*** Official "VANILLA SKY" Discussion Thread (2 Viewers)

[Jason Seaver]

No, they pretty clearly stated that some clients, not wanting to deal with being future-shocked, opt for the "Lucid Dream" upon resuscitation instead of (or in preparation for) walking out into a confusing new world where everyone they know and love is dead.

So, basically, it goes like this:

1. Aames signs a contract with LE, which includes "Lucid Dream" service.

2. Aames commits suicide; per his contract, LE gets custody of his corpse.

3. LE puts the corpse into cryonic storage.

4. 150 years pass

5. LE's successors resuscitate Aames, but before he awakens, puts him into the "Lucid Dream" virtual reality/dream-world

6. Aames's subconscious makes a mess of it

7. Aames chooses to leave the dream, and wakes up into the future.

 

[brian a]

I guess I assumed that LE didn't know about his suicide. Calling someone and letting them know that you're about to kill yourself could lead to them sending help.

I didn't see anything to indicate that they knew about his suicide beforehand other than the fact that they needed to get his corpse within a certain time window.

brianca...

 

[Jason Seaver]

Maybe they didn't know that Aames was going to kill himself, but all that really matters is that they received his body in a timely fashion.

 

[Brett_B]

Thanks for the replies, Jason.
One more question,

4. 150 years pass
5. LE's successors resuscitate Aames, but before he awakens, puts him into the "Lucid Dream" virtual reality/dream-world

Is this the way it was explained to Tom Cruise when he was on the elevator with the Tech Support?
I guess I am going to have to sneak into a theater and catch that part again. Maybe I was trying to piece everything together at the time of the explanation that I may have missed that part altogether.
Brett B.

 

[Jason Seaver]

Yep. They're pretty specific about how "Lucid Dream" is an alternative to waking up in "the real world", as opposed to just a way to pass the time until you get there.

 

[Howard Williams]

The last couple of days I saw "Lord of the Rings", Oceans 11" and "Vanilla Sky". I never saw or even heard of "Open your Eyes". The best of the 3 movies was definatly "Vanilla Sky". It was the only one of three that had me thinking as I walked out of the theater. Still don't know if I really understand it, but I think I got the main point. Despite all the hocus pokus I beleive the author was saying:

it is better to live in the real world as a pauper/average guy/peon than in a fantasy world as a King/Hot Shot/Stud.
Is that about right?

The funniest part for sure was:

the dead pan expression on "Benny, the Dog"s face when the camera zoomed in for a close up while on the Conad TV show. Man, that was funny!!!


People seem very hard on this movie. I'm not sure why. I enjoyed it a lot.

 

[Mike St.Louis]

Very good movie.

I'm still thinking about it.

The music was good too.

 

[Greg_Y]

I don't understand the Hollywood trend to remake films that don't need to be remade. (OK, I do understand it -- $$). In the past year, we've had at least 3 major feature films that are remakes of very, very good films. Planet of the Apes, The Grinch, and now Vanilla Sky. None of these 3 remakes are in the least bit necessary other than to line the pockets of their respective studios. Yet all 3 were directed by men who you would think know better (Tim Burton, Ron Howard and Cameron Crowe, respectively.)

I don't mean to say that Vanilla Sky is a bad film. It's not. But it is completely unnecessary, unless you speak English but are illiterate and can't read subtitles. I viewed the DVD of Abre Los Ojos yesterday afternoon and saw Vanilla Sky later in the evening. While I don't feel like my time or money was wasted going to see Vanilla Sky, it certainly would have been better served viewing ALO for a 2nd time.

I read somewhere (another thread on the HTF?) that Cameron Crowe said that the two movies would complement one another. He likened it to a good band doing a cover version of a good song. Fiddlesticks. If a cover version, be it song or film, is worthwhile it must add something to the original. In ALO, the audience could connect with the main character of César. In Vanilla Sky, I felt little connection to David. The relationships between the characters were quite natural in ALO, while in Vanilla Sky, they were awkward and ill-defined. (That was also my biggest problem with Almost Famous ... many people running around in a lottery ball mixer of a screenplay where Crowe would occasionally pick them out to interact.)

Anyway, I could go on about the little things that were done better the first time around. I won't. Someday, I could *get* Cameron Crowe and why he feels so much of his life needs to be up on the screen. But, honestly I don't think that will happen either.

 

[Richard Kim]

Alright, I've seen Vanilla Sky, as well as Abre los Ojos. From reading the negative reviews, I was expecting the worst for VS, but I was pleasantly surprised. Crowe added some of his trademark stuff, like some humor, rock and movie references. The ending which explains how his dream world is modeled after influences in his life (the album cover, To Kill A Mockingbird) was rather moving.

In Abre los Ojos, the main character shoots and kills a cop at the LE building. Supposedly, they show this in The VS trailer, but was taken out of the final version. Since VS takes place in New York, could it be that since the NYPD are held in high esteem right now, that Crowe removed this plot point? Interesting, since the he kept the WTC towers in.

Also, in Abre los Ojos, they focused more on the psychiatrist character's shock and disbelief that he is just a part of another man's subconcious, and that he will disappear when he wakes up. I really liked this part, and was disappointed that Crowe didn't really focus on this in VS.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I was not that sympathetic for the main character. He's a handsome, rich playboy (your typical alpha male), who can have any woman he wants, and he tries to steal away the girlfriend of his best friend, who is not as good looking or influential as him. OOTH, perhaps this is part of the reason he dream turns to a nightmare, as well as his disfigurement and his conflicted feelings for his jilted ex girlfriend. He' sorting out all of his problems in his subconscious.

 

[Nick Sievers]

I seen this earlier today and was very impressed by it. I seen A LOT of bad press for this and was expecting to be stuck in 2hrs of hell. Especially since i'm a Tom Cruise and Penelope hater, this is definately the only film i've liked with him in a title role. I haven't seen the original but i'm definately going to try and find this one now. Its definately been playing with my head all day which I like.
Just one major let down, I wish they didn't feel like they had to explain every little detail on what is going on, the whole elevator scene could have been chopped IMO. I felt like I was being treated like an idiot, just let the audience think for once. But overall

 

[Greg_Y]

Did anyone besides me NOT buy the Freewheelin' Bob Dylan album cover thing? Did Tom Cruise's character strike you as the type that was way into Bob Dylan? Didn't think so. Another unnecessary Cameron Crowe touch.

 

[John Spencer]

So am I the only one who noticed that throughout most of the movie the sky in the background is exactly like Monet's "Vanilla Sky" painting? This is both before and after the "Splice." Wouldn't that be the clue that the entire film is his dream sequences?

 

[John Thomas]

So am I the only one who noticed that throughout most of the movie the sky in the background is exactly like Monet's "Vanilla Sky" painting?

That's one of the problems - I think that's one of the points made by it's detractors; too much is spelled out for the viewers during the movie. It's too obvious after David wakes from his night of debauchery.

 

[Brett Jason]

I have't seen any mention of this and maybe there's no significance. The inspection sticker on the windshield of David's car (you can see it very clearly before the Mack Truck almost slams him and his friend) expires 2/30/01. Since February can't have a 30th day, I thought that was very odd. Made me think maybe the whole thing was a dream, but not sure. Anyone notice or read this before?

 

[KunWang]

I didn't watch the original movie but found Vannila Sky very entertaining and provocative. I am surprised by the many negative comments about it both on the internet and by critics. Is it because they found the remake not as good as the original? Now I have to find the DVD and watch it.

One question: has anybody here noticed that in the final scene on the roof top, the background was not the current New York, but rather 150 years later? This is supposed to be in David's dream, and one cannot dream of something he has never experienced before.

 

[bryan_chow]

One question: has anybody here noticed that in the final scene on the roof top, the background was not the current New York, but rather 150 years later? This is supposed to be in David's dream, and one cannot dream of something he has never experienced before.

But remember, Tech Support was there - they have some control over what is in his dream. Also, it's not true that one cannot dream of something he has never experienced before. Finally, who says that's what NY REALLY looked like 150 years from now? Maybe he was completely off...might only be what he THINKS NY would look like.

Bryan

 

[Pieter_L]

the first credit you see at the end of VANILLA SKY is:
"WRITTEN FOR THE SCREEN and DIRECTED by Cameron Crowe".
seeing that it is virtually a scene by scene remake of ABRE LOS OJOS / OPEN YOUR EYES written by the hugely talented Amenabar (& Gil), i thought credit was not given where due.
Not only was most of the dialog & situations kept intact - some of the visual scenes & blocking was virtually identical (disco scene, etc).
when Cameron Diaz & Tom Cruise appeared on Leno on two subsequent days, BOTH took pains to point out the VANILLA was "written and directed" by Crowe. no mentioned was made who & where it was "borrowed" from.
at most, Crowe should have claimed "slightly modified for American audiences" , and give Amenabar a bold credit. as i remember, he got a small credit way at the end of the long credit s scroll ("based on the film.... ")
from imdb, the WGA states something like: "If there was previously existing source material but the writer creates a substantially new and different story from the source, then the "screen story" credit is used. ". there was nothing 'substantialy new' in this case.
comments?

 

[Seth Paxton]

******** SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS ************

Yes, the whole film occurs in his dream state, BUT this does not mean that the memories of before the accident are wrong.

The film is using multiple timelines throughout, with foreshadowing moments and reflective moments. Assuming that he begins the film in jail, he has just "awoken" from his "empty NYC" dream and is now telling it to the shrink.

The pre-splice moments that are shown are from him TELLING THEM TO KURT RUSSELL, not in actual time sequence.

Therefore we have reality and dreams all mixed together, although the reality moments are memories being recounted while within the dream world.

We have no reason to doubt the validity of those memories as depicted on screen, but his ability to hear Sofia's voice at the beginning of the film, for example, makes perfect sense.

The film's TIME FRAME starts with one of his meetings with Kurt Russell, but the STORY timeline goes much farther back via his recountings to Kurt.

And I did believe 100% that Cruise had those tastes in music. Crowe makes it a point to show that Cruise has been living his life like a playboy indulging all his personal tastes, women, music, cars, snowboarding, films. He is in "play mode" all day, every day. He lives his life like he's in college, so the fact that he's into lots of music makes tons of sense.

 

[Seth Paxton]

one cannot dream of something he has never experienced before.

I'd disagree strongly with this. 75% of my dreams are things I've never experienced before.

Have you ever dreamed of falling from a great height? Now have you ever really fallen from a great height?

 

[PhilipG]

So I watched Vanilla Sky last week... and didn't like it.
Last night (v late) caught a TV broadcast (W/S, of course) of Abre Los Ojos. Wow! What a difference. Amazing that two films with virtually identical scenes had a completely different impact on me. While VS was dull, drawn-out, and melodramatic, ALO was interesting, well-paced and dramatic.
The problem must be Cameron Crowe's. Ludicrous! This, after Almost Famous?! Ah well, you win some, you lose some.
As for Cruz's opening words in VS:
It it my interpretation that the beginning of the film, up to the splice, is told in flashback from within the dream of the rest of the film.