<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Another interpretation of the movie]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><em>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Seconds</em></p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto"><strong>Od1n</strong> — <em>11 years ago(September 29, 2014 06:58 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Yes, it's a very sad movie. About a man who can't find himself in our reality, our social rules, way of life.<br />
But what about humanity driving forces - always looking ahead, try something new, live in avantgarde?<br />
If you look from another angle, that human always curious about everything surrounded him, including himself, always in search for something, better place, more money or another feelings - wouldn't this choice to change his life be an act of courage?<br />
Just because it didn't work it doesn't mean Arthur has been defeated or whatever. I would say completely the opposed, he had bravery to change his life, to do something with his frustration. And I think he realized in the end what he really needs, even if it was too late. You could notice he didn't want to die (or sacrifice his life).<br />
He needs a freedom from social ties, from his tailored life. Freedom of choices and a way he wanted to live. That's why "company" didn't work out, it was another even more strict life, a false one.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/181905/another-interpretation-of-the-movie</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 13:59:07 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/181905.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:52:05 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Another interpretation of the movie on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:52:06 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>Deluge69-663-991830</strong> — <em>10 years ago(July 01, 2015 12:44 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">A very late reply, but your post makes lots of sense.<br />
There was this hypocrisy of adjusting. Sounds more like conforming.<br />
Adjusting to yet another version of conditioning.<br />
People are conditioned to be conditioned, then (as is the case here), he is unconditioned to then be reconditioned. No real 'change'. Just went from A to B., like far too many clones in our world today.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1527605</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1527605</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:52:06 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>