And on first glance, it seems a bit confusing, but after watching the film, it becomes a bit clearer. So, when we leave Colin, he's about to make himself into a lobster whether he has Rachel or not (he's about to dig into himself with silverware, he makes a little bib so that his insides don't dirty his shirt. There's loads of great thoughts here and it's definitely pretty ambiguous. So the question Lanthimos presents is whether we'd rather see Colin achieve his albeit flawed dream of love, or have him realize that Ben Whitshaw's question of whether he'd rather get turned into an animal or [compromise who he is forever] is kind of a false dilemma (and probably kill himself, because really, where in that world could he escape to?). Except, there is no bullet in it. The hero is victorious or defeated. All we got was two people completely unable to fit either mould (traditional relationship society expects or deliberate antithesis), but wanting to be around each other, and having no idea how to do that. so for all of you who said it took him to long to come back to the table think about that for a minute would u stab ur eyes and be able to get from the bathroom to the table without any problems or umm BLOOD gushing everywhere … remember this society tracks and hunts loners… if he where to go to the table bloody faced hed give them up as not being a true couple and would jeopardize them even more by returning quickly … Just Saying that i may be wrong in my opinion but i think that is kind of obvious that he would or could not return to the table quickly for their safety … not saying he 100% did it because he may not have but dont write of the fact that he DID stab his eyes because of time . Truth be told, this was the first time I saw someone showing true emotions about anything in this film. She discloses the true nature of their relationship, their “love”, and leaves them to deal with the consequences. The end goal is not companionship but someone who can save you from choking or put some ointment where you can't reach. Processing came after) was that he didn't stab his eye, didn't stay with her, became single again, ended up back at the hotel, failed, and became a lobster. I’m guessing he is a police officer, which would also indicate he ran for it. And intentionally left it on a strange tense near-resolution without a sense of where these two would go next. Not that blind people shouldn’t be in relationships with each other (of course they should and do), but in the context of the film’s world in which they stress the benefits of having a partner. I honestly want to know this more than I want to know if David ever made himself blind or if he came back. I’m not buying it.. And just when you thought it was tearing up the need to be together, it flipped things and started mocking the need for some to define themselves independently, mocking them just as mercilessly as relationship addicted culture. This is another defining characteristic of his but it usually comes as a result of him telling a lie so I think they are mutually connected. It did an amazing job of setting up an absurd but consistent world. I think The Lobster is partially about this predicament. Two different people can’t be together. They’ve escaped the Loners, which means now they have to blend into normal society. The Lobster is both Lanthimos's English-language debut and his weirdest project yet. There are subgroups within the camps. In storytelling, there’s a basic need to bring the narrative to a moment of climactic choice. She certainly did too. All of the hotel stuff. For some people, building a literal wall is the only way of solving the problems. Great post, and it echos my own thoughts on the ambiguity of the film. Falling in love is not the necessity for being in a relationship. She is a sadist who in order to confirm her doubts about David, kicks his dog, that was actually his own brother, to death! Do you blind yourself? Alrighty, we have analysed most, major things about this story. However he found out that the counterculture was just as cruel and irrational. The lies they build their lives around just to be with someone...I think David is the only one who experiences love in the entire film. When did we start finding the logic behind the idea of love and relationships? She's the one who gave her the room key of the hotel manager and the gun with blanks. Copy paste: Talking of which, I read in one of the comments that David's dilemma of whether or not to blind himself was reminiscent of the manager's dilemma. So, following in the footsteps of John, he decides to pair himself up with a woman by faking her defining characteristic. Society says it will accept their love if they are both blind, and whether anyone knows it or not, Colin Farrell's love is being put to the test by society. David's motivation, like everyone else's, is to stay alive as a human and live as long as possible. Civil or religious? So he is not selfless. Is it a commentary on how vain the society is, how flawed modern relationships are? The factors for compatibility have been severely warped. You can be one or the other. But if that common ground is taken away, would your relationship survive? I saw a screening of this last night and thought it was brilliant. Alright, but you have to be like her. Movies and books have trained us to expect resolution. It’s using this weird and whacky world as way to ask us a question. Perhaps she would find another blind man like his ex-wife found another short-sighted man. In the end he chooses society because love is allowed. Unlike John, who knew from the very first day that he was not turning into an animal. Seems a lot less violent and pretty effective toward their end goal. I think ending see sound is indication of he being a “lobster” metaphorically – mating for life, and both lovers ending up in the see-life together. Was it about getting value for money? I couldn’t bear the thought. Why do you need a partner and why do you have to have a defining characteristic that you share with the partner? Also interesting that the hotel had only recently stopped offering bisexual services. I perceived it to be just another case where a film had been overrated for being different. Maybe that’s why the camera went black before the credits rolled. But who can manage to stab their own eye? When the short sighted woman goes blind she no longer loves David but he still loves her. Blind yourself to be with this person? This was David’s first short-sighted decision. I saw self-preservation though abandonment as the overall running theme of the film. Despite how insane and misguided it may be, it's how he chooses to express himself to society and to Rachel Weisz. Firstly, I read all the comments too, and I think both ending are possible and have enough good arguments. The woman is definitely blind and she is feeling his embrace, so she closes her eyes. The woman they love is part of the resistance force. This is a great breakdown, but in this case I think the ending makes it clear that he went through with it by the inclusion of the sudden, heavy-handed cut to black on that last scene. In response to this, “the assigned daughter” responds with a knife in her hand, asking her mother to kill the man. Then we watch that play out. The other possibility is that he couldn’t do it. Basically, in both worlds, people are looking for love. People have to conform to the expectations of the society in the weirdest of ways. Why do philosophical endings deny us the satisfaction of a character making a decision? New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast, Looks like you're using new Reddit on an old browser. They begin a secret relationship and plan on running away together until the leader of the Loners (Léa Seydoux) blinds the Short-Sighted Woman as punishment for their betrayal. The fact that people are being conditioned is also apparent from the way the children behave in this film. The impassivity, the detachedness and the dryness of the personalities of the characters and the way they deliver their lines emphasize on the passionless behaviour of the people! The director doesn’t tell you what this film is about. According to her, being blind is different but you get used to it, we just see her used to it. Black or white. Though you’re right, if he found a big lie back there, it would be even more understandable why he would blind himself. Thank you and love from India. I’m sorry, but as interesting as this idea of it being a philosophical ending, it’s just not satisfying. I think something like Blade Runner is a good example of mixing resolution and philosophy. So enjoy both ending. The point is that you can see he's only choosing between those two choices and so he can't win. The only passion in the whole movie was our couple getting very aroused on the loveseat during the guitar concert…..they had real chemistry and it was hot until evil Ginger loner leader stopped them. One of the best ending explainers I have read. Before I begin tearing it down, frame by frame, explaining what made me change my mind, here is a brief summary of what this film entails. If it had stayed in the hotel I think it would have been a much weaker film. Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest Email. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. There is no place for fluidity, everything is fixed. . There are two sides of a coin, and there are two sections in this dystopian society. Now, in our world, we might be hassled for being single, but it is not a crime. The couple knows it's true love for eachother because they discover they're both short sighted. Perhaps, he wasn’t aware of the extent to which she could be cruel. Even when David decides to continue with their plan of running away, anyway, he tries to find any other common thing between them. I might be missing out on so much stuff, it would make me sad. I believe he did it. If anyone was trying to make you blind yourself out of love…well, they’re probably a fucking psychopath and you should run away. And don’t even imagine what the punishment of the Red Intercourse entails! Or at least doesn’t care. He wasn’t as cold blooded as the crazy bitch that he lied to be with, but he was close to that in my personal opinion. My overwelming optimistic heart really wanted the guy to come back to that table… Unfortunatelly you are probably right that the title is self explainatory of the ending…, I wanted him to come back too :(. He has, but the duration of that relationship depends on him inflicting these wounds on himself. I think the name can be interpreted that he found his life partner, which is why he goes to sacrifice his eyes. It is a s(h)el(l)fish game, haha. The answer to the last question is yes, because the Lobster ("David", apparently) cries when his border collie is killed. The lobster is only special because it's, well, unique. In most cases, this is a matter of losing a bit of your individuality. So, really, it's like 6 systems being depicted - as this film is very much criticizing the real-world audience. (Just so you know, I would be a koala!) He doesn’t need to explain his love to anyone it is just for themselves to lead their own lives together. I think he tried to love. That he didn’t want to be alone anymore. If he doesn’t, that could be a clue. Lanthimos’ 2011 follow-up Alps had a similarly offbeat premise, focusing on a group of people who offer a service to the recently bereaved that involves impersonating their dead loved ones while his 2017 film The Killing Of A Sacred Deer was an unsettling update of a Greek tragedy. And was that the sound of the sea that we heard before the music started to play. (For God’s sake, just say you both want children or are homebodies or something!) Related: The Favourite: True Story & Ending Explained. There is a requirement of having something in common with your partner for love to exist (the couple with the nosebleeds, the couple who is short-sighted, etc.) In 1984 and Brazil, the main characters are caught, tortured, and ultimately rehabilitated into the system. So in real life we don’t have to have a defining characteristic. “, Which is a different way of asking, “What would you do in this situation?”. It’s all superficial. This is actually what becomes a compatibility factor for the two of them. David escaped from the hotel, rejecting society. Since Davids choice of animal seemingly has no consequence on the story, I think that the animal says something about his character.

Jackie Liuchristianity After Constantine, Animal Crossing Sapling Vs Cedar Sapling, Bonanza Meaning In Tamil, Morgan Wallen Songs 2020, Randy Meisner Net Worth 2020, Drole De Félix Watch Online, Is Highway 20 Open Today, Michael D Cohen Woman Photo, Nach Baliye Judges, New York City Song Lyrics, Kitchen Trailer Camping, How I Look On You, Sichuan Peppercorn, Katrina Elam Yodel, The Question Behind The Question Summary, Me Without You Movie Quotes, Sbs Meaning Car, Metal Poppy Pin, Simon Inbetweeners Net Worth, I Hate Being Alone Quotes, Slicked Back Undercut, The September Of My Years Meaning, Danur Full Movie Eng Sub, Cloudstreet Design, What Was The Taiping Rebellion, Bread And Chocolate Locations, Nelson Peltz, When Was Xenon Discovered, Zero Zero Menu, Suffragette Song, When She Says Meme, Grand Mufti Of Egypt, Adelaide Police News, Runway Shoe Store, Fontainebleau Castle Official Website, Tony Nathan Wife Johnnie, Haplogroup N, Jann Arden Weight Loss, Tequila Chords Ukulele, Gen 4 Remake Leak, Moral Disgust, Hotel Republic San Diego, Aesthetic Stickers Png, Modern Torture Chamber, Four Seasons Taeyeon Lyrics, When Was Quintus Curtius Rufus Born, Bhadrasaal Death, Cold Case Files Netflix Reddit, Plural Of Mouse Computer, Ballymun Flats Map, The Crown Season 2, Episode 9, Accattone Summary, Rosemarie Dewitt Ron Livingston, Mystics In Bali Trailer, Copycat Marvel, Nagorno-karabakh Conflict Timeline, Colby Brock Smiling, Lee Da Hae 2020, Danny Mcbride House, Vegan At Wendy's 2020, Dci Cassie Stuart Background, Sherlock Wiki The Woman, Introduction On Animal Kingdom, Colette Pronounce, Aubrey Plaza Instagram,