance.


  • Options
    #51
    cdgalwegian
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    MODS:
    Just realized the link in my post #45 contains major spoilers. As a lot of the posts need lots of greyed out areas anyway, at this stage (for a niche film) can a 'Spoilers' or 'Spoilers from post #45' tag be inserted?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    kerplun k
    Registered Users Posts: 2,385 ✭✭✭kerplun k


    I done the same in my last post. I’d say we’re good to freely discuss. Sure the spoilers would probably benefit some people before watching it :)


  • Options
    #53
    Hallaz
    Registered Users Posts: 205 ✭✭Hallaz


    I think I liked it but not sure!
    Some moments had my full attention, other scenes i phased out on.
    After credits rolled vehicle was still trying to start?

    Really just came on to say i thought i really enjoyed the performance Jessie Buckley. I had no idea who she was or that she was Irish. This sort of performance encourages me to seek out her other work, a job well done on her part.

    Going to watch Bill and Ted movie to wind down to a normal level now.


  • Options
    #54
    AllForIt
    Registered Users Posts: 8,317 ✭✭✭AllForIt


    What I liked:

    The acting was very good especially from the two main protagonists. That wan from Chernobyl and the new Philip Seymour Hoffman. Hope to see more big roles from them soon.
    I was quite captivated by it especially the first half. I really enjoyed the extended car journey dialogue scenes that I found somewhat hypnotic.
    It quickly became apparent that this is a 'what the hell is going on movie' and I enjoyed tying to pick up clues from the dialogue.
    It was quite funny at times and found myself laughing out loud.


    What I didn't like:

    It was too long. Particularly some of the scenes in the final 1/4 were too long.
    I guessed correctly the final outcome at least 30mins before the end. Which left me wondering for the remainder how he was going to do it. I do think thought 'freezing to death' was mentioned somewhere along the line. From that point onward I'd somewhat lost interest. I was hoping I was wrong, that I was 'fooled' but no. As a result I found myself not being particularly interested in trying to figure out exactly what happened in his younger life and it all seemed a bit too sad which wasn't the tone of the first half.

    Enjoyed it overall. Not brilliant but very good.


  • Options
    #55
    cdgalwegian
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    Hallaz wrote: »
    Really just came on to say i thought i really enjoyed the performance Jessie Buckley. I had no idea who she was or that she was Irish. This sort of performance encourages me to seek out her other work, a job well done on her part.
    She was the main reason I had wanted to watch the film in the first place, and really enjoyed her performance. Hopefully she'll be better recognised with this (and has a good agent).


  • Options
    #56
    cdgalwegian
    Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    Jessie Buckley on her role, and other bits'n'bobs.

    https://www.indiewire.com/2020/09/jessie-buckley-im-thinking-of-ending-things-interview-1234587055/


  • Options
    #57
    auspicious
    Registered Users Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭auspicious


    I liked it. Very quirky. I hadn't a clue what it was about before watching and was pleasantly surprised. All very dreamlike until the aha moment towards the end. Saying that, my aha was wrong. I thought it was her. But it wasn't. Not going to rewatch but worth the watch.


  • Options
    #58
    Wombatman
    Registered Users Posts: 3,337 ✭✭✭Wombatman


    Really liked it too. Something hypnotic or maybe therapeutic about it. Like taking a beautiful and complex Rorschach test. Wangles you into a bit of uncomfortable introspection. Original and very clever.

    8.5/10


  • Options
    #59
    tastyt
    Registered Users Posts: 2,017 ✭✭✭tastyt


    What an absolute load of bollocks .


  • Options
    #60
    limnam
    Registered Users Posts: 9,152 ✭✭✭limnam


    tastyt wrote: »
    What an absolute load of bollocks .


    It's rare a single sentence sums up a film so beautifully. :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    begbysback
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,910 ✭✭✭begbysback


    Looks really interesting, had been searching through Netflix for watchable stuff lately but completely missed this.

    Looks from the trailer that you may need to bring your brain along for this one, so probably not suitable for the gogglebox regulars.


Advertisement