MovieChat Forums > The Zero Theorem (2014) Discussion > My explanation for the ending

My explanation for the ending

posted 10 years ago by ThePPrestige
20 replies | jump to latest

Now, of course this is the type of movie where everyone forms their own opinions and conclusions, I simply tried to look at things as carefully and as logically as possible. I saw the movie like 3 times to get a better feel for it, definitely not something you can digest in one viewing.

Now I believe the tangible(non philosophical)ending is this: Bainsley leaves town(or not), Bob is hospitalized and may potentially die, Qohen's consciousness or "soul" is transferred to the neural net, to be part of it forever, or until it is destroyed. What we see at the end with him destroying the neural net with a hammer wasn't physically happening, it was effectively an illusion. Qohen accepts his fate, and reemerges in the neural net, effectively in "heaven" you can say, he can create his own reality.

Subsequently one can also imagine that after the sunset, he became intangible, just an "entity" in the vastness of the neural net.

Philosophical aspect to the ending: The entire movie Qohen was looking for meaning in life, via the phone call, or simply, a calling. In so doing, he lost the opportunity to create meaning for himself. If you think logically about it, life is meaningless, we are born, go through the various process, reproduce, then die. But that isn't meaning, that is simply programming in our DNA telling us to do things in exchange for sensory rewards(pleasure, relaxation, euphoria).

The only way for life to have meaning is to give it meaning, find a reason to live, a person, a goal, anything, and your life will have its own unique meaning for existence. Even if you simply want to "enjoy life", that in itself is meaning.

Finally, the ending isn't as depressing as everyone seems to think, even if the Zero Theorem is true, it means that everything was created out of nothing, which defies the laws of the universe as we know them. However, if true, why wouldn't the universe "pop out of nowhere", again? Why assume its a one time glitch? I think the Zero Theorem itself can't prove that, because no one will be around to experience it.

Not relevant to the movie, just my thought on the universe:
Based on what I know, and simple logic, even though I can't prove it, based on the theories and universal laws we already know, the universe will expand until one day it begins to collapse on its own gravitational pull. Once the matter is all condensed into an infinitely small, infinitely hot and dense ball, it will explode again, recreating the universe. The true wonder is whether or not it reforms the same exact way or if its totally random each time.

Theoretically this could be the trillionth iteration of the universe, for all we know, the earth, and all who dwell on it have already lived, that we already had this discussion. Not based on some magic, but probability. Throw dice enough times, and it will fall on the numbers you desire, or in this case, explode and reform enough times, and one day the SAME EXACT sequence of events will occur. This of course has tiny probability, but it exists nonetheless.

Honestly I can talk about the topic for several pages, but I won't.

Character metaphors

Management: A metaphor for control. Government, Religion, or any type of control. Seeks more wealth, knowledge and power. Is feared by those subjugated to his authority.

Bainsley: I'm not sure if she is a metaphor, but if she is, she is the "call", Qohen's call that is. To leave his meaningless life of waiting near the phone, to live with her. Assuming of course you believe she was genuine in her final intentions(I believe she was). She would most accurately represent the possibility of love and redemption.

Bob: Youth? Bob admits that he is 15 and is already bored with a lot of things. He still has interest in food and women apparently, so he is not totally jaded like Qohen. I think he is a metaphor that youth flies by, and things start to lose their novelty.

Thoughts? Feel free to add your own ending/character interpretations, or anything else you find relevant to the theme of the movie. None of these ideas are completely new, but we can go more in depth.

[–] reaseltbim 9 years ago

if the girl was the call he was waiting for, (the call to tell him the meaning of his life)

Then that means the meaning of life is Love, and more specifically finding your "soulmate"

you can see how Bob says that he doesn't know any girls his age, and how that makes him miserable and sarcastic.

you can also see how Qohen might haveh ad a Normal and happy and meaningful life with his wife.

but once she left him he lost his hair, lost the will to live and started to think he was dying.

all of this pretty much shows to me that what the movie is saying is that the meaning of life is to love, to be loved.
(Noticed how happy he became in that virtual world with the girl, all his happiness came back)

Those without love were miserable and angry with life.

[–] zereshk 9 years ago

I think it's much more cynical. Management and Joby listened to Qohen's ideas about life and figured that if he could only get laid, those problems would disappear on their own, so they sent him a callgirl. Both Joby and Bob comment on Qohen being physically tense and touch his shoulders as if to massage them. It's all very Reichian. A couple good orgasms and the mental rigidity will start to melt - or so they think.

What they don't take into account is how intense the relationship between two emotionally compromised people who get close can become. The other characters (except for Dr. Shrink-Rom, who warns of exactly this repeatedly) are much more flippant about social and physical contact, it's nothing special. But Qohen is sensually deprived, socially isolated, it all becomes very serious. And Bainsley usually doesn't have clients who, as she says, need her. It's so tempting to her to have someone who needs her emotionally, who doesn't see her as a disposable thrill, that she ends up abandoning her old life for a man she barely knows - or rather the sense of power he gives her. So I don't think love is presented as meaning here. Qohen's love for Bainsley not only causes huge problems for both of them, it starts with his boss trying to optimise his productivity. If anything, love is portrayed as - as Bob would say - one more tool. The callgirl is supposed to take the place of the call Qohen waits for, but she isn't the divine purpose of his life (which doesn't exist).

[–] anthony-dewayne-mack 9 years ago

My thought was that once he put on the VR suit and was electrocuted, he started dying. Everything within the scene that followed was his dying gasps. Once he jumped into the black hole and landed in his paradise, he officially died.

[–] RoidDroidVoid 9 years ago

I agree with your thought here. Actually, I thought it was meant to be obvious.

Also, remember Management's comments about people of faith waiting to enjoy an afterlife rather than acting within the lifetime they are given.

I might conclude then, based on what we both, apparently, gathered from the framework of the ending, that we should take the final scene to suggest that faith may be of some use because there may, in fact, be an afterlife.

If interested, you may want to see my post in the "this is garbage" (or something to that effect) thread for the rest of my thoughts on the films meaning.

RoidDroidVoid

[–] avenue129 9 years ago

I think that Qohen is the creator - God. But he is a blind watchmaker. The whole film was about him realising who he was. That he could go through many creation and destruction myths over the span of time. It was necessary for there to be self deception of his status so that he could buy into his particular imagining of the creation myth this time around.

[–] thulk01 8 years ago

Can you explain how you came to that conclusion? Were there other things implying it? And why would god want to do such a thing?

[–] gorguruga 9 years ago

I was disappointed after seeing the movie because the ending seemed too open-ended so I came to the IMDb boards looking for a thread just like this one. Until I read your explanation I was going to relegate ZT to the "bad movie" category but after digesting your ideas the movie has gone up a few points. I think I was a little too lazy to try to tie it all together myself but you've presented some interesting concepts and food for thought here, some of which I think are perhaps not just a subjective perspective but actually some of the underlying intentions of the story.