Amarcord
Buy This Italian Poster At AllPosters.com .

The definitive movie missskates database : venant à la suite de la précédente; "24" and more...

(or www.John Cassavetes Would Never Do That.Org.) -troisième mi-temps. Or "Partie Three", for our English speaking choums. "FilmInco.", ever more inKOheeeerant since Sep. 2000 -Return Of The Sequel, Loig 7 Allix Thi Van 2001 présente... Suite de la page d'avant (avant le reste de la page d'après) :

-More incoherences (misc.). (cf. archives)

-"CSI" : episode in which the couple kill their rich landlady and feeds her to the piranhas; so far so good -so to speak- ...but what about the bones ? Are we supposed to believe that the fish also ate the bones ?

"The West Wing" : oh aye, this tiny circle of wise-cracking non-politicians ruling the White House and in effect the worl, very credible...

-"Kill Bill Vol. One" special : After four years in a coma, "the bride" wakes up. But, hey, she doesn't seem to be much concerned about her husband's whereabouts... (Maybe she's seen him die; but the narration, at this stage, hasn't made this clear and therefore entitles us to this remark).
Logically, she should first enquire about him.She has lost strength in her legs -a nice touch clearly ripped off Couland's "Girlfriend In A Coma"- ...but not in her upper arms, which allows to fight to death two big men. Talking of which, how exactly does the rapist die ? It looks like she only bit his lip off...We are told that "the bride" spends thirteen hours in the oh-so amusingly named car trying to regain strength. And during all this time, nobody in the hospital notices that a nurse has gone missing, or notices two corpses in a room. Pretty cool. "Kill Bill Vol. 1" is a fantasy world in which killers go round slaughtering people with no interference from the pesky police.The plane at the end... is it held by strings. This is actually a nice -counting as kitsch- touch. "Kill Bill Vol. 1" : everyone knows that swords can be carried as passenger luggage aboard flights; ah, these crazy Japanese, eh... / Talking of, the film that is supposed to have inspired the Tarantino one, "Female Convict Scorpion : Jailhouse 41", when the heroine gets gangraped, her body doesn't move. The prisoners inside the van don't rock much either, and this despite the bumpy country road they're taking.

"V For Vendetta" : the London police authority does not remember the tube line underneath Westminster. Oh yes.

"Capricorn One" : can someone explain how the journalist guesses, just by discovering the film studio (in an unguarded army base part of a top secret operation, of course), that the three -SPOILER- astronauts are running around in the desert ? Eh ??

The problem with "Blade Runner" : in order to "retire", i.e. kill, these wonderful creatures the Replicants, the hero has to be hard-nosed and ruthless, in other words tone down his sympathy towards them, ...which is precisely what sets humans apart from their robotic doubles. This has led some conspiracy theorists -of which FilmInco is anything but a paid-up member (as if !?! Alas, we get our subsistence from restaurants bins leftovers -but that's another story)- to postulate that "Deckard" himself is a Replicant. Spooky, eh ?

"Fear Dot Com" : OK, so you are a young, attractive, blonde; some bloke in a funny accent turns up out of nowhere, filming you with a Camcorder, and declares that you are the actress he's been looking for all his life; he invites you to a secluded place this very evening for some serious shooting. Do you A) Tell him to go and take a long cold shower ? B) Of course, you go on your own, in a mini-skirt, without telling anyone. (Oh, the film's answer is B, actually.) "Curb Your Enthusiasm", episode "The Doll"; one of the plot's deciding factors is the problem with the toilet -or rather lack of- during the showing of the first episode at the producer's mansion; ...but then there is an abundance of toilets (male and female) at the second night ! The second showing does seem to take place at the same mansion, does it not...

"The Woodsman" (brilliant film) ...would a convicted paedophile be relocated / allowed to relocate opposite a school of all places ?! We don't think so.

"Bubba Ho-Tep" : where do they get that name ? Not exactly everyday vocabulary, is it... ? / For someone with a bad hip, "Elvis" moves surprisingly well at times (problem of continuity here) and why does Ossie Davis aka "JFK" need a wheelchair when he is perfectly nimble at times ?

"Naked Island". As the director himself remarked on the DVD commentary, it doesn't make much sense to water the plants in the heat of the day; farmers do it in the morning and in the evening, otherwise the water evaporates ! His crew and actors were the only ones working at that time ...as the islanders would be napping to escape the sun.

-"Urban Legends". The dean dies lying spiked on his back; but how did he turn ? Same problem : the youth tied to the toilet ...ends up kneeling the other way.

-"24" started so well... But after the, what, fourth episode, it's going all Pete Tong. (for massive chapter deconstructing the whole series, see here)

"The Sixth Sense" leaves us with a few questions. Now, as a film/spectacle, it works fine : the protagonist -SPOILER ALERT- makes his appearances at the right moments, and does not interfere with whom he is not supposed to; BUT... as far as the scenario is concerned, the edifice is a bit more wobbly. The film works on the basis on not just on the audience's cleverly manipulated credulity, but also -and more problematically- on the main character (the psychiatrist)'s suspension of disbelief. We are led to understand that, all along, he didn't know he was a -SPOILER- ghost in limbo. But how exactly did he get along throughout the story time-line ? Did he eat ? Change his clothes ? Drive a car , etc. ? He can't have , since we must assume that, in order to adhere to the plot, the ghost has been wandering, not mixing with anyone but the child. -And, all that time, he wouldn't have realised what was going on ?! Therefore we can only imagine that he just... appears every now and then, blanking out whenever not supposed to deal with the child, unawares of his own absence in-between. Hmm. In any case, one scene still stands out : the child comes home to find his mother sitting with the psychiatrist. Now, how did Willis get in ? She can't have (see here)

Up there with "Dallas" ? The petrol-crazed series had "Bobby Ewing" come back from the dead ...and a disbelieving world continued watching; also in "Dallas", let us remember "Pam Ewing"... she got abducted by aliens. But then again, back in Blighty, one episode of "Neighbours" consisted entirely of a dog's dream -yes. Anything goes, like !

"Sin City" : hang on, didn't the yellow nasty (boo hoo, a rich and protected pedalo -now, that's original!) get his hand blown right off in the early scene by Bruce Willis ? A hell of a great reconstruction job, must have been...

All sorts of remarks (can't be arsed to disseminate them all accordingly) about Spielberg's remake of "War Of The Worlds". Chrono/editing continuity : Tom Cruise doesn't wait for the noise to die down to tell T. Robbins that the invaders have shut up. Similarly, in "Le grand Restaurant", De Funes starts before the three sinister figures actually appear : premonition, eh ! / Missed opportunity : note to the team of "creatives", there is such a thing called the sense of smell. Surely, the killing fields behind the house would have alerted the Cruise man to what's going on on account of, you know, ...stinking to high heaven ? Instead, he just discovers them. / Story : you have to marvel how fast Cruise -and the others- come up with a theory explaining where the machines come from and so on. Why, of course... ! And no (dissenting) discussion on the rather -one would have thought original- subject. Bearing in mind that this is the US of A, a country where 95% of people claim to be believers, one also has to marvel how not a single character posits any divine or infernal intervention theory. / Scenario contradictions : for someone determined to survive or at least go down fighting, T. Robbins changes track rather suddenly does he not. (Ah, but he was upset so... mmmright....maybe...) And Cruise understandably panics when Roberts makes noises only to instruct his daughter, in the next breath, to start singing whilst he deals with the situation ! / All electric/electronic apparatus (apparati ?) are switched off by the attack's EMI (electro-magnetic interference). Every gadget ? No, thankfully there is a camcorder at hand to film the "birth" of the machine. ...But why does this one work ? / Lina Wertmüller's harrowing "Seven Beauties" : how can the protagonist rape the woman on the bed, when she is wearing shorts and has her legs pulled apart ? The next image : she is only wearing a robe which he lifts, ...but he couldn't do so.

(from B3ta)

NAVIGATION : CLICK ON THE "FILM INCOHERENCE" PAGE TITLE TO GET BACK TO THE INDEX

The Can Someone Explain Section.

Start of the classic "Man Who Fell To Earth" : who -on Earth, hee hee- is (rest of chapter at the archive)

"Superman II" : er...how exactly does he recover his strength ? After we've been told that neutering himself for the sake of procreation would rob him of his powers -and here we quote- "forever". Next thing you know, he picks up a crystal, and... is fixed ? How ?? Rip-off !

"The Devil And Daniel Johnston" : why isn't there any mention of Mark Linkous aka Sparklehorse ? When the great man took upon himself to record and produce an album by Johnston.

The ever-wonderful "Magnolia" : hang on, how does the great William H. unlock the door of his ex-place of employment to return the money at the end of the film ...since he broke his key ?

The excellent "Infernal Affairs". When the I.A. cops are looking for the mole after the hotel murder (shall we say, to avoid revealing what happens), surely all they need to do is to look at the CCTV footage of who get in the lift on his way to the meeting on the rooftop ? Huh.

"Hannibal Rising" : why should a French police inspector, right after WW2, care about one murder that took place more than eight years before at the other side of Europe (in Lithuania) ? How come that policeman has so much power, time and personnel to go on about searching various places and so on ? Grotesque film...

NAVIGATION : CLICK ON THE "FILM INCOHERENCE" PAGE TITLE TO GET BACK TO THE INDEX

"The Incredibles". First question : since the superoutfit doesn't feature any superpocket, where exactly is "ElastiGirl" supposed to keep the tracking device cards showing her where her superfamily is ? Hmm ? Also -cf. "structural fault" section- why does the superdaughter have two superabilities, as opposed to her superrelatives ? 'Bit of a lack of cohesion here, mesuperthinks. (...Could it be because both of them will come in superhandy at some stage otherwise we would be up the supercreek...)

Jet Li in "Romeo Must Die" : looking for a car in a car-park, he beeps the car remote control in one direction, and the car situated behind him "responds". Is this possible ?

(The great) John Sayles's "Lone Ranger" : bizarre change of heart courtesy of "Mrs. Cruz", who suddenly accepts to help the illegal immigrants, after brief flash-back... Was her life story more developed, originally ? (The legendary) Dario Argento's "Profondo Rosso" : Hemmings agrees to get back to his deliciously alluring Italian companion's place; then suddenly announces that he can't, as he's forgotten something...; the two exchange a would-be meaningful look, and... cut to the next morning, back to the murderer chase. What on Earth was that about ??

"Charmed" : one of the three sisters has her brains sucked out by the evil doctor with the stabbing finger and falls into a coma; then the "Warlock" gets annihilated by the two other witches. She then wakes up as if nothing had happened and doesn't need to have her soul reinstalled, as shown previously with another victim. Er...

"Ichi The Killer" : why does "Jiji" confuse his puppet killer at the end, telling him that one of his victims is his long lost brother ?? Plus the ending : there is a debate on IMDB as to what it exactly means : is sado-maso "Kohi" finally in hell ? It seems to me, if anything, that it is paves the way for a sequel to come, but any theory is welcome here.

Can someone explain... the significance of "Lost In Translation"'s opening shot , i.e. Scarlett Johansson's bum ? Now, lovely and perfectly formed as the divine miss Johansson's bum unquestionably is, we rather fail to "get" it. Should we conclude that Coppola is -hee hee- talking out of her arse... ?!

Logic and inferences (déductions). Esp. with regards to previous section. Humour is based on references; something is funny, because its timely revelation stands in contradiction with what should, logically, follow from its premise. Take, for instance, one of the subtlest cultural jokes in "Men In Black" : one of the agents (W. Smith) picks up this -howdyoucallit- ethnic ornament from the road, and deduces that the monster has borrowed... a taxi as a getaway car. Now, for viewers who haven't been to NYC, this shouldn't make any sense. But anybody who has ever taken a cab there will know that (...the rest here) . Exemple de titre : "...comme la lune", du négligé Joël Seria : c'est au spectateur de reconstituer le titre complet, c'est à dire l'expression "con comme la lune". Même remarque : "...comme elle respire" = expression "elle ment comme elle respire".

Which highlights , by contrast, some films' total lack of subtlety. The Hollywood "In Your Face" attitude, where everything has to be spelled out, detailed, and even repeated, under different angles (any climactic explosion, for ex., has to be shown three times). Watching "E.T." again, lately, I was amazed how heavy-handed it now looks : all the kids lining up on their bikes, one after the excruciating other, the repeated close-ups on the (absent father figure)'s groin region, etc.. Anyone familiar with "Superman" comics here ? What struck me, when I was a kid -and by contrast with "Batman"- was its insistence upon explaining each time, in details, where this week's monsters came from. Cf. gimmicks used in "X Files, The Movie" : for the innocent who don't know what the preceding series was about, at several points do its heroes heavy-handedly recall where they're from, who they are, etc.. For instance, "Mulder" and "Scully" are asked to explain themselves to yet another FBI investigative committee early in the movie, which handily provides more opportunities for "the story so far", and an intoxicated "Mulder" takes up a bored waittress's customary query "sowhassup ?" a little too literally : conspiracy theories, nickname, details, inside leg measurements, and all. / "Freddy vs. Jason" -or is it the other way round- spends about 12 minutes recapping who its two protagonists are, which seems uterly pointless since it can be safely assumed that the huge majority of its audience already knows bloody well who "Freddy Kruger" and "Friday The 13th"'s "Jason" are ! But it is not (pointless), since what the authors are clearly trying to do here is fill up their semblance of a film to an acceptable near 90 minutes. And fool noone. UPDATE

"Sliding Doors" is a film composed almost entirely of explicit reminders, presumably for those who can't follow the plot or/and need to have everything spelled out, such as -starting with the first sex scene : "Oh, remind me, why we're shagging ? -Well, that's because you are so-and-so and I do this-and-that" etc. throughout the entire movie : -Main character : "Oh, why do I do this ?" Ever-reliable best friend : -It's because..." every five minutes, oh aye... (now, shouldn't I need to remind myself why I am writing this ?) / "Demons" one and two is a brilliant example of (two films) where the characters keep exclaiming "look at her back !" "look at her nails" to draw attention to what is so effing clearly happening. The same kind of character who, chased by, well, ... demons, stop to shout to their comrades "we 'gotta get out of here !" -no shit Sherlock.

Another great example : "Speed Two", in which the baddie, Willem Dafoe, spends the entire movie explaining to his victims why he does what he does. Now, first of all, we don't need to be told another motive than the one already presented : jewels theft. Secondly, do bank-robbers take time to expand upon their (private) lives, when in the middle of a heist, going : "Oh, folks, by the way, I'm only engaging in a criminal activity today because my absent father didn't paid my mother alimony / a multinational screwed me out of my job, etc.; would it be for these circumstances, I am a really decent guy, I swear." Nope, they probably want to get on with the job at hand, and get the hell out as soon as possible. But not in "Speed 2".

Cf. also "Lost Weekend" 's flashback, as R. Milland recounts how he ended there; the wonderful's "la Fille sur le pont", where V. Paradis starts the film by answering questions about her past, etc. By contrast, Hal Hartley's early films always started "ex nihilo" : no such exposition, A. Barbeau or M. Donovan just burst onto the screen space, already engaged in their actions / destiny, and it's up to us the audience to fill in the blanks (such as who is she/he ? what is she/he like ? etc.), making us feel like close friends of theirs (empathy). Same remark : Cassavetes's movies. A good recent example of gradual revelations : the héroïne of "Resident Evil", whose memory comes back bit by bit, at crucial moments. / The-godawful-"Within Striking Distance" : the baddie at the end tells us -and we mean all- about why, when, what, how. Very naturally, of course.

In the other direction, we have "DreamCatcher". What happens is, this film multiplies astounding revelations, going through one cliffhanger to the next without taking the time to dwell on it (a bit like "Spiderman 3" and its structural weakness with articulations: one minute the hero looks at the black suit, the next he has gayfully abandoned any moral quibble and embraced darkness). At this stage, I must write this "SPOILERS AHEAD". The film has about 3 or 4 parts which could all be a subjet themselves; roughly speaking, how the kids rescued that weird guy who gave them superpowers; where on Earth did these aliens come from; what is going on between the various army factions. All the potential storythreads are sprinted through without any due consideration; by the time you're starting to get to grips with, for example, this mysterious red dust, you have a vaguely phallic slash indentada vagina Cronenberg-type monster; then a big alien; then an extraterrestrial invasion; then an army conspiracy; then an internal army war -and so on. Basically, and here is what this critique made of the "scattered" film, it feels as if the movie was an adaptation of a 600 pages sci-fi blockbuster condensed into 100-odd minutes.

It is interesting to know the "Groundhog Day" background. The scriptwriter, whose brilliant scenario had been initially rejected by everyone, was told by the producing party to come up with a reason for the repetition affecting the protagonist. Among the various versions : a gipsy curse cast by the hero's recently jilted girlfriend, a discussion with a scientist mentioning the possibility of a time-travel singularity and so on. Director Ramis, who seems to have been on the writer's side, told him to write one in any case, "that (he) might -or might not shoot at all". In the end, of course, there is simply no rationale whatsoever ....and does it spoil our pleasure ? Nope.

A few examples of visual gags based on anticipation : the Monty Pythons, I think, with the giant phone ringing. We the audience imagine it to be that size because of its position at the foreground, but no, someones appears and picks up the genuinely gigantic thing. Also, in "Top Secret !" : a man wearing a magnifying glass to one -suitably monstrous- eye; guess what ? he lowers his magnifying glass, and his eye really is that size ! Same idea later with a scene seen through binoculars... which turn out to be a partition through which cows pass.

(Unnecessary) Revelations. "Irma Vep" -la vision finale du génial metteur en scène J.-P. Léaud, son film abandonné : ?!?? Quid , quoi qu'est-ce ? Censé être une parodie de, par example, Godard, ou bien un réel chef d'oeuvre irrémédiablement perdu ? Personnellement,... eh...j'ai aimé. Ou n'aurais-je pas dû ? Un peu comme le dernier livre de J. Irving, et sa soi-disante grande romancière, qui écrit -désolé, Johnny- comme un pied -et il faut que je revienne à l'anglais là, car c'est en cette langue que je l'ai lu. Brief literary interlude, if you please -but with cinematographic resonances, not to worry. In Irving's last novel , "A Widow For A Year", the so-called brilliant writer "Ruth" : huh. Que ? No disrespect, but the few pages quoted are stylistically nothing remarkable, as banal as Irving's own usual "pedestrian" style. Not only that, but 1)-besides her sounding, if anything, very flat indeed, 2) all the novelists presented within write with the same voice ! The problem/point with quoting different characters -in cinema as well as in literature- is to differentiate them, give them distinctive styles/personalities. And I'm afraid Irving -who I love dearly, let it be known- fails in that instance. Mind you, all of Coupland's characters speak with the same post-everything, intelligent, wacky, ironic tone. I want to live in a Coupland world. But to come back to the original point : how, indeedy, can genius be expressed ? Lesser mortals like us can't fake it, we can only boast it for so long and then... Then, you don't actually have to propose any would-be proof, is Hal Hartley's clever answer in the terrific "Henry Fool". The Nobel Prize poet's words are never to be quoted, he, he. Same register, different subject : in Bunuel's "Belle de Jour", the ultimate taboo object of repulsion, which every prostitute refuses... is never shown. See what I mean ? cf. remark, elsewhere, about "American Beauty"'s laughable "Eureka" vision. Van Sant's "Psycho" : why the last scene, in which "Bates"' motivations are spellt out for those who have been asleep at the back of the classroom since 1960 ?

cf. the remark on "Ring" above; the Monty Pythons famously had a gag about a secret weapon : the ultimate joke, that, once told, would make its listeners die with laughter. Crucially, the text of the joke was never revealed. ...or we would die too !

"24" : FilmInco love the way characters talk about (i.e. spell out) murder, rape and so on so openly, in public and over the phone, oh yes.

From FilmInco's faithful contributor Lisette : "I went to see "Murder by Numbers" last night. Since it was midnight, I had the sense to cover my eyes anytime the music told me something creepy was going to happen, je ne veux pas de cauchmares. Still I noticed that the stupid detective woman went in after the kids on her own, even though she knew help was on the way. How much sense does it require to wait and go in together instead of putting yourself in unnecessary danger? The whole film suffered too much from "guess what's going to happen now? That's righhhhhht!!!!" ...but on the plus side, you knew when it was going to be nasty and you should shut your eyes."

Would-be genius twist section. Imitation is endemic. As soon as someone comes up with a clever trick to wrangle one's characters out of a hairy situation, everyone appropriates it. Take for instance "Silence Of The Lambs"'s ingenious jail breakout, in which you-know-who, trapped in a can't win situation, takes on an injured cop's identity and simply waits, rather than actually attempting to physically escape. A couple of years later, "Leon" pulls the same neat trick, with Jean Reno, cornered in a hotel room, taking on a SWAT commando member's gear. (I would hate to say I had guessed but, in fact, ...I hadn't.) (Only kidding, I had.) Press forward to "Ocean's Eleven" : and guess how the gang gets out of the casino vault ? That's right, by dressing up as body armoured fully helmeted police agents. In this respect, "expect the unexpected" takes on a new meaning; "expect what once was the unexpected", more like, as they become the norm.

These examples represent, of course, but one meager instance of film stories, even though the said films depend on it; the principle probably applies to just about any convention developed since the Lumière brothers, Mack Senett or Buster Keaton. Everybody since can be said to have been riding on the wings of a few ground breaking inventors like O. Welles or Jean Vigo.

Then again, the ultimate twist might be in... not having a surprise twist at all ! "Town On Trial"'s killer turns out to be, well, the fall guy who was the suspect throughout the story, accused by the town doctor. What's the effing point of expecting the ending, then !

-No error, in fact.

Hannibal "Lektor", in the brilliant "Manhunter"/"Red Dragoon" : genuine, original spelling.

"Ocean's12" : why would the head of a fictive European police force have a Southern American (Texan-like) accent ? ...Unless of course that cop turns out to be the mother of one of the Americans !

"Dhoom 2" : surely the fistfight between the awesomely bodybuilt Hrithik (phew ! gasp ! swoon) and the, er, normal cop is scaling the heights of surrealism. Ah but... could it be the evil genius is just pretending as a prelude to a stunt...

Double whammy here (see also the "private joke" chapter) : in "Valentine", Boreanaz utters this line : "I"m no angel, but I'm no killer either." Aha, but everyone knows he is "Angel", in the "Buffy" spin-off TV series -he is lying ! Henceforth...

For those who wondered about the weird (clearly CGI added) blood spurts in "Zatoichi", Kitano explained that such was the intention; he was actually worried about the amount of violence and wanted the blood ejaculations to look like "flowers" (hana, in Japanese).

"Fulltime Killer": the cinema loving hitman refers to a film with Alain Delon (must be "Le Samourai") in which someones gets stabbed through the hand and nailed to the bar. Later on, the victim complains he hasn't been able to track down the film in question. Well of course -and feel free to correct us if we got it wrong ourselves-, ...since this gory instance does not take place in any Delon movie, but in "The Godfather"!

"Riky-Oh": if one the four prison wing guvnors looks a bit camp, there is a good reason why: it's a (Japanese) actress! Also, if you can't help wondering about the main actor's evolving physique, it is because the kung-fu expert was told to put on (demonstrably bigger) muscles so as to impress foreign audiences who might not recognise his artistry; therefore, he constantly indulged in body-building sessions as the film got shot, ending up more voluminous than he started.

"Buffy"'s sister : where does she come from ??? (well... explained 3 episodes later : she's not her sister, but..."The Key". Ah. QED.)

Boom mike visible on "American Movie, the making of etc." (Loïg's advice : just rush and rent it on video, it's ... wonderful) : it IS a documentary.

"The Usual Suspects". For a low-life nobody, Our-Friend-Kevin "Verbal" is surprisingly able to recognise Hungarian (scene at the dock, Keaton asks what language the sailors are speaking). ...Or should this be significant ? Cf., as well, page four , section on weird dialogue.

"The Truman Show" : "Truman" and his pal watch both the sun and the full moon set, a scientific impossibility. Or is it that... -Also : when he tries to board the bus, the vehicle breaks down, with smoke all-too spectacularly rising. Hmm... Also cf. page four , section on weird dialogue..

A few months back, I wondered aloud why extra-terrestrials should have a vague humanoid appearance, for example in "Star Trek". FilmInco reader, and part-time Trekkie (if I may say so ?) "errl grey" (presumably not his real name) replies : "the reason for this was finally explained towards the end of the "Next Generation" series : ....the romulans, klingons, humans, and more species (unsure) fight over clues spread all over our galaxy. In the end they see that they are all pieces of a puzzle left by the original humanoids that inhabited a dying planet in our solar system millions of years ago. When combined it tells the story of how their race was dying and they implanted their DNA into the primitive soup on many planets that they thought might support life in the future. Millions of years later, all of the races have evolved with similar characteristics ( man size, with two eyes, four limbs etc..) but the differences come from the specific characteristics native to the different planets; that is why they all appear similar but have "slight differences". -Aha !! Thanks for clearing that up.

"Through A Scanner Darkly" : it would seem strange that agent "Fred"'s superior (whose identity wasn't much hard to guess) doesn't mind -in effect- inviting his girlfriend to what is a super secret antinarcs police station, when the issue of confidentiality has been super high all long.... Ah yes, but by now the game is up, what with poor "Fred" well and truly gone on his way to the funny farm, as well as, more importantly, -SPOILER- the issue of the girlfriend coming to pick him up being oh so slightly artificial, if you see what Phil K. Dick/Linklater mean.

Early in "Fight Club". Something about E. Norton giving/receiving a phone call even though "no incoming call" message shows. i.e. there's something fishy, here...

Right, and let's jump right into it : some naive viewers might have gasped at the casualness carelessly exhibited by the writer and producers of the "The West Wing" TV series when they devoted whole entire episodes to a trifling private life incident concerning one of the White House aides heroes ...and about five minutes to the bombing of an Arab State ?!? ...But isn't it on the contrary rather indicative of the mood in American politics : bombing the Third World -who cares ? Sex life in the US -huge deal !

pour d'autres remarques encore meilleures...

Michelangelo Antonioni : "Meaning (senso) , it's an instrument of power; so, to make the meaning subtle is a political act just as it always is : to seek to shred, to disrupt, to break down this mania for meaning (fanatismo del senso)."