i like film threads. so cut from the "last movie i watched" thread...
in the style of soderbergh. at one point i thought it could be an allegory for addiction. as things progressed i kinda dropped that theory. the designer's original destruction had me crawling out of my skin. fortunately that is not what the movie is about. still creates a slow start. people seeking out disturbing films will like that part. maybe its not that disturbing and just hit me hard because i've begun building up what she is stripped of. it's also the extent and fashion in which she's ruined. worse off than blank. that's part of where i got the addiction idea. actually, there is a lot in support of that interpretation from start to end. it's broader. another film about connection and value. a strange one. worth watching. thriller made bearable by romance. not that enamoring--even with a lead actress featuring that soft, pseudo androgyny. she looks jaundiced the whole time. yellow more so than heroin chic.
edit:
i didn't wanna read anyone's interpretation before writing my initial review. i now realize this movie has a thread. and how much i forgot about. [spoil]i thought the couple before were other victims. that the pig man and the thief were more in cahoots, and part of the hypnotism was the victims being pulled toward these flowers that now possess an essence of their children. that the wife and the husband ran the plant business. that was losing stability with time, and the new victims were to replace them. once they break the cycle by killing the pig man (and possibly no longer selling the flowers if they ever were), it's over. there are no more flowers even for the wife who has her hair dyed and checks at the same time as the thief. or is that a different woman? a lot of the cast doesn't have head shots on imdb. either way, if the random women labeling the plants are not employees, if the husband and wife did not run the original plant store--gotta be a word for that--and then the second couple started another before realizing (a version of) what's happening, then i there are aspects of just the plot i am missing. if the wife is a victim, why didn't she get a copy of Walen? fuck. i don't believe the article i read, despite quoting the director. the thief would not know where to check for the flowers once the supply was cut unless things are more integrated than that Slate article suggests. the lead girl and guy definitely find the plants themselves when hiking and take them.[/spoil] i need to read from others.
also, the memory thing. i totally forget to mention what i thought of the childhood stories. it plays into things on a basic level, them not knowing what really happened and all that. there is the question of what has been taken from her, what she had, what she has. part of the film could be called a critique of the material. other aspects challenge that idea. the material is often degraded as something lower than experience and love. it's all material. love and memory are in the CNS. susceptible to worms.
