Enemy In-Depth Analysis (Fully Explained Theory)

Great analysis! I really enjoyed it.

Really, a well thought out analysis of the movie. As you pointed out I picked up on the accident relating to the scar when i Watched the movie. I didn't quite think about the cycle starting all over again as you suggested. A very nice read indeed!

Thanks a lot.

Best and perfect analysis!

WOW!!!

THANK YOU!

That was brilliant.... I had not even thought of them being the SAME PERSON on top of everything else, and completely loved the film on an A+, 10 out of 10 level, but just about every single thing you analyzed made perfect sense.

So, so, so, so impressed with this film after viewing it for the first time today.

What an incredible sleeper hit.

Thats a great analysis. I havent read all the posts here but I would also add Helens Hairstyle. She has the same hairstyle (spiral) as Kim Novak or the woman from the painting in Alfred Hitchcocks Vertigo. That is why I considered Adam/Anthony as the same person too. In Vertigo the second act is about Scottie making "a similar" woman into the first one he loved. I think that is crucial for this movie. In the last scene Anthony is "replaced" by Adam and he sees the spider. Which I think means that the marriage is now as it "should be" which is a fantasy come true. Like Scottie discovers that Madeleine is actually Judy and his dreams come true. In philosophy when a dream comes true it is considered nightmare. The spiders in this movie are also nightmarish creatures walking all over town meaning that in our society everyone is living a dreamlike life.
Ninon de L´Enclos, a courtisan from the 17th century said that in society we need to play a role in order not to be cast out. Which is some kind of dictatorship through society and it repeats itself over and over again because societies arise and die like flowers. Which makes perfect sense because Adam is the intellectual and Anthony is an actor and the actor is the tool in this movie to live out the urges of the intellectual.

I liked your analysis and it was almost compelling enough that I am tempted to not toss this movie on the annoying artsy-fartsy scrap-heap. I have a few thoughts on it though.

Your explanation of the non-linear aspect makes sense on second thought, but I prefer the way that Memento approached it because they made it clear from the start. I don’t like it when a directory does it like this so that you are forced to watch it again. I have better things to do with my time.

Your theory of an endless loop is in fact exactly what Saramago’s original story is. In the book, the actor dies in a car-crash, the teacher takes his place, then he gets a call from a guy claiming to be his double. That is a much more interesting twist which they removed from the film adaptation, and one which your theory fits better than the movie.

I have issue with your contention about them being the same person because Helen still had line-of-sight on at least half of Adam when she called him. Even if his head and hands were out of sight, how could he possibly have known what she was able to see in order to answer?

Most critically, you claim that Anthony manufactured the Adam personality, but how could he just suddenly, magically become and accredited college professor?




(Response notification is off.)

Good theory/analysis and well explained, makes me appreciate the movie more. Would also explain why the bit-actor with a pregnant not working wife has such a nice apartment. Probably a million tiny little ways others might interpret the scenes too which is great.