A Simple Plan reminded me of another movie I watched some time ago called "Armored". The two movies actually were very similar, and the idea behind them was nearly the same. Both movies had the idea of paranoia after taking money. In A Simple Plan, Hank was a respectable man, that was dragged into a life of crime, after taking 4.4 million dollars with two friends. His plan was supposed to be straight forward. He holds the money until the summer, at which point the three split it into three, and move away. Obviously, that was not the case. Armored, had nearly the same exact plot. A group of 5 armored truck drivers devised a plan to steal a delivery of over 40 million. They decided to bring in a 6th person, who was also respectable. Originally he did not want to join the scheme, but after being assured that no one was going to get hurt , he finally accepted. The plan was also simple, after a certain checkpoint, the men would drive into a lone warehouse, split the money, and make a run for it.
In simple plan, immediately after Hank took the money, paranoia hit him. Suddenly he decides to bring back 500k, to make things look less suspicious. The solution was not smart at all, and the only reason why Hank stuck with it, was because of the paranoia of being caught. The person that would come to reclaim the money, would quite easily notice the difference between 500k, and 4 million. Hank and Jacob went back to the area, but while they were there, a random old man questioned Jacob about a fox. Instead of acting reasonably, Jacob ends up running over an old man in fear, and Hank decides to suffocate him when he realizes he is alive. Armored had the same concept. The group of 6, met up at the lone warehouse. However a random homeless person happened to occupy the place. Instead of letting him leave, one of the men took out a shotgun and shot him, in fear that he would be identified by the man. In both movies, as soon as this happened, things went down hill, and both sides split.
Luo ends up figuring out that Hank murdered the old man. Hank now feeling completely insecure gets Jacob on his side, and after a confrontation with Luo, the two end up killing Luo and his wife. In armored, the group of 6 also split up right after that one murder. At that moment, the one guy that originally did not want to join the group, ended up locking himself in one of the trucks, and the entire group of 5 turned on him. Over time some of them slowly turned to his aid, but were killed off by the rest.
The general idea, and parts of the plot were almost identical. Both movies had a "simple plan" which was supposed to be succesful without any intereferences. Then because of paranoia there was a pointless death which resulted in a split between the groups.
However ironically some of the smaller details were also exact. In both movies every member of the group was killed except for the "smarter" one that did not want to get involved. Also, in both movies, the money was never used and was infact burned. In A simple Plan, Hank at the very end decides that the money was useless and trackable, so instead of spending it wisely he burns in. In armored, the one guy decides to burn the money to prevent the others from claiming it.
It almost felt like one of the movies was a remake of the other. The only major change was that one movie had 3 regular guys discovering money, while the other had armored truck drivers transporting it. Also A simple plan took place over a number of days, while Armored took place in only one day. Other then that, the movies were nearly identical.
Sunday, May 20, 2012
Monday, May 14, 2012
Memento
Throughout the entire film, Memento is made to be confusing. The fact that the past is shown later in the film, results in the audience never knowing the reasons behind an action made by characters. As the movie progresses you begin to piece together the events. However, just when you think you finally understand exactly what has happened, the ending shows you a different theory, or possibility. The ending brings to mind the question about whether or not Leonard truely has a condition where he can not create new memories. At the very last scene the character Teddy, "reveals the truth". He explains that Leonard has already killed his wifes assaulter. If this is the truth, then perhaps Leonard is just a killer on the loose. There are many scenes in the film that prove both sides of the story. But I think the film slightly edged onto one side.
Some of the hints that suggest perhaps he doesnt have the "illness" and is indeed a sociopath, are his constant small memories. For example, he seems to always find the pictures in his pockets. How is someone that has no new memories; able to remember to check his pockets. There is also that final scene, where he writes down Teddy's license plate, which ultimately leads to Teddy's death. It is safe to assume Leonard planned on discovering that the license plate belongs to a "John G." If he had another another reason to kill Teddy, then he should have at that moment. But instead he set up a mystery for himself.
However, there are scenes that suggest otherwise. Many times the film showed what Leonard was thinking. Often times he would think "out loud". The first thing he did many times, was question his location, and what was happening. If his memory was fine, and it was a mental issue, he would not need to question his location. Also when he was at Dodd's appartment, he knew very well that Dodd was armed, and could potentially kill him. If this was a mental issue, he would not convince himself that he was actually in his own house, to the point where he went and took a shower. Also Leonard claims he remembers everything before the incident. Why didnt he remember his wife was diabetic? This could imply that perhaps Teddy's story is atually false.
As to why Leonard did not kill Teddy at the spot, or why he wrote down the license plate number if Teddy was innocent, is an important question which could determine the truth. However, Leonard did want to kill Teddy at the spot. He went up to him and pointed the gun right at him, before Teddy convinced him not too. After he decided not too, he realized that Teddy was infact a "John G." and decided to investigate it further by writing down his license plate. I do not neccessarily think that Leonard knew it would lead to Teddy's killing. But I think a huge part of the movie, was that although Leonard followed his notes without question, the notes could be as flawed as memory. Leonard would virtually follow his notes without question. Perhaps his original intention was to get more details on Teddy. But because of his lack of memory, when he saw his notes, he actually thought they were hard evidence. Right before he kills Teddy, he was convinced that he pieced the mystery together. Finally when he wrote down "He is the one, kill him", he did not question it. He did not know the reason, or who Teddy was, but he obeyed his note either way. He put more trust into his notes, then himself.
I think there was also one final evidence of Teddy's story being false. The beggining of the film, showed Leonard taking a picture of Teddy's death. If he previously killed his wifes assaulter, it is safe to assume he would take a picture. Obviously through out the whole film, he did not have another picture to remind himself. Now although he could have disposed of a picture, I think it is very unlikely that he made a tatoo dissapear. He tatooed all of Teddy's details onto himself. If he ever hunted down another "John G." then he would have tatooed details of the other "john G." just as he did with Teddy. Obviously, that was not the case, as he clearly only had one license plate tatooed onto himself. I think this is the most important evidence, that Teddy was infact the first "John G." that he killed. (Ignoring potential targets, that he was tricked into killing by Teddy.)
The final question as to why Leonard remembered to check his pockets for pictures. I believe this is one of the questions that isnt really supposed to be asked. There wouldnt be much of a movie, if he was not able to remember absolutely anything.
Some of the hints that suggest perhaps he doesnt have the "illness" and is indeed a sociopath, are his constant small memories. For example, he seems to always find the pictures in his pockets. How is someone that has no new memories; able to remember to check his pockets. There is also that final scene, where he writes down Teddy's license plate, which ultimately leads to Teddy's death. It is safe to assume Leonard planned on discovering that the license plate belongs to a "John G." If he had another another reason to kill Teddy, then he should have at that moment. But instead he set up a mystery for himself.
However, there are scenes that suggest otherwise. Many times the film showed what Leonard was thinking. Often times he would think "out loud". The first thing he did many times, was question his location, and what was happening. If his memory was fine, and it was a mental issue, he would not need to question his location. Also when he was at Dodd's appartment, he knew very well that Dodd was armed, and could potentially kill him. If this was a mental issue, he would not convince himself that he was actually in his own house, to the point where he went and took a shower. Also Leonard claims he remembers everything before the incident. Why didnt he remember his wife was diabetic? This could imply that perhaps Teddy's story is atually false.
As to why Leonard did not kill Teddy at the spot, or why he wrote down the license plate number if Teddy was innocent, is an important question which could determine the truth. However, Leonard did want to kill Teddy at the spot. He went up to him and pointed the gun right at him, before Teddy convinced him not too. After he decided not too, he realized that Teddy was infact a "John G." and decided to investigate it further by writing down his license plate. I do not neccessarily think that Leonard knew it would lead to Teddy's killing. But I think a huge part of the movie, was that although Leonard followed his notes without question, the notes could be as flawed as memory. Leonard would virtually follow his notes without question. Perhaps his original intention was to get more details on Teddy. But because of his lack of memory, when he saw his notes, he actually thought they were hard evidence. Right before he kills Teddy, he was convinced that he pieced the mystery together. Finally when he wrote down "He is the one, kill him", he did not question it. He did not know the reason, or who Teddy was, but he obeyed his note either way. He put more trust into his notes, then himself.
I think there was also one final evidence of Teddy's story being false. The beggining of the film, showed Leonard taking a picture of Teddy's death. If he previously killed his wifes assaulter, it is safe to assume he would take a picture. Obviously through out the whole film, he did not have another picture to remind himself. Now although he could have disposed of a picture, I think it is very unlikely that he made a tatoo dissapear. He tatooed all of Teddy's details onto himself. If he ever hunted down another "John G." then he would have tatooed details of the other "john G." just as he did with Teddy. Obviously, that was not the case, as he clearly only had one license plate tatooed onto himself. I think this is the most important evidence, that Teddy was infact the first "John G." that he killed. (Ignoring potential targets, that he was tricked into killing by Teddy.)
The final question as to why Leonard remembered to check his pockets for pictures. I believe this is one of the questions that isnt really supposed to be asked. There wouldnt be much of a movie, if he was not able to remember absolutely anything.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)