No, CASTLE KEEP was a highly metaphorical and existential movie. Certain scenes were not meant to be taken literally as it was depicted. In real life no woman would simply let some strange soldier into her home and into her bed to become a substitute husband/lover and father to her son. It wasn't meant to be taken at face value. The whole scene was possible a set of historical religious and cultural metaphors. All of CASTLE KEEP could be interpreted as one colossal, complicated dream or else broken down as a series of dreams within a dream. One theory speculates that all the American soldiers were already dead and undergoing some kind of inexplicable purgatory that resembled their former, war-torn lives; or quite possible they were literally in a hell of their own making, not a place of fire and brimstone, but a surreal recreation of the European battleground where they lost their lives. I don't subscribe to that theory although it is fascinating and evocative. I am a simpler man with a simpler explanation suitable enough for the thinking man. The movie is base on a book by a writer who integrated his philosophical, moralistic, religious, and spiritualistic emotions (as opposed to rock hard beliefs) with his revulsion of war and unnecessary but militarily necessary destruction. That comment I wrote seems self-contradictory, but think about it and you'll eventually get the point. We humans tend to find ourselves compelled doing things we know shouldn't do, don't want to do, but end up doing anyway for one contradictory reason or another.
reply
share