*** Official "IDENTITY" Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Patrick Sun]

I recall Rebecca DeMornay got new boobies back when she was a guest star on ER a few years ago (when she was sort of dating Carter). I had a harder time just recognizing her now that she's a bit heavier (like a heavier Traci Lords).

I still think it's highly improbable that a judge would commute a death sentence execution based on a performance with the shrink, but I guess we had to have the guy be labelled "insane" even though the authorities truly have no idea which of the multiple personalities is in charge, and released to a mental hospital, else we don't get the truth of Malcolm's MPD.

I was pretty sure the kid held the key to it all, there were lots of clues. Even the inmate tells the rest of the personalities he's got a secret. Malcolm was pretty aware of what was going on. To have the inmate escape, only to have him find the motel again was the big clue that something was seriously not right with the reality of the situation. The blood on the back of Rhoades shirt was another clue. The kid was the last to be in his mom's room before they find her dead.

I could have done without the hysterical historionics of the blonde girl in the bathroom. That scene got on my nerves. I wasn't feeling no sympathy when she got carbombed.

When Ginny's head is found in the dryer, a woman in the row in front me was so scared that she yelped and jumped out of her seat. Scenes like that are almost worth the price of admission.

 

[MatS]

I think the director played this knowing people would be looking for clues for a plot twist throughout the whole movie so they threw in a bunch of misdirection.

- convict (Busey) was the kids biological father
- Indian burial ground (revenge for a time when there was no drinking water..as the event happens on a stormy night)
etc...

there was also a lot of forshadowing
- "where did you learn to do that?" (re: stitching) ..."right where you're standing"
- blood stain on back of 'Liota's' shirt
etc...

I'm still not sure about the ending was the kid just Rivers as a boy when he committed the murders or what it just one of Rivers' multiple personalities and he committed the murders as an adult? Which characters in the movie where his personalities and which characters did he actually kill?

I love the first 2/3 of the movie and felt like I invested a lot of time into the characters then the ole twist ending is sprung (and we're all waiting for it to happen) but they don't spend the time hashing it out properly.

the film contained some great on liners:
"I really wish I had beige" (may not be exact quote)

Patrick: "I was pretty sure the kid held the key to it all" ...no pun intended???

 

[DAN NEIR]

After reading some of these comments I can't help but think of Sigourney Weaver in Aliens when she said "Did IQ's just drop sharply while I was away?"
I mean people saying the kid being the killer was unrealistic?? How could someone die with a bat like that?? Hello!! It was all in his head, if a giant pink lizard appeared and turned out to kill everyone it would have been ok because it was all in his head. They were all aspects of his personality. That's why they disappeared, they were re intergrated back into his psyche. The little kid represents a part of himself and wasn't meant to be taken literally. Am I the only one who has ever read or seen stuff on people with multiple personalities before? Being a former psych major I loved this movie. I did see the twist coming but it still didn't keep me from liking this film. And I totally disagree with the argument that once you find out they aren't real you stop caring about them. I don't know about anyone else but I was rooting for him to be CURED at the end, at peace with himself and finally able to subdue his murderous side, to reintegrate all the parts of himself back into a collective whole.. That was what you were suppose to care about. I will concede that a last minute hearing to decide whether or not to execute him was a huge stretch. Not to mention that the last time I checked the psychological community hadn't made up it's mind on whether or not it even recognized multiple personality disorder as a legitimate disorder. If memory serves it's not listed in the DSM IV.

 

[Matt Stone]

I mean people saying the kid being the killer was unrealistic?? ...etc

I can agree with your point about the fact that it's all in his head anyway, but I think it's a double edged sword. The film definitely played for realism inside his mind...so it comes as a moment when they shatter realism in the last minute of the film. That being said, if it's what they were shooting for...than that's kewl, and I'm glad people enjoyed it. But I didn't.

Edit: fixed quote

 

[AJ Johnson]

I loved the way it ended. I would have been disappointed if the guy just made peace with himself after all that. It just wouldn't have fit the mood of the movie imo. And the way the kid looked in the end smiling and tapping that rake thing against his hands gave me chills

 

[DAN NEIR]

He had more than a couple of minutes of screen time. He was on the screen almost all the time. If you were looking at John Cusack then you were looking at him, if you were looking at Liotta or Amanda Peet, you were looking at him. The whole movie is about him. They presented all the different sides of his persona from murderous and violent(Timothy, Liotta,Busey) to the softer sides(Peet, Duvall). I didn't want to see Amanda Peet get it in the end. But I can understand if you never cared from the get go, I just don't get the argument that people stopped caring when the twist was revealed.
On a side note, my God! Amanda Peet is hot!!

 

[Justin_S]

I got into the same argument about how realistic the kid doing the killing was on another board. Seriously, I don't see how people could find it unrealistic when its in the guy's head where anything can happen. In real life, sure, but in someone's mind, no problem there.

I also thought the twist was executed perfectly, and it added to the film for me rather than take away from it. I guess it depends on the viewer, but I was still completely enthralled with everything that happened after the reveal. The ending with the kid attacking Peet was also very effective in my opinion, and was truly a perfect ending in my book.

Also, if you care about the characters or not (I still did after the reveal), I'm glad this was more than just another killer on the loose film, and that this film had more depth than that. This film is damn near perfect in my opinion, and that goes for from beginning to the very end!

On a side note, my God! Amanda Peet is hot!!

Indeed, she is an absolute goddess, and is one of the hottest and most charming women on this planet if you ask me! She's one of my favorite actresses easily, and has been since I first saw her a few years back. I also have to say that Rebecca De Mornay is quite gorgeous as well, and I've liked her for a while now too.

 

[Matt Stone]

Dan,
I'm not an idiot...I know that we watched him via various personalites the entire film, I was just talking about the more concrete idea of rooting for him.

just don't get the argument that people stopped caring when the twist was revealed.

It's not really an argument...it's an opinion. If you didn't stop caring, that's good. I, on the other hand, did stop caring.

 

[Alex Spindler]

Not responding to anyone in particular (I've seen this in many of the reviews as well), but I get the feeling that arguing about caring after the MPD plot is fully revealed is the same thing as when many critics (Roger Ebert included) didn't like The Usual Suspects after its twist was revealed.
In both situations events are not real, but I think their method of presenting them was such that I continued to care about the characters even knowing full well the reality of the situation.

I mean, I sincerely wanted the characters to stop the killer before they were lost. I also really liked the idea of a personality who wanted to escape and be fruitful (minor pun intended) being the remaining personality in this guy's head.

Also, I could find the boy being the agent of killing to be totally plausible. I the small glimpses of MPD I've seen in documentaries, new personalities seem to develop to deal with certain issues, and having a boy be the angry type was perfect, especially given the more outrageous methods that he used (decapitation, forcing a bat down someone's throat). I thought it was so well done and a great way to end the film.

I wonder, however, if he will be able to stay on the loose at all after his escape. He has lost all of the practical personalities and is only left with the most extreme.

Was anyone else reminded of a scene from Hell in Event Horizon when they showed the bat scene? *ouch*

 

[Matthew Chmiel]

I wonder, however, if he will be able to stay on the loose at all after his escape.

Yes, in a few years, there will be an Identity 2.

 

[DAN NEIR]

I don't understand the opinion of those who stopped caring because unless you are watching a documentary, no characters in movies are real, but you care about them anyway, whether they exist in animation, are set in the past, some one's mind or set in the future in a galaxy far far away. It shouldn't make a difference.
I don't think the film makers had to spell every single thing out in regards to why he had MPD. Did the film makers ever tell us why Lector did what he did? It was fairly obvious that some traumatic event or events occured that shattered his psyche. Did this really have to be explained? If you're looking for a clue, I believe John C Mc Ginly's character said that he was the boy's step dad and that his real dad had to go away because of his temper. You could deduce from that that maybe he was abused by his father. I don't feel this was necessary to the plot though.
You don't need a high IQ to enjoy a movie but it helps.

(And for God's sake if the smiley face isn't hint enough, it's just a joke.)

 

[Matthew Chmiel]

you're looking for a clue, I believe John C Mc Ginly's character said that he was the boy's step dad and that his real dad had to go away because of his temper.

Yes, but what about the other characters in the film. Who and/or what are they supposed to represent? And as I said earlier, WHY is he having these multiple personalities? WHAT caused him to have multiple personalities in the double digits? Some stuff is explained, some is not.

 

[Matt Stone]

I agree with Chmiel on this one 100%. Especially regarding more development for the killer. I would have cared about him more had I know why he had those specific personalities.

I was thinking that the film would have worked better if it had shown both "realities" in equal screen-time. They could inter-cut with longer scenes of the killer and his shrink to shed more light on his character. Unfortunately, the film would have been insanely long at that point...but I really think I would have cared more about the fictional characters had I understood the killer's reasons for them.

 

[Doug Miller]

Just a few thoughts:

- I guess this was really more of a Psycho times 10, eh? Killings in a hotel, all done with a split personality. No, I'm not comparing this to Psycho in terms of merit or anything, just an off hand comment.

- I can't help but think that this was one of those movies that had multiple endings. I guarantee the Director's Cut will be something to the effect of "See _____ as the killer" for about 4 of the main characters. Hell, they should have pulled a "Clue" and had it be 1 of 4 different people for each movie. There was so much misdirection in the movie, that you could put the "blame" on any of the last few characters. I still expected the killer to be Amanda Peet personally because 1) She's so damn hot, and 2) Whatever happened to her John's? I would have loved to see her in the orange grove with a flash back to her killing/torturing her customer for his possessions. (Taking after his/her mother.) Pan over to the barn outside the house and see the owner dead, and end with a bad guy in the car grinning, roll credits.

Doug

 

[Matthew Chmiel]

Unfortunately, the film would have been insanely long at that point...but I really think I would have cared more about the fictional characters had I understood the killer's reasons for them.

The film is 87 minutes long.

It took 20 minutes to make the film worse than the previous great 67 minutes.

If they would've added 15-30 additional minutes with Malcolm and Alfred Molina, the film's running time would've only been 102-117 minutes. Not insanely long.

 

[DAN NEIR]

To quote Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction, "That's an interesting point."
Other personalities emerged to deal with different aspects of his life, when a person develops this disorder there are always more than one or two personalities that come forth. I guess I had no problem accepting this because I had seen it done so many times before in film and in books.
Well at least give the film this much credit, it's got us all talking about it.

 

[Matt Stone]

If they would've added 15-30 additional minutes with Malcolm and Alfred Molina, the film's running time would've only been 102-117 minutes. Not insanely long.

I honestly didn't know the run-time and wasn't paying attention to how long it was when I saw it...but with that knowledge, your definitely right, it wouldn't have been insanely long. I think they really could have made a better film with ~20 more minutes.

 

[JonZ]

"I would have been disappointed if the guy just made peace with himself after all that"

This is my point. Since there are already spoilers here,I'll just say it:

Like most I suspected Ray Liotta and then kid after the woman died just after he'd walked into the room.

But the last minute of the film suprised me(the kid showing up at the Orange Grove) and I loved the quick shots showing how the Kid personality masterminded it all.

After all that,the one personality they tried to get rid of ends up being the one who survives. I also liked how it ended with the car escape which resembled the one in the dream with Liotta and Busey.

Until the car bomb I thought I was watching a pretty well made slasher(which is RARE), so the revelation that they were just personalities was kind of disappointing and I agree that u stop caring about the characters after that.

 

[David Lawson]

I don't think the comparison to The Usual Suspects is fair, given that Keyser/Verbal presented himself as a character that was involved in the story itself (and, indeed, he was, since some of the story was factual...remember the burned-out boat in the harbor?).

As others have mentioned, Identity's problem is that you feel no sympathy for Rivers because you aren't asked to feel sympathy for him until he "wakes up", at which point it's far too late, since you've already invested so much time developing sympathy for the characters who suddenly don't exist. Really, what's left to care about?

And why should I care about a man who can't even imagine one nude scene for Amanda Peet?

 

[Alex Spindler]

I'll stand by my comparison. In an interesting way to think about it, you don't have to care for the killer. But what you can care about is who the remaining dominant personality is within the character. One of the people that had been shown at the hotel had killed several people in the real world. The only way to punish him by conventional standards is to kill all the remaining "innocent" personalities, which are presented as fully realized people.

I also think you'll find the intro covered all of the information that you're looking for on the killer. If I am recalling it correctly, it identified abuse as a child and maybe also had a mention of a prostitute mother (which helps explain the hotel manager's distaste for prostitutes - the personality developed to deal with his thoughts about his mother).

I would also disagree that much more should have been shown regarding the killer. If you show it too early, you dispel any chance of keeping the people as personalities thread alive as long as they did. If you show it too late, you bore people with an a drawn-out and anticlimactic ending that just over explains things too much (a complaint many of us have with movies today).

What can I say? I loved the movie, and I did care for the personalities. I cared about the loving mother, the nervous dad who gets called into dangerous situations and runs things by the numbers, the opportunist manager who deals with guilty activities, and the angry child who carries all the rage. All of them had their own roles but I wanted the redemptive personality to have final control. I didn't care much about the "shell", but rather what would be left within it.