Escape From Tomorrow - Discussion (with Spoilers)

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I was curious so I looked this up:

Once we got a distributor that’s when we started vetting the film to lawyers.

Is that why the name Disney is bleeped out in the dialogue?

Actually that’s in the Sundance version. And that was just more kind of a dark joke. We emphasized a few things more to make it obvious that we were parodying these corporations.

I thought so. The idea that they would need to bleep the name Disney after showing everything else was silly. Interesting that music rights trump all else.

BTW the film was cut by 14 minutes since Sundance, and he's saying they weren't censorship, just tightening the narrative. Fourteen MORE minutes? That would be excruciating.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by lashbear

..given that we later see 'him' (or a very good AA of him) arriving as a guest again.

That's the part that closes the door on the "all in his head" angle. It made whatever the inside-spaceship-earth nonsense was talking about concrete - explicitly saying, "Yep, something weird is happening. He's not JUST in his own head losing his grip on himself."

Either he's real and the classy version we see at the end is some sort of replica or fantasy..or the classy guy at the end is real and the tool we see during the movie is some sort of alternate nightmare...or some other thing.

Honestly I haven't spent much energy trying to read into WHAT it meant because honestly I don't get the feeling the filmmakers put much energy into it themselves. I think their goal was to make it intractable and unsolvable and don't have an answer themselves. Which wouldn't have bugged me IF the ending didn't imply that there IS an answer. If they left it completely ambiguous, then I'm okay with them not having an answer in mind. But throwing on an extra layer of, "Ooh, look how weird an mindblowing THIS twist is," without anything coherent behind it just doesn't interest me.

I mean, that's all a bit of over-analysis for what it was - a cheesy story as an excuse for a ballsy and unique method of film making. So it doesn't really matter. I just felt like they actually were flirting with doing something with the fantasy/nightmare angle that was a little beyond the ordinary and predictable (even as the acting and dialog were pretty poor) and was disappointed that they undermined it in the end.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

The pull and push of the film is summed up in the Cat Flu thing. I enjoyed the nurse scene, with the cast member treating the kid exactly as you'd expect. The part where she breaks down about cat flu was funny and weird and unexpected and worked well. However when it came around in the end it made no sense, was beat to death in ok-we-get-it overly long sequence, and undermined the rest of the film.

This is a rare film, because I enjoyed it less than GD did. To be honest I think I couldn't let myself completely go because the whole "thinking with his dick" aspect totally put me off. I'm ok with that as a plot device but it was so endlessly repeated, allowing it to seem worse and worse. Perhaps once with a kid around, once from far away, once in a close encounter, once when you realize they're ridiculously young, and maybe even once more with them eating bananas, but they did it about twice as much as that. At least they made his wife every so slightly insufferable to counter balance a tiny bit.

[Ghoulish Delight]

To be clear, I make no defense of the "plot" and do not disagree about the over-done drawn out lecherousness. That part was pretty irretrievably bad.

[lashbear]

I agree it was too drawn out. As far as I can see, it was almost suggesting that the girls kept leading him along, glances back at him, that kind of thing, for the sole purpose of leading him to the Siemens chamber - thus her offer for him to go with them, and the obvious regretful alternative of infecting him with the cat flu when he rejected the idea, hence the security people having to forcibly bring him there instead.

Are they running around the park deliberately spreading the flu to guys if they don't succumb to Siemens? Is that their purpose?

Sorry if I sound like I'm analysing it too much, but I enjoy plot speculation as much as the geeking out at the location bit.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Speaking of draw out lecherousness, CP at some point asked, "Is this really what it's like to be a guy?" After a bit of thought I responded, "No...it's just what we fear it's like."

[€uroMeinke]

I don't know, seems reasonable for a sexually frustrated man struggling with monogamy. I have no doubt that one of the experiences the film maker drew from was navigating the park with his father pursuing hot age inappropriate foreign girls. Perhaps exaggerated a bit for cinematic effect, but that didn't force me to suspend my disbelief.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

I have no doubt that one of the experiences the film maker drew from was navigating the park with his father pursuing hot age inappropriate foreign girls.

Really?? Pretty horrifying on so many levels.

[€uroMeinke]

Eh, perhaps there's some cinematic exaggeration, but next time you're in the park, keep an eye on some of the dads

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

Eh, perhaps there's some cinematic exaggeration, but next time you're in the park, keep an eye on some of the dads

Sure, young girls catch the eye. They catch my eye. But actually following them? Seriously, diverting your course, so you can follow them?

Maybe I've been reading too much about our "rape culture" but the very concept of following them turns my stomach. Take out the spouse or child in tow, and you're still a grown man, following underage girls.

Sure, look. They want you to look. I'm fine with looking, always have been. But anything beyond that is crossing a line for me, unless you are an underage boy.