Sucker Punch: worst movie of the year, or just not the movie you signed up for?

[JoshL]

Moving this discussion from the movie-rating thread, since it was getting off-topic. Again, I love discussing movies with those who disagree with me (which, with this film, is most people, especially Nick!) and the more I've thought about this movie, the better I thought it was.

Spoiler-heavy discussion ahead, so if you haven't seen it, be warned (though given the general reception of it, I can understand not caring if there are spoilers!)

You've got it all wrong I'm afraid Josh.

Sucker Punch has nothing to do with disassociation and rape. Perhaps, if they used that basic storyline, but it was directed by Gaspar Noe then there'd be some merit to that suggestion, but the film is directed by Zach Snyder. Where 300 was a shameless attempt to stir up dormant homoeroticism and get squads of Rugby players who shower together to go to the pictures, Sucker Punch is the same thing just with scantily clad girls.

So the point of the movie should be judged by the director, not the content? Had Noe done it, it certainly would have been far more graphic, and a lot less subtle. The point of fairy tales (and many fantasy stories, by extension, but that's another lit-theory conversation) is to take a moral lesson and wrap it in an exciting adventure. I disagree that 300 was all about homoeroticism, though it's certainly there for those who want it. I thought it was more an experiment to recreate the look of a comic book in film (heavy-handed slow motion, pacing it as you would linger on the artwork, making the live actors look less realistic so the CGI blends in better). Sort of a proof-of-concept as a marketable film (which worked; it did well and he was allowed to spend TONS of money on Watchmen, which is decidedly more of a niche appeal project). Anyway, where are you getting that was Snyder's intention? I didn't leap to any conclusions; everything is right there in the film.

The biggest question Snyder faced during pre-production was how to get them half naked. It was easy with topless warrior men but women don't fight as much, and don't fight topless. So it has to be an 'escape' movie but how can he make such a crass and eroticized escape movie? Well, he can't. So he instead scrambles together the vague and slightly perverted images he has in his mind of girls holding samurai swords and machine guns and cobbles that into a screenplay.

Again, what are you basing this on? Yes, Snyder did 300 and the Dawn of the Dead remake (which I didn't like at all, but the original is one of my favorites. Replacing tension with explosions wasn't the best decision, I thought). He also did Watchmen, which we could argue about how well he did it, but it is a complex book. I feel that he "got it", and that is far from, as you say, a crass and eroticized escape movie. 300 is based on a comic too, by the by, albeit a far less complex one than even the film version.

I was expecting what you were; a basic excuse-plot fantasy action film. I was expecting short skirts and dragons (and, hey, not disappointed there). But it wasn't presented in a "feel good" sort of way. The action breaks away (literal escapism here) from a really horrific and uncomfortable story. My comment in the other thread is that I think in some cases, that dissonance is part of what a lot of the audiences dislike (no one can argue that the film is generally poorly received).

You should mistake the mental asylum/brothel setting for anything more meaningful. Short of dumping Victoria's Secreet angels on a desert island it's hard to get girls naked and fighting each other. Nobody in modern film has done as little for gender equality as Zach Snyder.

Why not? It is presented that way in the movie. To wit:
1) Girl's stepfather attempts to assault (implied rape) her, then her younger sister, seeking to control them, and thus the money they've inherited (sociologially, rape is more about power and control than it is about sex).
2) Girl accidentally kills sister, providing stepfather with a) one less girl to control and b) an easier method of taking care of the other.
3) Girl is taken to the asylum, where she is given to the care of one who flat out says the plan is to abuse her.
4) At this point, the girl's mind breaks. At which point she starts seeing the place where she is held against her will as a brothel.
5) Even this proves to much to face, so instead of her being raped in Brotheland, she is forced to dance. At which point she goes someplace else. Dancing == sex is a very common metaphor, and "going someplace else" is a likewise similar description of dissociation due to trauma (for example, rape).

With the possible exception of point five, this isn't me drawing metaphor out of, say, the bunny face on the mech. This is all in the movie, and the metaphor is not very complex. Why then, other than disliking the movie, shouldn't one see meaning in this?

AND... this isn't even my problem with the film. To quote my own review of it, I had assumed it would be 300 for heterosexuals. Given that I'm the creator of the concept Gash (further details available via the Super Summer Contest) I actually have no problem with getting attractive people to undress onscreen. But this film was just so technically and story wise inept that it makes the dubious moral politics all the more difficult to ignore.

...which is the point that I was making. You went in expecting Film Type A and got Type B. More specifically, you went in expecting an exploitation film, and got a film about people being exploited (which then, I believe intentionally so), colors your perception of the action you were looking to enjoy in Type A.

Now, again, the movie could have been better. I agree that the storytelling was clumsy. In particular, it was meant to be ambiguous as to whether any of the girls existed, or were reflections of the main character's personality (or, and most likely, her on personality projected on the faces of people in the asylum). Like any magical realist story, it provides an "out" with a throwaway line about her helping a prisoner escape, though the color palatte, character and road sign all indicate that the girl getting on the bus is doing so in the brotheland projection.

It's no Brazil, though I think it has aspirations to be so. Taking that as a parallel, Brazil used the central commentary on the absurdities of bureaucracy to tell the tale of fantasy leading to dissociation. If Sucker Punch did the same, however, it would have to show more of the abuse and maltreatement in the asylum, which while making the message more clear, would definitely push it into Noe territory.

While I can certainly understand not liking this movie (everyone has different tastes), I'm not sure I understand why you so vehemently dislike it. I find that interesting, as I find debate about any movie interesting. Anyone else can feel free to chime in as well, there are no wrong opinions!

 

[NickClapper]

Zach Snyder has control of my keyboard.

I have deleted lengthy replies twice.

1.) Accidentally closed my tab when trying to open a new one to investigate a point I was proving.

2.) Accidentally hit backspace which took me on to the IT homepage.

Can you trust a director who, twice, made me delete my well argued responses to a defence of his toilet mess?

 

[TheNoob]

I'll watch it right now, and report back my findings. I haven't read any spoilers, I just read the warning.

 

[Lucky Hardwood]

I went in (yes, I actually went and saw it in a theater) with very low expectations. I was pleasantly surprised. I enjoyed the graphic novelesque visual style. I understand the story and see it on a deeper level. To me, the film had several subtle layers of story and perception.

 

[Cracker Funk]

Why not? It is presented that way in the movie. To wit:
1) Girl's stepfather attempts to assault (implied rape) her, then her younger sister, seeking to control them, and thus the money they've inherited (sociologially, rape is more about power and control than it is about sex).
2) Girl accidentally kills sister, providing stepfather with a) one less girl to control and b) an easier method of taking care of the other.
3) Girl is taken to the asylum, where she is given to the care of one who flat out says the plan is to abuse her.
4) At this point, the girl's mind breaks. At which point she starts seeing the place where she is held against her will as a brothel.
5) Even this proves to much to face, so instead of her being raped in Brotheland, she is forced to dance. At which point she goes someplace else. Dancing == sex is a very common metaphor, and "going someplace else" is a likewise similar description of dissociation due to trauma (for example, rape).

I'm sorry, JoshL, but you got 3-5 wrong. After reading your post, I had to wikipedia it, to see if I'd missed anything, and was shocked to learn that so many other people share your same interpretation of the story. It seems a great deal of people have missed the boat, on this one.

1. I'll agree, there is definitely a strong implication that there is a history of rape, between stepfather and her, and that is most likely what he intended to do to (first her, then) little sister in the opening scene.

2. Accidental death of little-sis gives stepfather exactly what he wants -- a means to controling the inheritance.

3. No, he never says he is going to abuse her. He says he is going to lobotomize her. That is simply stepfather's plan to gain control of his deceased wife's estate.

4. You skipped over something rather important. In-between the negotiation between stepfather and bad-guy, and the transition to the brothel, there is a rather telling musical montage, ending in her lobotomization. This montage shows some of her real-life experiences in the mental institution, before she gets a nail in her brain. No, her brain did not ever "break". She experienced all of it, in it's entirety, and then the vast majority of the movie is a flashback. And the flashback that we watch is her delusion (important distinction between "delusion" and "fantasy"). She actually is mentally ill.

5. I see absolutely no evidence that the dances were supposed to be analogous to rape. Yeah, at the end of the movie, it's implied that the guards have been abusing the patients, but that doesn't mean that the dances were actually rapes.

On the contrary, remember that the negotiations between stepfather and bad-guy take place in what they call "the theater". The patients have a free space to socialize, in front of a stage, where their therapists leads them, one at a time, through a type of therapy in which they are supposed to act out their feelings of guilt, trauma, etc. In the real world, the therapist plays music for them to dance to, on a stage. The bad-guy guard even comments that sometimes it's fun to watch their "performances".

So, when we see her in delusional brothel world, when the therapist plays music and she dances, in the real world she is actually dancing, on stage, in "the theater", and people are watching. There is no symbolism going on here. Sometimes a dance is just a dance (same can be said of her seduction of the cook -- in the real world, she was only dancing).

Here is my problem with the movie -- it is completely bereft of any tension, save for the very effective opening. The opening scene works very well for me. It's gripping, nightmarish, and full of drama. The first scenes in the mental institution are also very good. At this point, we fear for our heroine; she is in serious peril.

Everything falls apart, as soon as we enter her delusional brothel world. In all of the therapeutic dance-sessions, she enters a fantasy world (again, important distinction between "fantasy" and "delusion"), where she is in control (as instructed by her therapist). This gives Snyder a good excuse to put these scantily-clad ladies in tripadelic worlds where they fight zombie-nazis and giant demon samurai, all in slow-motion.

The problem is that each of these action sequences is purely fantasy, and our heroine is controlling the fantasy. Uhh, that's boring. That means that nobody is in any actual danger, so you've effectively lowered the stakes so much that none of it matters. These action sequences are nothing more than a vehicle for trippy, slo-mo, CGI extravaganza. But nothing is on the line. My brain hits the snooze button.

Escape movies are supposed to be exciting. But by replacing all the real world (or, at least delusional world) scenarios with pure fantasy, you've sapped all the energy out of the escape.

Furthermore, the acting and writing are just all-around piss-poor. I couldn't connect with any of these characters, no matter which world they were in. Except for in that brilliant opening scene. Too bad the rest of the movie couldn't maintain such an emotional intensity.

I did, however, walk out of this movie with a greater appreciation of Snyder's visual style. I can't wait to see what he does with "Superman"!

 

[TheArtist]

I hate it when something happens offscreen, when all the characters are like "WAAAW, THAT'S AMAZING", and you as a spectator, you just can't see it.

I feel like the guys behind the movie didn't know how to make a dance that'll look mesmerizing so they just put action instead.

 

[rayw]

Umm... you guys know everything in the story is a delusion of Sweet Pea's, right?
Who may or may not have even escaped the mental institution she may or may not even be in.

Think of this as being a variant of Inception's dreams within dreams within dreams, which is actually a variant of Total Recall, are your memories really experiences if you remember them?, which is based off of PKD's "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale"

And OMG! They're remaking Total Recall for $200M. (Please tell me that's a marketing ploy).

Great. Maybe we can look forward to a remake of Sucker Punch in another two decades!
Yippee skippee.

 

[Sucramdoow]

I don't think it's the worst movie of the year. I've seen worse.

But it was bereft of any poignant message (if it was trying to achieve one.) The action outweighed everything else, including character development. I just didn't care for anyone.

Though it did have a pretty visual flair to it. That is to be expected from Snyder though. He needs to include some... heart to it. Much like his origin sequence for Doctor Manhattan in Watchmen.

 

[The Mud Doctor]

I was shocked at how utterly terrible Sucker Punch was. It was a loud, sexist, incoherent piece of garbage. In my opinion anyway.

 

[Nate North]

I agree with cracker, having the bulk of the film's major scenes take place in a dream state with no effect on the actual plot made this the shallowest theatrical experience of the year. None of it really worked. An attempt to totally sell out, that gave new meaning to the word soulless.

Just a terrible concept from the beginning.

 

[PaulGriffith]

It was exceptionally bad. I kept wanting to leave but telling myself "surely it redeems itself in the end" but... no.

Granted I haven't seen every movie ever, but I see most theater releases and this was my worst experience in the past few years.

 

[rockerrockstar]

I guess the one thing they did right was the trailer. I have not see the movie but the Trailer looks good.

 

[Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC]

With film and fiction in general, you need to have an ability to read between the lines of what did the story teller have in mind with their work.

Zack Snuder recently lost a female relative who he dedicated the movie in memory of.

I have to assume he lost his mother or grandmother.

If anyone has ever had an elderly parent in a nursing home who was losing their wits, they can relate to Sucker Punch where that relative loses touch with the world around them and fantasizes being back in their adventerous youth. They no longer know the people around them.

My mother confused me with her brother with the same first name I have and believe she was with her brother on a military base in their youth. She no longer recognized me as her son.

Sucker Punch is just an abstract film about someone's final days in a nursing home before their death when they are literally losing their minds.

 

[TheBuck]

I really liked the film and think it was well done. It had something almost every movie does not and that is a msg about abuse and standing up to it. It also says chicks have more power than just what that Prince song "Pussy Control" is about.

 

[JoshL]

Sure, Nick, Zack Snyder ate your homework Though that excuse *could* explain the majority of Uwe Boll films... Seriously, though, I can't count the number of times I've done exactly that and wiped a huge post (even worse when I used to blog on a regular basis).

3. No, he never says he is going to abuse her. He says he is going to lobotomize her. That is simply stepfather's plan to gain control of his deceased wife's estate.

I'll take your word and grant that I am wrong here (I did only see the film once). The lobotomy is definitely the stepfather's plan. I thought I recalled a line of dialogue from the orderly that indicated further abuse was HIS plan (and that he had done it many times before). I could be wrong though. Either way, at this point her perspective is changed.

4. You skipped over something rather important. In-between the negotiation between stepfather and bad-guy, and the transition to the brothel, there is a rather telling musical montage, ending in her lobotomization. This montage shows some of her real-life experiences in the mental institution, before she gets a nail in her brain. No, her brain did not ever "break". She experienced all of it, in it's entirety, and then the vast majority of the movie is a flashback. And the flashback that we watch is her delusion (important distinction between "delusion" and "fantasy").

We are not really disagreeing at this point, though you think we are. The movie shows her, in the hospital leading up to the lobotomy. Then it flashes back, and presents how SHE saw her experiences. It is unclear as to what was the straw that broke the camel's back, so to speak, but from the flashback, we can take it from when she got to the hospital.

She actually is mentally ill.

...which was ENTIRELY my point. Dissociation is not a healthy reaction, and what I meant by her mind "breaking". When someone is suffering a dissociative disorder or breakdown, memory gets futzed with. As you said, the difference between delusion and fantasy, and why I never used the word fantasy to describe brotheland. You could argue that the otherworlds are more of a fantasy; again, "going somewhere else". Again, I think we are actually agreeing on this point, just using different words.

5. I see absolutely no evidence that the dances were supposed to be analogous to rape. Yeah, at the end of the movie, it's implied that the guards have been abusing the patients, but that doesn't mean that the dances were actually rapes.

As I said, point 5 was my biggest leap to metaphor. A leads to B leads to C. If A and C, B is implied, though not explicitly stated. As you said, it's implied that the guards abuse the patients. As Nick said, this is not a Gaspar Noe film, so we don't need to see it. If the film is, as you say, delusions, they are delusions that are informed by her surroundings. She sees a brothel instead of, say, a prison. Why? Either it's her brain re-interpreting what's happening, and therefore metaphor (which does not, of course, imply EVERYTHING is metaphor, but does add weight to it), or as Nick suggests, it's just an excuse to get girls in corsets. I believe there is evidence for metaphor.

On the contrary, remember that the negotiations between stepfather and bad-guy take place in what they call "the theater". The patients have a free space to socialize, in front of a stage, where their therapists leads them, one at a time, through a type of therapy in which they are supposed to act out their feelings of guilt, trauma, etc. In the real world, the therapist plays music for them to dance to, on a stage. The bad-guy guard even comments that sometimes it's fun to watch their "performances".

So, when we see her in delusional brothel world, when the therapist plays music and she dances, in the real world she is actually dancing, on stage, in "the theater", and people are watching. There is no symbolism going on here. Sometimes a dance is just a dance (same can be said of her seduction of the cook -- in the real world, she was only dancing).

Agreed, and the first dance in brotheland, where she is being instructed on how to dance by the therapist/madame is definitely just that (being taught to control her world, and note that in that fantasy, there is no one but herself). In the real world, instead of learning to deal with her issues, she's learning to detatch herself from them (making that form of therapy dubious at best). Again, not good, healthy or sane. Again, point 5 was definitely a leap to metaphor and commonly used symbols, but based on the metaphors already being drawn. In brotheland, the customers watch girls dance, and then go have sex with them. In the asylum, the guards watch girls dance...

The problem is that each of these action sequences is purely fantasy, and our heroine is controlling the fantasy. Uhh, that's boring. That means that nobody is in any actual danger, so you've effectively lowered the stakes so much that none of it matters. These action sequences are nothing more than a vehicle for trippy, slo-mo, CGI extravaganza. But nothing is on the line. My brain hits the snooze button.

I see what you're saying, but I don't necessarily agree. If that were truely the case, would she have "lost" the train scenario? As someone really into folklore/fairy tales, I feel the journey is often more important than the destination. Take Dead Man (a much better film, by all accounts). Johnny Depp's character is essentially killed in the first 15 minutes of the movie. So therefore, on a superficial level, absolutely nothing he does matters. However, it's one of my favorite films ever. I get that type of story isn't for everyone, and more a matter of personal preference/perspective.

Furthermore, the acting and writing are just all-around piss-poor. I couldn't connect with any of these characters, no matter which world they were in. Except for in that brilliant opening scene. Too bad the rest of the movie couldn't maintain such an emotional intensity.

Fair enough, and a good reason to not like the film! I didn't think it was distractingly bad, but again, I liked it more as I thought about it more, very much indicating that I didn't immediately connect with it, like you did.

As for the movie being Sweet Pea's delusions (another complaint that I had about the film; the names), I don't buy it. There are only two pieces of evidence for that; the narration and showing her getting on the bus, both of which are equally likely if Sweet Pea is a manifestation of Baby Doll's protective instincts towards her sister, and the guilt she feels for having killed her (or, if you like, said feelings projected on a fellow inmate). We never see Sweet Pea outside of brotheland (other than an appearance when she first gets to the asylum, if I recall), but we DO see Baby Doll interact with all levels of perception. That said, I think this was one of the points that Snyder wanted to be ambiguous, so therefore open to debate.

 

[JoshL]

With film and fiction in general, you need to have an ability to read between the lines of what did the story teller have in mind with their work.

Zack Snuder recently lost a female relative who he dedicated the movie in memory of.

I have to assume he lost his mother or grandmother.

I didn't notice the dedication. If it was an elderly relative, it makes sense that he'd be thinking about that kind of disconnect with reality for a while.

And sorry for your loss as well. That's not easy to go through.

 

[NickClapper]

I'm sorry but I can think of plenty of films about abuse, female empowerment, senility and insanity...etc that don't do so in such a crassly sexualised, terribly acted, abysmally written and *I don't even have an adjective to represent hod* directed way.

I thought it would be fun (rather than saying anything new or interesting) to pull up the review I wrote as a gut reaction to the film. My opinion has only lessened:

Did you think that 300 was excessively character driven? Did you find the plot of Avatar overly complicated? Did you think that the visual effects in Clash of the Titans were too subtle? Well, if so, you’ll find Sucker Punch to be the perfect movie. If not (like every single mentally tuned in human being) then you’ll find it to be a storytelling abhorrence on a level rarely witnessed in mainstream cinema. Put politely this movie doesn’t have a script and if it does have a script it should never have got past the first reader. Piling handfuls of glitter over a dog turd just means there’s more mess to clean up and boy does Zach Snyder have some mess on his hands.

I hoped that this film would basically be 300 for heterosexuals, a straightforward action adventure with astonishing visuals and very short skirts. Even the dismally discordant trailers didn’t totally alert me to the fact that this film turned out to be two hours of special effects that did not further the plot one iota. Baby Doll (played by Emily Browning) is sent to a mental asylum to the strains of Eurythmics and there she finds out that she’s going to be lobotomised. So far we’ve got a relatively coherent plot. At this point the asylum turns into a brothel, seemingly for no other reason than to strip the lead actresses down into corsets and garters. I’m not complaining, that was by far the best part of the film.

So how do we get ice palaces, robot ninjas, World War One and a bomb on a train (sorry Source Code)? Well, apparently that’s where Zach Snyder’s imagination runs to. Sure, there are some references to manga that may appeal to diehard comic book fans but on the four different levels of Baby Doll’s subconscious we are presented with a visually similar landscape except for the fact that the girls are wearing different outfits, different things are exploding around them and different things are trying to kill them. Other than that it’s the same mind numbing experience on repeat. It’s like Groundhog Day with flame throwing marmots.

Perhaps the most painful part of the experience is how juvenile and unstructured the film is. Snyder is like a kid in a candy shop assuming that throwing Abbie Cornish, Vanessa Hudgens and Emily Browning in with samurai swords and rape fantasies will make for a good movie. Like the child who experiments with caramel sauce and mashed potatoes he should now be able to confirm that it’s not a hybrid that works. Restraint will never be his way but let’s hope that he learns from Sucker Punch and applies that wisdom to his Superman reboot. I would hate to see Amy Adams in hot pants (hate is not quite the right word) bouncing around as Superman lays waste to the earth and all the mutant pirates who are chasing him. If he fails to learn from his mistakes here he should be tied to a chair and forced to watch his abomination for the rest of eternity- basically the same experience I had in the cinema this afternoon.

You know it’s terrible when it has that many gorgeous girls and I still hate it. The world will end in much the same way as the ideas for Sucker Punch were conceived.

 

[The Mud Doctor]

Wow Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC, no offense, but that whole nursing home business is pretty far fetched. If this seemed like an appropriate film to dedicate to a dead relative, a dead female relative no less, than Zack Snyder needs his head examined. If he dedicated this to his mother or grandmother, I'm very worried (is he imagining granny in a skimpy bikini killing giant robot samurais?) He had tons of ideas, and yet no ideas. Watchmen was great, and I really enjoyed his Dawn of the Dead remake. But come on, there is no defense for this movie. In no way is this a movie about empowering women. That was just a phony cover for the total exploitation and sexism on display here. I'm all for politically incorrect content, but trying to pass this trash off as some feminist statement is such a load of bull.

 

[laurenvictoria]

i'm not one to judge if its good because i have Not watched it. But i watched the trailer with my friend and we couldn't stop laughing , it looked so dumb. BUT i havent watched the whole thing, i'm just judging it by the trailer. Plus thats just my opinion, im sure many people out there loved it.

 

[Cracker Funk]

Umm... you guys know everything in the story is a delusion of Sweet Pea's, right?
Who may or may not have even escaped the mental institution she may or may not even be in.

I'd have to disagree. I think it's pretty clear that both the beginning and end take place in the "real" world. Everything we see is as it actually happened. We see Baby Doll enter the institution, then eventually get lobotomized. We also see the aftermath of her escape plan, all the damage and destruction, and somebody mentions that she helped another patient escape. Again, all of this happens in the world that has been established as being real.

For me, the only thing that can really be called into question is Sweet Pea's ultimate outcome. What we see is that she gets on a bus, and rides off into the sunset. However, that scene is done with the brighter coloring that is used throughout all of the delusional brothel scenes. Also, the bus driver is the dude who looks like David Carradine, and his character is a little too all-knowing to seem "real". So, I interpret that final scene to be yet another delusion of Baby Doll's. We know that Sweet Pea has escaped, no question of that. But what happens, after she escapes?

Sucker Punch is just an abstract film about someone's final days in a nursing home before their death when they are literally losing their minds.

I'm sorry for your painful experience, but I think you're doing some serious projection. This movie isn't abstract, at all. It is clearly about a mental patient who creates her own delusional world to deal with her issues with sexual abuse, and escape from them.

I'll take your word and grant that I am wrong here (I did only see the film once). The lobotomy is definitely the stepfather's plan. I thought I recalled a line of dialogue from the orderly that indicated further abuse was HIS plan (and that he had done it many times before). I could be wrong though. Either way, at this point her perspective is changed.

Sorry, I should've mentioned it, last night. After reading your post, I had to re-watch that scene, and I believe I know the line you're referencing. He mentions "touching and beating". And he kinda mumbles a couple words, so it could be misinterpreted. But he doesn't say that he, or any of the guards are going to touch or beat. He is describing the girls' performances, as they act out their memories of the people who have touched and beat them, in the past.

We are not really disagreeing at this point, though you think we are. The movie shows her, in the hospital leading up to the lobotomy. Then it flashes back, and presents how SHE saw her experiences. It is unclear as to what was the straw that broke the camel's back, so to speak, but from the flashback, we can take it from when she got to the hospital.

Okay, we're pretty close to being on the same page. That mostly works for me.

...which was ENTIRELY my point. Dissociation is not a healthy reaction, and what I meant by her mind "breaking". When someone is suffering a dissociative disorder or breakdown, memory gets futzed with. As you said, the difference between delusion and fantasy, and why I never used the word fantasy to describe brotheland. You could argue that the otherworlds are more of a fantasy; again, "going somewhere else". Again, I think we are actually agreeing on this point, just using different words.

Somebody else used the word "fantasy", and I used it later (to describe the tripadelic action scenes), so I just wanted to make sure we all understood the distinction. Yep, you and I see this the same.

As I said, point 5 was my biggest leap to metaphor. A leads to B leads to C. If A and C, B is implied, though not explicitly stated. As you said, it's implied that the guards abuse the patients. As Nick said, this is not a Gaspar Noe film, so we don't need to see it. If the film is, as you say, delusions, they are delusions that are informed by her surroundings. She sees a brothel instead of, say, a prison. Why? Either it's her brain re-interpreting what's happening, and therefore metaphor (which does not, of course, imply EVERYTHING is metaphor, but does add weight to it), or as Nick suggests, it's just an excuse to get girls in corsets. I believe there is evidence for metaphor.

I suppose there could be some metaphor here, but if so, it's pretty damn abstract. Because they gave us a real-world explanation of what is actually happening when she dances (that she is actually just dancing, for therapy). They also gave us a delusional explanation of the reason for the dancing, that can be used to understand what is going on, in the real world. They dance to attract the men (delusional world - customers, real world - rapist guards), so that the "customers"/rapists will "pay for their services"/rape them, in their rooms.

Agreed, and the first dance in brotheland, where she is being instructed on how to dance by the therapist/madame is definitely just that (being taught to control her world, and note that in that fantasy, there is no one but herself). In the real world, instead of learning to deal with her issues, she's learning to detatch herself from them (making that form of therapy dubious at best). Again, not good, healthy or sane. Again, point 5 was definitely a leap to metaphor and commonly used symbols, but based on the metaphors already being drawn. In brotheland, the customers watch girls dance, and then go have sex with them. In the asylum, the guards watch girls dance...

...then go rape them. Right. So, we agree on what is happening. I'm just saying that I don't see the dance as a metaphor. I suppose it could be, but the only thing we know for sure, on this front -- when they dance in brotheland, they are actually dancing in the real world.

I see what you're saying, but I don't necessarily agree. If that were truely the case, would she have "lost" the train scenario? As someone really into folklore/fairy tales, I feel the journey is often more important than the destination. Take Dead Man (a much better film, by all accounts). Johnny Depp's character is essentially killed in the first 15 minutes of the movie. So therefore, on a superficial level, absolutely nothing he does matters. However, it's one of my favorite films ever. I get that type of story isn't for everyone, and more a matter of personal preference/perspective.

Well, the important thing to note about the train scenario is that the events of the real world effected how she would shape her fantasy world, not the other way around. So, that means that no matter what happens in these fantasy dreams she has, while dancing, the real world is still happening, completely unaffected. The tripadelic action sequences can have absolutely no outcome on the real world, so they're meaningless. Nothing more than a diversion from the real story. I'm all about storytelling, so anything that takes you away from the story, instead of advancing it, is problematic.