Poll: What theory do you subscribe to (spoilers, obviously)

[fgadmin]

nickoten — 14 years ago(May 22, 2011 01:36 AM)

1. I wasn't that impressed by the movie but I think that 2 is selling it short.

[fgadmin]

k_byrne04 — 14 years ago(May 24, 2011 02:06 PM)

Has anyone watched the commentary / extras.

[fgadmin]

IMDb User

This message has been deleted.

[fgadmin]

IMDb User

This message has been deleted.

[fgadmin]

Demarates — 14 years ago(December 26, 2011 03:42 AM)

2
"I am not a complete idiot, some parts are missing."

[fgadmin]

General Comment — 14 years ago(January 23, 2012 03:44 PM)

2 for me. Often with these films the explanation is deliberately left open to interpretation, but I think the possession theory fits nicely.

[fgadmin]

robovich — 14 years ago(February 22, 2012 01:22 AM)

vote for #1

[fgadmin]

troodon311 — 14 years ago(February 23, 2012 06:35 PM)

1 for me

[fgadmin]

chet19 — 14 years ago(March 10, 2012 05:24 PM)

One
I never even imagined whatsoever that Simon had anything to do with Gordon. I suppose the clues are there, but it's a stretch.

[fgadmin]

dhmason6155 — 14 years ago(March 17, 2012 01:48 AM)

1
Unc John "We makin' trouble?"
Stacy "Yeah"
Unc John "What kind?"
Stacy "The forever kind"

[fgadmin]

smashsmack — 13 years ago(June 22, 2012 07:25 AM)

1, it's the most fitting choice, quite honestly it's the most disturbing and adds a lot more depth to the story. 2 would just be the easier explanation since (IMHO) there's not much supporting the possession theory besides the end dialog, possession is always a cop-out for when they don't have an ending and is thrown in there to fill the missing gap.
Because sponges never have bad days.

[fgadmin]

Indifferent_Observer — 13 years ago(June 23, 2012 06:38 PM)

2 to me is obvious

[fgadmin]

JazukaiX — 13 years ago(August 01, 2012 06:10 AM)

I subscribe to theory #1.
#2 doesn't feel like it has any deeper meaning.
"If I don't understand it, it's a plot-hole!"
-Typical Reviewer

[fgadmin]

ElectricKoolaidAcid — 13 years ago(August 02, 2012 04:26 PM)

2. The ending dialogue explains that Simon "preys on the weak." 3 has already been done (well maybe after the fact) in Identity.
   Look at how happy you are, so carefree. It's almost as if you don't know you're Billy Bush!-Triumph

[fgadmin]

VaultBoyX — 13 years ago(October 11, 2012 02:50 AM)

1. Small amount of Evil lives inside each of us. Simon is just a name for it.
   Final line - 'I live in the weak and the wounded.' is not 'I'm entering the weak and the wounded.'.
   So, no "possession" theme for me.

[fgadmin]

jonathanmoffat — 13 years ago(October 16, 2012 07:43 PM)

1
corn, chicken, green peppers, chilis, sigh onions

[fgadmin]

craigc1223 — 13 years ago(November 01, 2012 12:51 PM)

2 gets my vote.
It's the voice. Gordon hears the same voice that came from Mary. There is a connection and that is the voice and Simon.

[fgadmin]

IMDb User

This message has been deleted.

[fgadmin]

EziliGede — 12 years ago(May 23, 2013 07:37 PM)

"There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion."

[fgadmin]

rc_lrd — 12 years ago(June 08, 2013 08:35 AM)

1
The Mary tapes reveal a case of multiple personality disorder brought on by an extremely traumatic event. The disorder is the mind's way of repressing memory of the event.
Hearing these tapes gives a hint (to the audience) that this is also what's happening to Gordon.
(But: I don't altogether rule out the 'supernatural' explanation 2. The movie is ambiguous. It's
meant
to be ambiguous!)