Explaning Pleaseeeee

[deleted]

Religiously speaking they are of course DEMONS or those that dwell beyond. Director gives this religious reference in the beginning quote, in the mysterious mark on the shoulder of her husband, even in the name of Camael.

However, in my opinion, I'd label them as a gypsy family of murderers. Imagine Camael being father, the old woman traveling with them is his wife. The younger - his daughter and the other dude is his son. Then the other old man perhaps his brother or just a like-minded fellow. They travel while searching for naive middle-class families to invade into their houses. Being well familiar with brutality that is distinctive to eastern European nations, in particular to gypsies, that is what they are superior at.

I can only see this from detective experience. Homeless men traveling around the country while looking for families to rob. Anyone knowing well psychology knows how fast you can trick the family wife that is bored of daily routine. They would also use drugs on the kids. The operation they do is taking their organs for sale - a common practice of criminals like that.

Finally, they could not do much with the property they got after killing parents. Knowing cops would finally be searching for them following disappearance of two gardeners, they took their kids and went away. Kids will most likely be sold for slavery and human trafficking so why not taking them for a short trip?

Of course we can romanticize repulsive killers like that, but when you work in criminal investigation, you come across a lot of scums that specialize in illegal activities like that.

LOL,
ANGELS comes from greek. It just means MESSENGERS.


One should make up his/her mind. Are the guests forces of evil or are they angels. Do not try to blur the line between them by speaking of angels as violent beings or else you cannot explain evil at all anymore.
Is Camael the SNAKE from the biblical allegory or is he an "angel of destruction" and if latter what exactly destroys, a rich bourgeois family with their kids? I know of angels that announced Lot whole city will be wiped out, better he and his family get out quick.

The Gamael from the Bible only was messenger for the couple to get the beep out of eternity, out of paradise and leave their lifes as family, in homes like the one in the film and have kids like the ones in the film, to work for their bread and to exit life at some point. Mind you is someone up there pissed that somewhere in this century the sons of Adam and Eve are not quite living the lifes bible prescribed them or that only some of them are living it and comes to steer all up for the "right"?
You cannot imply anything about Camael having or not desire of sex with the heroine. Fact is he just doesn't have it. His younger companion although tires his "little man" with Stine the beautiful housemaid. He keeps telling not yet and not does he does not want.
This story is so rooted in the OLD Testament and does no service whatsoever to the idea of JUSTICE/GOOD.
One could say the visitor only asked for a bath. But then if he is an angel/demon he doesn't need one. Why is he pissed off? If he on contrary is just a hobo just the opportunity of "playing" some bourgeois a lesson. To outsmart them. He LIED about knowing the woman. ( Eve and Adam were only lied by the SNAKE/EVIL) never were they lied to by the other side :)
He got beat it. Most of you americans I guess would have also grabbed a gun and point at the poor fellow.
How can the pair in the film be liked to the biblical pair is beyond me.
Last evening after sawing the film I remember thinking the movie was good and defending it in one comment on another thread from the accuse that was pretentious crap.
This morning I see it better and remember clearly what was it that shortcircuited it for me. It was in the middle when the bearded Camael on point of leaving says to the protesting woman that all is boring to him and he feels the need to PLAY.
And that's about what the dutch director here does. Play. In play. Throwing so many disparate cues from disparate sources into his play. Only that I doubt it now that it worked. Up until that reply of Camael I was watching the movie as it was set for me, that direction, but afterwards I watched the film just for curiosity of how it will end. Never serious just like you aren't supposed to take it serious that kids throw slabs of stone upon mens' heads.

But the Testaments are so messed up accounts for me that like this director they can try in vain to explain evil. Seeing the pack as gypsies, magicians or pure supernaturals invites its own problems of understanding. Not feeling bad for watching it but it certainly is no account of anything only an absurd play and quite humorous one. Think of it just about no one in this play is a good being. The "good" wife has to cheat her husband to achieve christian virtues, to command from housemaid further obfuscation of her "good deeds". what can be more comical than that. That's why I watched. Nothing serious. Not even the supernaturals are really serious, the guy can sit on naked wife at night troubling her visions but he needs cement and bucket and the helping hands of other "angels". Really people should relax a bit about this movie. How can one relax about a movie with so much violence, death. One in which evil triumphs. It the way of the nature, of the garden, it just reclaims what hers back whenever has the chance. Next time better not serve hot soup to a hobo in your marmor bathtub. Nice one from the director that one as well.