Splice

Er, what bolts are you talking about? (I honestly am not placing what part you're talking about).

And how is foreshadowing bad? I would say that the foreshadowing was actually pretty effective, because it's gotten you thinking about the possibility of what is going to happen, then hits you with it.

This is not a movie for shocking twists or jump-scares, for the most part. It's about set-ups and reveals.

The bolts that were holding down the container the slug-things were in when they fought. I don't remember the exact layout, but I did count four bolts. They looked like 5/8" to me, so assuming it was a center stand and not one of four legs, it would take 3,100 pounds of sideways force at the top to tip that thing over! You're not going to get that with two twenty pound (a generous estimation if I say so) creatures thrashing around in a cage.

A prime example of the foreshadowing issue is the fact that we didn't find out that the lady's mother had a bad mental history until after she herself started acting crazy. The mother, the farm, and the history, none of them were forshadowed before they appeared.

The other extreme would be when Dren was watching them get it on.

The only instance of appropriate foreshadowing I can remember is when his brother told him there was a change in the hormones of the slug.

What is "appropriate" foreshadowing? I didn't realize that there were rules for foreshadowing.

I'll admit that the scene with the bolts you were talking about, I had originally thought was going to turn out to be a nightmare sequence, so I wasn't being too picky. The bolts failing there had no plot relevence, it was visual-effect-only, and thus not really something I cared about too much. The purpose of that scene was simply a giant Oh, Crap! designed to force their hand with Dren ( and to itself add foreshadowing to the end of the movie).

I simply don't see the problems you do. The scene where she witnesses "mom and dad" seemed pretty natural to me, and made what came later make more sense. Remember that Dren was playing out an entire childhood of awkwardness and learning in the space of a month or two.

edited 7th Jun '10 2:38:01 PM by Dracomicron

I'm sure you didn't realize it.

Appropriate forshadowing is forshadowing that hints at a possible future without making it a fucking certainty, pardon the pun. Appropriate forshadowing also induces Fridge Brilliance. Details that don't seem important at the time, but become important later on, or indicate one future but add up to an unexpected one when Chekovs Gun finally fires.

They didn't allude to Elsa being crazy when she decided to ditch scientific ethics in order to create something her employer had already told her was a financial infeasibility? She did seem awfully driven to do it FOR SCIENCE. They also showed her looking at a photo of her mother (and not appearing well afterwards) waaay before her mother issues popped up. Just because some things were obvious doesn't mean everything was.

Fridge Brilliance? Ginger's hormonal changes were noted, but it wasn't identified as potentially sex-changing because Clive and Elsa were too busy with Dren. They later paid less attention to Dren (she drew all new pictures of Elsa, remember?) because of the friction between them, and then Dren also changed sex.

Now, the farm, that was never alluded to.

The farm doesn't seem like something that would just come up in normal conversation at the office, which is mostly what we saw until then. Especially when your work at the office involves freaky Frankenstein shit.

Heck, Clive doesn't even know about it. The very fact that she kept it from even him, I'd say, is some pretty big insight into her character.

edited 8th Jun '10 7:12:27 AM by Dracomicron

Here's moviebob's review at the escapist. He really enjoyed it. How accurate is this guy by your milage?

Speaking of Cube and Vincenzo Natali, anyone see Nothing?

This movie was mind rape incarnate, yet I liked it. It was well set up and paced. Freaky ass ending too. It does raise some interesting ethical issues and had some very interesting moments. My favorite part of it though was the "murder" by drowning of Dren. It was just an interesting and very intense scene. Another well done scene was when Dren killed Clyde, the look he(?) had on his face was just so similar to the earlier cat killing scene. That was VERY well foreshadowed. It seemed to be a "take that" at Elsa.

Om the topic of Movie Bob I find him accurate most of the time(he is the reason I wanted to see it in the first place), but there are times when I do not agree with him(I personally have not liked either of the Iron mans)

syvaris

Might want to watch those untagged spoilers.

Considering they were not tagged other places already.

I would advise the same thing to those people, but I didn't notice them.

Am I the only one who got a mildly sexist vibe from the movie?

To clarify without giving anything away, I mean sexist against men.

I got a more mommy issue vibes from this movie. Most films seem to be directors dealing with daddy issues, but we all know what happens here(well most do). So who directed this again? Anyway some one should do some digging, I can bet they had a poor relationship with their mother.

^It was directed by the guy who did Cube.

edited 12th Jun '10 8:05:09 AM by Jumpingzombie

I got the sexist vibe too. Unsympathetic controlling woman does mad science, abuses a powerful hybrid human, and claims it's all in the name of science. Then she ditches her boyfriend to die in the cold, and every notable male in the movie gets offed. Deep down I was hoping she was sent to prison at the end, but no, she's getting paid. I felt no pity for the character at all, and felt she deserved to die the most of all. Though I am still scratching my head over why Clive waited for Dren to orgasm before trying to kill he/she/it. Rant over. Yay spoiler filter.

Did anyone else feel like Clive was raped too? I felt it was more subtle hinting with hormones manipulating his mind, but I think it was possible. I still call BS with Clive suddenly blaming Elsa for all of the problems though.

I thought some of the foreshadowing was obvious from the start. When they were talking about having kids, and then the affection for Fetal and child Dren. Then the gender change. I figured that Clive would get Dren preggers though, but once the gender flip and human sex scene came, I knew awkward sex scenes were on the horizon.

But it was an interesting foray into our steadily advancing biological technology.

edited 17th Jun '10 3:05:41 AM by Ry3386

Oh, sheesh. Sexist? Really? Against who? The "unsympathetic" female characters or against the idiotic male characters? Nobody comes across well in this movie, because it's a total FUBAR.

Regarding Clive: I'm guessing that Dren had some crazy powerful pheromones, but he wasn't exactly "raped," per se.

I know this is terrible, but its something my friend loves to say.

"You can't rape the willing, and if you orgasmed, you were willing".

Yes, yes I know terrible, but the last couple of posts made me think of it.

I just rented Splice this week. The premise seemed cool, and I really wanted to like it... but I thought the science was terrible. Just completely unbelievable.

Anybody else feel that way?

The science is not worse than multitudes of other cautionary out-of-control For Science!! movies/shows, and actually better than most.

I thought this was one of the year's best movies and that it deserved much better at the box office. I felt Natali was very ballsy to make something like this and not conform to major studio and audience tastes (oddly enough, Warner Bros. distributed in North America).

I'm not saying it was a terrible movie. I thought the main characters were believable, it was visually appealing, and the engineered animals were really cool. But the scientific premise was bad, and broke my suspension of disbelief. This ruined the movie for me. YMMV, I just wanted to see if anybody else had this experience.

As movies of the sort go, I liked the science. It portrays scientists working in a lab with (sometimes) recognizable equipment, working as part of a team, trying at least tangentially to accomplish recognizable scientific goals, and constantly in conflict between the research they want to be doing and the profit-driven motives of their superiors.

As opposed to the more common paradigm of the lone mad scientist in his basement doing bizarre stuff For the Lulz.

The misportrayal of how scientists work is at least as deeply entrenched as the misportrayal of science itself.

That's an awfully weird way of spelling For Science!.

Thank you for that brilliant and insightful contribution.