Shutter Island - What did you think?

[dejr_8]

OK... so SPOILER ALERT (LOL)...


I don't know about anybody else, but these are mine:

1. Andrew Laeddis (Leo) is crazy, and even though he has a breakthrough in the end, reverts back to his delusion and is lobotomized.

2. Andrew Laeddis is crazy, has a breakthrough, and then FAKES a relapse because he would rather be lobotomized than live with the fact that his wife killed their children and he then murdered her.

3. Teddy Daniels (Leo) is NOT crazy, pretends to have a breakthrough back to the personality the evil Dr. John Cawley tries to convince him is real, and then decides to have the lobotomy because he knows he can't escape.

OK. I agree with 1 and 2 but I think Leo's character is too strong to give up in your third scenario.

 

[dodukes]

I think that #2 is what i thought was most likely because of his comment at teh end to the dr. before he walks off. But I do agree with the website I read about seeing the clues if you watch it again.

Like in the interview or when they are "seaching in the rocks". I can see where everyone knew it was a game.

 

[dejr_8]

So for those that read the book - Is Andrew Laeddis sick on the boat related to the fact that his wife drowned his kids?

 

[GoodFairies]

So for those that read the book - Is Andrew Laeddis sick on the boat related to the fact that his wife drowned his kids?

He has a thing about water, which is one of the central themes of the book.
It goes back much further than his wife & children, back to when he was a child and on a boat with his father. He got terrible seasickness. It is also assumed that his illness is at least partially related to drug withdrawal - remember they took him off his meds to allow the delusion to play out fully.

I thought the movie (and book too) was great and did not find it confusing at all - it lays everything out clearly in my opinion. It is interesting to note that the last line of the movie is not in the book and the book has no ambiguity regarding that - he simply regresses to the Teddy personality and they must give him the lobotomy. It is also interesting to note that in the book it's not really a twist about what's going on - the surprise is the series of events that led to it. This is because the law of 4 is much more fleshed out in the book than in the movie and it is easily solved by the reader long before the "reveal."

The "really tricked a man into thinking he was someone else because he got too close to the truth" (#3 above) is silly and not a plausible theory at all.

 

[DawnCt1]

I liked it. Not enough to watch it twice. There are a few movies I can watch more than once. TAKEN is one of those movies.

 

[DawnCt1]

I think that #2 is what i thought was most likely because of his comment at teh end to the dr. before he walks off. But I do agree with the website I read about seeing the clues if you watch it again.

Like in the interview or when they are "seaching in the rocks". I can see where everyone knew it was a game.

I agree, #2.

 

[claudia]

I loved it....would have to say that it is one of my all time favorites.

 

[Christine]

OK... so SPOILER ALERT (LOL)...


I don't know about anybody else, but these are mine:

1. Andrew Laeddis (Leo) is crazy, and even though he has a breakthrough in the end, reverts back to his delusion and is lobotomized.

2. Andrew Laeddis is crazy, has a breakthrough, and then FAKES a relapse because he would rather be lobotomized than live with the fact that his wife killed their children and he then murdered her.

3. Teddy Daniels (Leo) is NOT crazy, pretends to have a breakthrough back to the personality the evil Dr. John Cawley tries to convince him is real, and then decides to have the lobotomy because he knows he can't escape.

I had a theory that Teddy Daniels came to investigate the missing patient, got too close to knowing things, and was "drugged" with hallucinogens by the doctors who made him crazy. I know there's a lot of holes in the story but what bothered me was when, the last scene, his doctor walks out, sits on the steps with him, and calls him "Teddy" before he even knew that Andrew had reverted back.

 

[Angelhalo]

DH and I enjoyed it. We guessed the ending though so that was a bit of a bummer.

 

[CleoPahd]

I don't think Shutter Island is necessary to watch two times to understand. And I think the ending isn't actually concrete. I see three possible scenarios for what actually was going on, and each one seems just as plausible to me as the last. As opposed to The Sixth Sense, which has only one actual explanation.

I completely agree.

 

[dejr_8]

This is because the law of 4 is much more fleshed out in the book than in the movie and it is easily solved by the reader long before the "reveal."

What are the additional details of the Law of 4.

 

[DisneyFan32WI]

Oh geez, no wonder I am even more confused....I was thinking this thread was about SILENT HILL (NOT Shutter Island).

Duh, me.

 

[dodukes]

I had a theory that Teddy Daniels came to investigate the missing patient, got too close to knowing things, and was "drugged" with hallucinogens by the doctors who made him crazy. I know there's a lot of holes in the story but what bothered me was when, the last scene, his doctor walks out, sits on the steps with him, and calls him "Teddy" before he even knew that Andrew had reverted back.

oh wow i didnt catch that. It is now definetely on my must watch again list.

 

[I*heart*MickeyMouse]

Just watched this last night. My wife hated it. I was confused by it. I found a website that said when you watch it a second time (i.e. knowing the ending) everything makes senses.

Should you have to watch a movie twice?

*not reading this thread yet, as Shutter Island is in my Netflix queue and I don't want to be spoiled*

But The Usual Suspects is an AWESOME movie that if you watch a second (or third and fourth!) you always pick up on something - an *aha!* clue... I love movies that make me think. Another movie is Memento, great movie but definitely one you want to see twice.

That being said, my dh saw Usual Suspects once, and had no desire to see it again. He liked it but was satisfied with the ending and didn't care enough to watch it again and see more things. Some people are like that - just satisfied with what they initially see and know. Nothing wrong with that at all.

(this coming from someone who watched every single Lost episode at least 3 times - initial viewing, and rewatching 2 times during the week before the next new episode - and also rewatched every season during the off season)

 

[MomNeedsVacay]

I ruined it by completely guessing the ending at the very beginning...no shockers for me....sigh

 

[okeydokey]

I had a theory that Teddy Daniels came to investigate the missing patient, got too close to knowing things, and was "drugged" with hallucinogens by the doctors who made him crazy. I know there's a lot of holes in the story but what bothered me was when, the last scene, his doctor walks out, sits on the steps with him, and calls him "Teddy" before he even knew that Andrew had reverted back.

He did? I thought he called him "boss".

 

[Christine]

He did? I thought he called him "boss".

You are correct!! I KNEW I couldn't remember my theory.

So here's what got me thinking. If the doctor walked right out to him and say "boss" then, IMO, he was actually *leading* him to insanity. I mean, the day before, they spent all that time convincing him he was Andrew, he finally believed it. They showed him the next morning and his doctor walks out and calls him "boss"? I mean why would he do that unless he was trying to make him think he was still a cop? Shouldn't he have walked out and called him "Andrew"?

 

[GoodFairies]

You are correct!! I KNEW I couldn't remember my theory.

So here's what got me thinking. If the doctor walked right out to him and say "boss" then, IMO, he was actually *leading* him to insanity. I mean, the day before, they spent all that time convincing him he was Andrew, he finally believed it. They showed him the next morning and his doctor walks out and calls him "boss"? I mean why would he do that unless he was trying to make him think he was still a cop? Shouldn't he have walked out and called him "Andrew"?

I think it proves the opposite. First, he doesn't call him boss until after Leo calls him Chuck. Then the doctor makes the motion to the other doctor that he has regressed. After the final line (the one that adds the ambiguity about whether he is actually in the Teddy persona or not) he calls him Teddy - note that Leo does not respond and keeps walking (most likely because he is Andrew now).

 

[Christine]

I think it proves the opposite. First, he doesn't call him boss until after Leo calls him Chuck. Then the doctor makes the motion to the other doctor that he has regressed. After the final line (the one that adds the ambiguity about whether he is actually in the Teddy persona or not) he calls him Teddy - note that Leo does not respond and keeps walking (most likely because he is Andrew now).

I guess I didn't pay enough attention to all that. Maybe I do need to see it twice.

 

[vettegirl]

I love that movie, and I watched a second time and it was even better watching the characters knowing the ending. Great move