Never has a movie perplexed me in the way this film has. I am never quite sure exactly what is dream and what is reality. The general plot of the film is that a 118-year-old mortal, Nemo Nobody (Jared Leto), in a world of immortals is dying- and the world wants to know what life was like back before immortality. He recounts his life story, but with a twist: there are multiple story lines to his life. So which one is real? That's the ultimate question. The major point of deviation seems to be when Nemo was 9 years old, choosing between going with his mother or staying with his father as they separate. Many different narratives branch off from this choice, because apparently Nemo has the ability to predict the future his choices will create. This is why he can tell his story so many different ways. This then begs a mind-bending question: is this story from the point of Nemo at 9 or Nemo at 118? I'm still asking myself that question.
The hardest part about this film is just keeping track of the story lines. There are no helpful labels or transitions: the different stories flow seamlessly from one to the next. It's kind of like Memento, but at least that movie made sense eventually. Thrown in among the narratives is a completely out-of-place story that has Nemo stuck in an argyle-sweater world, finding notes telling him to wake up or leave quickly. As best I can understand, this is how Nemo ended up in the immortal world as a 118-year-old, but I can't be sure. If you can get past the confusion, the film is very visually stunning. The colors are bright and beautiful, and there are many gorgeous effects. In one timeline, Nemo drowns, and the shots of him underwater are beautifully filmed and shot. There are lots of shots of reverse filming: of fruit re-composing (reverse decomposing) and of a mouse's body reverse-decomposing. Thrown in among the narratives are snippets from a scientific documentary about time, love, you name it. These help really get across the point the movie is trying to make at the current moment. I think the opening to the film is very striking as well. It explains the idea of 'pigeon superstition,' where a pigeon, if it is convinced that one action leads to a specific reaction, will continue to do that action because it is convinced it will lead to the reaction (even if that isn't true at all). This really sets the tone for the existential beliefs about memory and choice that are brought up in this movie. Are our lives futile?
I think the most thought-provoking scene would be the ending, so if you don't wantspoilersdon't read on! In the end, Mr. Nobody dies. Once he does, time begins reversing. He cackles joyously as everything moves backwards. The air bubbles go back into the drowning Nemo. The comatose Nemo opens his eyes. The Nemo heartlessly wrenched from his true love's arms is brought back again. And then we see a scene we haven't before: Nemo and his love Anna reverse-throwing stones into a lake. Anna (played by Diane Kruger in her older age and Juno Temple in her teenage age) was undoubtedly Nemo's true love, so for the movie to end with him and her side by side gives us hope. I think the idea the movie is trying to get across is that 9 year old Nemo has made his choice. He has contemplated his options and found one that fits for him, and is going to follow through with it. What exactly that is, I don't know. But it's interesting that the end of the film undoes literally everything that the movie shows. There can be many meanings to this, and I have a feeling I'll be searching for what really happened for the rest of forever.
If you're up for a mind-bender, I'd say go for it. It's got the Sci-fi aspect of Inception combined with a weird romance like Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. But you need to be fully awake, or so tired that you start having existential thoughts. Whichever one works, to be honest. But this film requires deep thought and insight, so know what you're getting into! I loved this film, so incredibly much. Finding a film this confusing and surprising is a real treat. 4.5/5 stars.
In celebration of our weather unit in Earth Science, we watched this 1996 movie about hardcore stormchasers. I got really excited about this film and finished it over the weekend. I'll admit, it isn't incredibly well-written, and it isn't incredibly well-developed, but it was actually pretty cool. The basis of the story is that our protagonist, Jo Harding (played by Helen Hunt), and her crew are trying to collect data from inside a tornado using their new machine, nicknamed Dorothy. This is very dangerous, seeing as they have to get incredibly close to a tornado to deploy the machine, so we have some close-calls. There is the obligatory romance, as Jo's ex-husband Bill (played by Bill Paxton) shows up to collect divorce papers and ends up being drawn back in to the stormchaser life (also dragging along his poor fiancé played by Jami Gurtz). This film is pretty much celebrity eye-spy. We've got Philip Seymour Hoffman, Alan Ruck (who was Cameron in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off), and Cary Elwes (who was Westley in "The Princess Bride"). There's definitely some good talent in this film, even if the plot was only so-so.
This movie, much to my surprise, was nominated for two Oscars. One for Best Visual Effects and one for Best Sound. The soundtrack is actually really fantastic, and fits perfectly with the film. I enjoyed the movie so much more just because of the soundtrack. But it's definitely the visual effects that take the movie to the next level. For 1996, the visual effects were spectacular. I've studied tornadoes in class, and I've seen a lot of tornado footage, and the way they animated the tornadoes was actually very accurate. And, of course, just as terrifying as they are in real life. Watching an F5 tornado tear a house apart is unsettling, and that was perfectly captured in the film. This film is also very blatant with it's imagery. Countering Jo and Bill's ramshackle team of misfits, you have Jonas and his crew. Unlike the colorful, painted trailers Jo's group drives, Jonas's group drives shiny black vans. This juxtaposition of colorful and mechanical sets the two apart and characterizes Jonas's group as being malicious and cold. Clearly that's what the movie wants us to think, as Jonas not only stole Bill's Dorothy idea but continues to be a jerk throughout the film. This is film definitely endorses research for the sake of the good of the people, rather than research for fame (as Jonas wants). The movie was kind of obnoxious in the way it beat you over the head with it, unfortunately. It's also kind of repetitive. Tornado appears, they chase it, Bill magically predicts the shift in the tornado's path, Jo wants to deploy Dorothy but there's not enough time and Bill has to pull her away before she gets sucked up, they face a head-on collision from a tornado and survive. While it is exciting, it's also the same thing over and over again. And every time, as soon as the tornado passes over them, it disperses. Is that really realistic? Tornadoes can last for a while and for it to disappear conveniently after it passes over Bill and Jo is kind of ridiculous.
I think one scene which is a testament to the movie and the overall unrealistic aspects is one of these near-death tornado experiences. After a day of failed tornado hunting, the dejected group settles down in as small town next to a drive-in theatre. In the background of all the shots of the different characters is a news forecast warning about an approaching tornado. Now, I get the crew is tired and disappointed, but they still make a living of tracking and understanding storms. It seems kind of ridiculous to me that these so-called "experts" don't notice the giant tornado headed right for them. In the sky, lightning cracks and wind whips. There are close-ups of drapes fluttering ominously in the wind. Heck, the movie playing at the theatre is "The Shining,"a movie known for being one of the scariest horror films of all time. All this foreshadowing leads up to the reveal of the tornado...literally right on top of the town. Now, it seems to me that if a tornado is that close, somebody would notice. I get that it's dark and that the crew has other things on their mind, but seriously? And this is all topped off by Bill producing one of the corniest, worst-scripted lines in the movie. Dusty (played by Philip Seymour Hoffman) runs up to Bill and shouts "It's headed right for us!" To which Bill responds, "No. It's already here." This scene represents how unrealistic the entire film is, and how bad the scripting is. Speaking from a scientific perspective, Bill and Jo should be dead. In a tornado, debris can fly at up to 300 miles per hour, sending wooden planks through cement walls. So for Jo and Bill to survive not one, not two, not three, not four, but five different tornado strikes is about as unrealistic as it gets. Cars are also known to roll over due to the intense wind near tornadoes, so for Bill and Jo's cars to remain firmly planted on the road throughout all these storms is ridiculous. Here's what happens when you get too close to a tornado:
The end scene had Bill and Jo frantically running or their lives as a F5 tornado descends upon them. They manage to run fast enough to find some form of safety before it catches up to them. Tornadoes can travel on average 30 miles per hour, and even up to 70 miles per hour (Source). The average human can sprint 100 meters at 15.9 miles per hour (Source). So even if Bill and Jo were running as fast as they possibly could, they still would not be able to outrun an F5 tornado. Not only that, but the movie is a bit presumptuous about how the inside of a tornado would look. The first images from inside a tornado were not captured until June 2005 by Tim Samaras (Source), The movie was made in 1996, before there was much information about the inside of a tornado, which means the special effect eye of the tornado was completely theoretical. At ground level there is a lot of dust swirling around, so how Bill and Jo could see so clearly is beyond me. This is what it actually looks like inside a tornado:
Well, even if the science is a bit off, I still enjoyed this movie. It was kind of your typical action flick, just with really cool weather phenomenons instead of guns and violence. In fact the director is Jan de Bont, director of "Speed," another action flick. I'd say this is kind of like watching Indiana Jones, but with tornadoes. If you like cool weather and action, I'd say go for it. Just a fun fact: the sound the tornadoes made in the film was created by slowing down the moan of a camel (Source).
