Possible Worlds
- 2000
- 1 घं 33 मि
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA man lives in parallel worlds, falling in love with the same woman, while the police hunt down a serial killer who steals brains.A man lives in parallel worlds, falling in love with the same woman, while the police hunt down a serial killer who steals brains.A man lives in parallel worlds, falling in love with the same woman, while the police hunt down a serial killer who steals brains.
- पुरस्कार
- 3 जीत और 7 नामांकन
- Child #2
- (as Étienne Gobrysz Forget)
कहानी
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThe first English-language movie for Quebec director Robert Lepage.
- गूफ़At the beginning, when the police are examining George's brainless body, it can be seen to be breathing.
- भाव
Inspector Berkley: Doctor Kleber says that he was never able to get anything but rudimentary consciousness going.
Inspector Berkley: There is a light that flashes occasionally, but we don't know what it means.
Inspector Berkley: Your husband probably isn't aware of who he is.
Inspector Berkley: Kleber described it as kind of a fluctuating dream state.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in Weird Sex and Snowshoes: A Trek Through the Canadian Cinematic Psyche (2004)
- साउंडट्रैकThe Nest That Sailed The Sky
Written by Peter Gabriel
The 'Possible Worlds' from which this film takes its name is a concept of contemporary philosophy, it is a method of discussing the nature of possibility and necessity. Instead of saying "I might have gone to the shops", one says "there is a possible world in which I went to the shops". This allows for greater clarity of discussion about the nature of possibility. One of the more eccentric lines of thought in philosophy is idea that Possible Worlds actually exist (technically they only possibly exist, but every possibility is an actuality for that possibility... yes, this is the simplified way of discussing it!). The concept is very similar to the quantum mechanics notion of multiple/parallel dimensions, as explored in a great deal of science fiction, and is the central premise of this film.
The film can be best described as a cross between Darren Arranofsky's Pi and the cult sci-fi Primer. In places it is distinctly Lynchian, such as this dream sequence (which is the only part of the film available on youtube, there isn't even a trailer) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7odlad7TOc Although the film isn't particularly complex (and it isn't as deliberately convoluted as Primer which, although enjoyable, tries too hard to make its dialogue impenetrable) following George through the various worlds and tying the different plot strands together does require the audience to concentrate.
For a student of modern philosophy or a person fairly well read in the subject, this film will be highly enjoyable. While it contains slightly heavy handed brain-in-a-vat allusions, the film primarily focuses on discussions of identity and possibility. Many different ideas are brought in regarding the nature of consciousness, evolutionary development of the mind, and physical embodiment and the film makes no attempt to give simple or easy answers to these. However, for somebody not read in such areas, the film is likely to be frustratingly dull and pointless. The film does not try to overly explain or reduce these notions: such an attempt would be pointless anyway, it is dealing with some of the most difficult material ever written, 5 minutes of exposition isn't going to benefit anyone. But all of the films dialogue is very clear and simple and it never throws in unnecessary technical terms (like Primer) or tries to fool its audience. In spite of this, I do fear its subject matter will alienate many viewers.
This dichotomy is perhaps best seen in the film's ending (which I wont reveal here). The film has a sad, melancholic ending, in which the story's plots come together and the characters journeys receive closure. This is good, and it does mean even somebody unfamiliar with the concepts it is exploring can still enjoy the film. But at the same time, it could appear to be wrapping up profound questions with an overly simplistic conclusion. The ending of the film is good, but I think to truly appreciate the film is to realise that (as with many great films) its conclusion is in fact the least important aspect of it.
Possible Worlds is an excellent film with a very niche audience; it is to philosophy as Primer is to science. It contains enough surreal imagery and dark, dry humour for any audience member to enjoy, and I should of course point out that reading philosophy is by no means necessary for somebody to understand or engage with philosophical concepts, any more than one needs to be an art scholar to enjoy good art. But its target audience, as the name suggests, is those who are directly familiar with the material that this film is exploring, and if you are a fan of David Lewis, Wittgenstein, Kant or Descartes then this film really is essential viewing.
- VaticanAssassinWarlock
- 15 मई 2012
टॉप पसंद
- How long is Possible Worlds?Alexa द्वारा संचालित