I just finished watching this movie for the first time and I only have one question (well, several really, but just one
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Possession
jonm11100 — 11 years ago(October 09, 2014 12:15 AM)
I just finished watching this movie for the first time and I only have one question (well, several really, but just one MAIN quesiton):
WHAT SENSE DOES ALL THIS MAKE?it makes no sense at all, as far as i can tell.NONE OF ITwhat was the creature?Where did it come from?.How did Anna get hooked up with it?Why did the creature want to have sex with a human and WHY HER?.how did it evolve into Mark's doppelganger?.
After Anna attempted to cut her own throat with an electric knife, and Mark bandaged her up, why would he start slicing on his own arm?Have you ever known ANYBODY in your whole LIFE who would do such a thing?.i haven't..Like I said, NOTHING in this movie makes any sense and certainly isn't believable.
What was the point of Mark making the cab driver crash into the back of the police car?
What was up with all the sirens at the end, as if world war 2 were in progress?
When Mark first left his house after finding out his wife wanted a divorce, what caused all those seizures he had?..he called someone on the phone and couldn't talk, as if he had gotten the wind knocked out of himwas he on some kind of drug?Everybody in this film acted crazy as if they were on PCP or something.
Why did Mark kill Heinrick?At the point Heinrick was killed, Mark had developed an infatuation with Helen and wasn't interested in Anna and Heinrick anymore, so why kill him?When Mark asked Heinrick how long he had been screwing his wife, Heinrick said "one year."..does this mean that the year she was screwing Heinrick, she also was screwing the creature at the same time?.If so, I fail to see why Anna would have an affair with Heinrick in the first place, because she told Mark she got more out of sex with her lover (I assume, referring to the creature).
Why did Anna have that fit in the subway, then start oozing blood and white stuff out of her?
what did she mean when she referred to "SISTER FAITH" and "SISTER CHANCE?"What did she mean when she said "ITS NOT FINISHED", and, when she was having sex with the creature, she looked at Mark and said, "ALMOSTALMOST.ALMOST?".Almost WHAT, for God's sake?..and when Mark saw the creature on top of his wife, he had a look on his face as if to say, "oh oki understand.".well please explain it to me because I sure don't understand it.
At the end, when Mark and Anna took all those bullets, why was the doppleganger not hit?was he like Superman?Did the bullets just bounce of of him?..or maybe the bullets went THROUGH HIM.maybe he was a ghost?
All I could do through this whole movie is say "maybe maybe maybe" about everything because NOTHING made any sense.God I hate movies like this.This was the biggest waste of celluloid, time, and money I've ever seen.Here is a tip for the director/writer: If a movie makes no sense, noone will be able to understand itDUHMore importantly, if nothing is explained, and you are not going to be able to understand it, why watch it in the first place?I was conned into believing this movie was good..I can't help but feel angry..I've just wasted 2 hours of my life that i will never get back.One can only hope that the director responsible for this crap will some day get raped by some unexplained creature from who-knows-where.. -
AwjitA — 11 years ago(October 14, 2014 02:52 PM)
I don't think Andrzej Zulawski needs the tip; his film career is pretty good and has achieved cult status as an arthouse director. But who knows? Maybe he'll appreciate it.
How did you end up stumbling on this gem, if you hate movies like this? It's not an easy one to find.
If you're really just looking for a surfaced, linear plot, this isn't the film for you, but it's certainly a film for a lot of people! Because films like this tap into the subconcious; people who engage in these films find relation in their psyche, in this case pertaining to jealousy, betrayal. Andrzej Zulawski wrote this during a nasty divorce. People do CRAZY things when heart broken (crazier than in this movie!) but what's more, people THINK CRRAAZZZIER things and this is an artist's portrayal. Anyway, sorry you didn't enjoy it, but I assure you it wasn't a waste and quite influential.
(<= 5 REASON TO WATCH POSSESSION) -
jonm11100 — 11 years ago(October 14, 2014 06:44 PM)
For everything that happens in life, there is a reason. Sometimes we dont know what that reason is, but there STILL is a reason, nevertheless. In the case of movie makers, the movie maker has total control over every single thing his viewers see and hear. That being the case, if a movie maker takes his audience through a series of events, I feel he is obligated to let his viewers know why they saw what they saw. If a viewer watches an entire movie, and, at the end, hasnt the faintest idea of what he just saw, then all he has done is waste his time. Are you saying that the makers of this movie did so KNOWING their audience would be left in the dark? If so, then they need to go back to movie school. Whenever I get to the end of a movie and have ten million questions, to me, that indicates BAD writing. Ill give you an example of good writing:
There was a TV series that ended last year called Breaking Bad. When you watch Breaking Bad from beginning to end, you know EVERYTHING. You are left with no questions at all. Every single thing you see on the screen has an explained, logical, easy-to-understand, believable reason, and if you do, by chance, have questions at the end, its because you missed something. All of the answers are in the show. I feel that all tv shows (and movies) should be written this way, because when everything is explained, it makes the story easier to follow, thus, you get more enjoyment out of it. (I might add that the makers of Breaking Bad won numerous oscars. How many awards has Andrzej Zulawski won?) Whenever I see a movie like this one, that makes no logical sense, its easy to get lost to the point to where you have no idea whatsoever is going on. Thats bad writing, my friend. After all, shouldnt it be the goal of every movie maker to entertain as much of an audience as he can? Now, if there is some deep, philosophical, artsy-fartsy reasoning to this movie, then I would agree with you this movie is NOT for me. I borrowed this from a friend who told me it was good. The problem is, no matter what anyone tells you, until you actually watch a movie, there is no way to know if you will like it or not, which was the case with me and this film. Im sorry, I cant be entertained by stories that make no sense. Ive never seen any other movies by this director, so I cant comment on anything else he has done, but if there are people out there who feel Possession is a masterpiece, I just dont see it. There are too many unanswered questions. To me, this is just a bunch of garbled junk that nobody could possibly understand. Oh, I suppose people can come up with their own interpretation of the movie but that's just a matter of opinion. Nobody but the writer could possibly know what point, if any, he was trying to make, other than the fact that marriages go bad sometimes. But that still doesn't explain all the details of the things shown in this movie. -
warrior-poet — 10 years ago(April 23, 2015 10:56 AM)
There's people like jonm11100, and then there's people like this (benardokubrick-95353):
http://www.imdb.com/board/10082933/board/thread/242903518?d=latest&t=20150421142421#latest
One lives life willing to put forth effort. The other one wants everything spoon-fed and complains when it isn't.
I personally do not view "Possession" as a masterpiece (and suspect that many who dub it as such may lean toward what might be deemed arty, overly-intellectual dweebs, or in a few cases snobs, but my final assessment on that, i.e. whether they're in the snob spectrum or are balanced, would depend on whether they like big, dumb blockbuster popcorn films just as well as films like this), although the uncut version has a lot of value and a lot to say to those willing to listen (while I'd agree the cut version is trash).
In other words, "Possession" is far from the "garbage" the OP thinks it is. He just wants it all handed to him and fully explained on a sliver platter instead of being a creative participant, putting forth the effort to explore, both internally and externally, the multi-layered meaning of what he's experiencing with this film.
It's a shame, really, but with maturity may come wisdom. One can hope.
I'm something new entirely. With my own set of rules. I'm Dexter. Boo.
-
JameGumbisSilent — 10 years ago(March 07, 2016 07:18 AM)
I'm curious which numerous Oscars Breaking Bad has won? Do you mean Emmy awards? Then yes, it won numerous Emmys.
You can easily look on the Possession page for its list of awards, to start Zulawski was nominated for the Palm D'Or at the Cannes film festival, and Adjani won best actress.
I suspect you broke your tv in frustration at the conclusion of the final episode of the Sopranos. WHAT WAS THAT? WHY CUT TO BLACK? WHATS HAPPENING? MOM!!!
Heads up, you may also want to stay away from films directed by Stanley Kubrick or David Lynch as well. Maybe avoid art museums too. Too many questions left unanswered.
Have mommy hold your hand whenever you see a movie, she'll explain everything to you if that's what you need.
How can anybody call this Masterpiece a piece of garbage? -
jonm11100 — 9 years ago(July 29, 2016 11:01 PM)
Breaking Bad won Emmysand yes i am familiar with Kubricks movies and to me they all made sense..i never saw the Sopranos..i heard that the ending was "open ended" though which i'm POSITIVE i would not have liked..when i finish a movie or tv show, i expect there to be NO loose ends that would leave me hanging and asking myself all kinds of questions..I can't stand David Lynch movies.they are a lot like this Possession garbage..
-
Draven65-1 — 10 years ago(March 17, 2016 02:14 PM)
"To please the majority is the requirement of the Planet Cinema. As far as I'm concerned, I don't make a concession to viewers, these victims of life, who think that a film is made only for their enjoyment, and who know nothing about their own existence" -Andrzej Zulawski
-
simpsonment — 9 years ago(May 14, 2016 03:50 PM)
Omg, most hilariously irrelevant out-of-the-blue cringeworthy BB reference/comparison ever made! EVER!
that makes no logical sense [] Thats bad writing, my friend.
I stopped there. Not even funny anymore
I Sympathize with Lars Von Trier. -
curious_chaos — 9 years ago(June 05, 2016 11:40 AM)
All of Zulawski's films are (in my opinion) meant to be viewed multiple times. I understand what you mean by wanting clear, cut/dry answers to what you watch. Many people have difficulty when answers are not laid neatly before them. But there are some movies that are so absurd and cryptic, that they deserve (I would say DEMAND lol) second and third viewings. I, like you, was baffled after seeing it. I knew absolutely nothing of its content, and to say I was troubled by it, is an understatement. But it was so unique, I could not stop thinking about it, and I found myself wanting to watch it again; after I saw it a few more times I was able to really see it as the masterpiece it is.
Possession has all the answers you the questions you listed (except for Adjani's babbling about Sister Faith and Chance, you've got me there) but to think a person could pick up and discern what means what, with only one viewing of it, is hilariously and improbably impossible. It's a very complex movie, and whether you find it good or bad, it really should be seen a few times to be given a chance to pick out the subtleties that help put the pieces together.
Give it another try! Do some research about the story, and the making of, and what others have written about their experience of watching it. Then watch it again and it should make some more sense. Whether you'll like it or not, I'm not sure Possession is not for everyone, and that's just the way things are. But it should make more sense. I promise, the answers are all there, but you have to dig a bit under its surface to find them. Pay attention to body language and positioning, and what it could mean. Watch the changing colors. Imagery is very symbolic. Things are not as they seem. That's Zulawski for you!
Watch it with the director commentary, it's quite interesting and enlightening. -
jossseph — 10 years ago(April 29, 2015 05:02 AM)
It would be boring if every movie made would provide an explanation. Watch Mulholland Drive, Donnie Darko or even Triangle (2009). It's food for thought. Not everything must be spoon fed. Enjoy the mystery, engage in discussion about the films - you might learn and understand them better or come up with your own theory. That's why these movies are great. Think about it.
-
Marjeez — 10 years ago(May 04, 2015 05:49 PM)
Some films don't spoonfeed you. If you like being spoonfed, make a thread on each film before you watch it. "Does this movie spoonfeed the audience?". If yes, watch it. If no, skip it. Problem solved, buddy.
~RANKING 2014 FILMS~
www.imdb.com/list/p5gSdyBFHgI
Last seen: Kingsman (8/10) -
resmat-1 — 10 years ago(May 07, 2015 05:38 AM)
There was a TV series that ended last year called Breaking Bad. When you watch Breaking Bad from beginning to end, you know EVERYTHING. You are left with no questions at all. Every single thing you see on the screen has an explained, logical, easy-to-understand, believable reason, and if you do, by chance, have questions at the end, its because you missed something. All of the answers are in the show. I feel that all tv shows (and movies) should be written this way, because when everything is explained, it makes the story easier to follow, thus, you get more enjoyment out of it.
I hope you're just being hyperbolic because this idea of what is good seems far too limiting to me. Think of the countless classic films that you'd dismiss by adopting this mind-set. Things like ambiguity and impressionistic imagery are powerful elements of cinema. -
Tin_ear — 10 years ago(December 20, 2015 01:17 AM)
It's one of those movies that's worth watching if you don't think too much about it. Think of it as high-brow schlock. Those that don't care too much about plot probably love it and will try and defend it as really profound and poetic; I only came to appreciate it by not taking it seriously. I like the visuals, the Berlin setting, Isabelle Adjani's tits, the weird paranoid energy, the cinematography, the subway freak-out, and the beep crazy tentacle monster. It's a sputtering, pretentious mess, but the parts when isolated are at least amusing to gawk at.