|
Post by jolt on Apr 22, 2004 12:23:03 GMT -5
OK, this was asked before, but no one answered the guys question cause his english was bad. But if frank is manipulated dead, then why isnt gretchen manipulated dead?
|
|
|
Post by DarkoFan on Apr 22, 2004 13:24:15 GMT -5
I suppose it is open to interpretation, but according to POTT she is manipulated dead. Some people on this site don't agree with that because she didn't time travel, etc. the way that Frank did. I personally don't think that all manipulated dead have to act the same way and the Gretchen that we see (if that is the one that is manipulated dead) has at least as much of an effect on Donnie as Frank does. Besides, it's clear from the director that everybody in the movie is being manipulated to get Donnie to do what he needs to do, so for me the living/dead distinction doesn't really seem to matter all that much.
|
|
|
Post by Pax on Apr 22, 2004 21:24:14 GMT -5
The fact that Gretchen is considered "manipulated dead" gels with the whole idea of the movie, i.e. fate. Gretchen is going to die later in the movie, just as Frank will. Frank is apparently, as someone said on another thread, a "ghost from the future." The converse of this is Gretchen. She'd dead, she doesn't know it yet. That is an extremely morbid way to put it, but it holds, I think. Hell, in a way, Donnie is "manipulated dead," because he is going to die, and yet is being directed to do something by forces beyond his control.
|
|
IIVII
Full Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by IIVII on Apr 24, 2004 17:38:23 GMT -5
Hmm. I gotta dissagree with you pax. I don't think dying in the movie all of a sudden puts you in the manipulated dead category. We see two different Franks in the movie; one with special powers and one who is just a normal living being. If Gretchen was part of the manipulated dead we would see two different versions of her(one with powers and one living the course of her life). Why it says she is a manipulated dead in the POTT I have no idea.
|
|
|
Post by Mojokicks37 on Apr 26, 2004 7:40:12 GMT -5
I think it's possibly because Gretchen is a huge catalyst in getting Donnie to the point of making his final decision that we know as the ending of the film.
The fact that he liked her and she became such a driving force in his life added to her (unknowing) effect on him.
|
|
IIVII
Full Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by IIVII on Apr 26, 2004 19:25:30 GMT -5
agreed, but that merely defines her as one of the "manipulated living" in the POTT book. As i stated before, gretchen matches then definition of one the living more then one of the dead.
|
|
|
Post by DarkoFan on Apr 27, 2004 11:42:57 GMT -5
IIVII...
It's funny that you would cite POTT as evidence of your point but completely ignore the part of the same text that contradicts it.
I'm not sure that the question is really all that relevant. Gretchen IS manipulated dead by definition (i.e. she died in the tangent universe).
But your question is really not really whether or not she is manipulated dead, but whether or not she had the same time travelling and other capabilities as Frank and that is going to depend entirely on everyone's interpretation of the story.
My own personal interpretation is that Gretchen is one of the most powerful manipulators in the movie. Although the viewer does not see a mutilated Gretchen showing up in Donnie's mirror that does not mean that she does not have all the powers of the manipulated dead. Don't forget that everyone is being manipulated for the sole purpose of getting Donnie to complete his task. If Gretchen's time traveling wouldn't help in this goal, she wouldn't do it.
|
|
IIVII
Full Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by IIVII on Apr 27, 2004 23:57:40 GMT -5
Exactly what part of POTT am I ignoring? For you to say that gretchen has the abilities of frank (manipulated dead) and chooses not to use them is a huge stretch. Gretchen acts in no way different then any of the other manipulated living. As far as her controlling donnie more then anyone else I think thats absurd, we all know women have no control over anything .
|
|
|
Post by DarkoFan on Apr 28, 2004 11:36:35 GMT -5
"Exactly what part of POTT am I ignoring?" (your words)
the part where... "...it says she is a manipulated dead in the POTT" (also your words)
|
|
IIVII
Full Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by IIVII on Apr 29, 2004 1:56:55 GMT -5
i'm not ignoring that, we already discussed this before. Why are you saying this agian? I think whoever put her as the manipulated dead in the POTT book is on crack. the book contradicts itself. Either the definition of the manipulated dead is wrong or writing her as one is wrong. It's either one or the other. Gretchen in no way, does the acts that are defined in that book. When comparing definitions of T.M.L. and T.M.D., it's obvious what category Gretchen truly belongs in. However, belive what you will. I'm not going to argue any more over such a trvial part of the movie. In fact, whether she's one or the other doesn't make a damn bit of difference.
|
|
|
Post by DarkoFan on Apr 29, 2004 15:36:36 GMT -5
It's probably better that your not going to argue any more. You seem to be getting way too tense over something that "doesn't make a damn bit of difference." You might not believe me, there was no crack addict that snuck into your house and manipulated the bits of your DVD to show Gretchen Ross as MD on the pages of POTT. That was something that Richard Kelley put there on purpose. You say that "one or the other... has to be wrong" even though other explanations allow for everything that Kelley included to be true (not just the parts that conveniently fit with them). To support your opinion you claim that everyone else in this post is wrong and Richard Kelley is on crack. The only description of ML in POTT is "They are prone to irrational, bizarre, and often violent behavior." yet you claim that makes it obvious that GR falls into that category? Maybe you are the one on crack.
|
|
IIVII
Full Member
Posts: 106
|
Post by IIVII on Apr 29, 2004 16:14:20 GMT -5
Dude im perfectly calm, I just down understand why you like the argue with me over such trivial matters. I'm not stating anything I said to be a fact but it's just mere oppionion. If you think Gretchen matches the discription of the MD more then the ML, then I think I figured out who's the one really on the crack pipe ;D. You did bring up an interesting thing though. The definition of the manipulated living also has it's flaws. "They are prone to irrational, bizarre, and often violent behavior ", no character in this movie matches that definition, unless you look at the two "bullies",but there just normal jackass kids. So in a way you actually helped my statement. I really don't think alot of time and thought went into the writing of the pages for POTT, alot of it just doesn't match what we see in the movie.
|
|
|
Post by DarkoFan on Apr 29, 2004 16:58:11 GMT -5
Dude, 1) arguing over trivial matters takes 2. 2) If the fact that "Gretchen in no way, does the acts that are defined in that book" means she isn't MD -- then shouldn't the fact that " no character in this movie matches that [ML] definition," mean that they're not ML? And if nobody in the movie is ML or MD then what are you arguing about? 3) One thing that I AM very sure of from interviews with cast and the director is that Kelly is very concerned about details, almost to the point of being obsessive. So when you say "I really don't think alot of time and thought went into the writing of the pages for POTT," I think you are plain wrong. 4) "alot of it just doesn't match what we see in the movie." It doesn't match what you saw in the movie. It matches perfectly with what I saw in the movie.
|
|
|
Post by Just a Passerby on May 6, 2004 1:20:09 GMT -5
Damn....
|
|
|
Post by Passing By Again on May 6, 2004 1:21:10 GMT -5
.... I just wanted to tell you two that I liked that movie. Good Day.
|
|