john(45) and jane (45) meets at a bar...they go to past to meet jane (25)...they fall in love...jane(25) gets pregnant and give birth to jane (0) whom john(45) takes back to past to the orphanage. my question is simple:
SO ACCORDING TO THE MOVIE JANE GAVE BIRTH TO HERSELF?????? o.O
also
if somehow someone convince me about the above how was the first jane born????
john(45) and jane (45) meets at a bar...they go to past to meet jane (25)...they fall in love...jane(25) gets pregnant and give birth to jane (0) whom john(45) takes back to past to the orphanage. my question is simple:
SO ACCORDING TO THE MOVIE JANE GAVE BIRTH TO HERSELF?????? o.O
also
if somehow someone convince me about the above how was the first jane born????
Hasn't this been deliberated in Physics for over 30 years as the Grandfather Paradox, or a variation thereof?
Upon second watching I caught the subtle things like how John the bartender says "son of a bitch, that's funny" after Jane realized she was setup to kill herself, she had the choice.
He also keeps singing that "I'm my own grandfather, and it plays on the jukebox when he quits and yells at "Jerry?" to just let the drunk guy play the damn song. lol, more that that but those 2 come to mind a couple days after watching it.
More subtle things about his "boss" too, I forget his name, how John goes psychotic at the end and has delusions that he "set the whole thing up" well his delusions might be spot on. Anyway great job by Ethan Hawke, didn't think he had the range for this, well done I'd say.
Even in linear, monotubular timeline, The Grandfather Paradox can be side-stepped with Self-consistency Principle. The "intelligent" Universe. Or at least the illusion of intelligence.
So clever time-travel fiction is about two things: Rewarding repeat readings/screenings *and* flirting with paradoxicals.
Ethan Hawke is an incredible actor.
Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.
k..i did not understand what you just said..mind simplyfying it
share
k..i did not understand what you just said..mind simplyfying it
ok..so you are saying that jane was born to her natural parents and afterwards when the cycle starts they were cut off...so according to theories related to time travel, once the past is changed then automatically the future changes it path...but according to the movie it is just a cycle and there is no natural parents...and also how can a human being coming from another human being be the same??
share
ok..so you are saying that jane was born to her natural parents and afterwards when the cycle starts they were cut off...
so according to theories related to time travel, once the past is changed then automatically the future changes it path...
but according to the movie it is just a cycle and there is no natural parents...
and also how can a human being coming from another human being be the same??
Here's a thought:
John always kills the Fizzle Bomber in the laundromat, before he can carry out the explosion that kills 10,000 people. But the explosion itself is never prevented, because if it had been, John's reason for hunting the Fizzle Bomber would vanish, and it hasn't.
Does this mean that the Fizzle Bomber was actually never responsible for that last bomb? That John has actually he hunting the wrong guy his entire life?
John always kills the Fizzle Bomber in the laundromat, before he can carry out the explosion that kills 10,000 people. But the explosion itself is never prevented, because if it had been, John's reason for hunting the Fizzle Bomber would vanish, and it hasn't.
Does this mean that the Fizzle Bomber was actually never responsible for that last bomb? That John has actually he hunting the wrong guy his entire life?
@Rainofwalrus.
You have by far the best and easiest explanation that I have read so far. Thanks.
Glad to help. We must ignore the smoke and the mirrors of time-travel fiction...
We must track the catalyst(s).
I think people get too hung up on "past cannot be changed / paradox" rules/rationale and it stunts analysis. Once the temporal 4th and 5th dimensions have been breached, not only are all things possible--all things have already happened.
Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.
Actually, one of the things that hit me watching the movie is this:
Old loopy woopy Fizzle Bomber John told his younger self in the laundromat that his killing him is what makes him become the Fizzle Bomber (or something to that effect). If it is true that a necessary key event is that killing, that means that the final big bombing gets stopped every time, but every time he is replaced by the "next" John which plans a new big bombing, which causes the "next" John to stop him by killing him... and so on. This is what I figured was the explanation of the event constantly shifting its date.
I'm sure there are several complications to this way of seeing it too, but which theory about this story doesn't? Either way, I find a certain beauty in it, so I like it.
This is what I figured was the explanation of the event constantly shifting its date.
You explained and interpreted so well that I haven't seen such intelligent and nice to listen, in this case; to read, arguments since university. It would have been nice to talk about you on these kinds of open to interpretation subjects.
By the way this movie is so much better than the Looper, according to me. It ended with me dazed. I have guessed a few things but not the ending the way it was.
tuba-aka-odtu, thanks for the kind words.
I agree it's superior to Looper, but the source material (All You Zombies) is supreme influence for Looper--heck, all time-travel films made after 1970 owe something to Heinlein's work(s).
Looper has its flaws, but I still love it so much. So much to think about ON TOP of the timey-whimey-wobbley stuff. Like the evolution of "The Mutilation Contingency," how many iterations that took to get "running." (hehe, to catch runners.)
Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.
In 3 Spatial Dimensions (nested in the quasi-dimension; Time/Duration) there are numerous Jane(s); enough to self-propagate yet another "Baby Jane."
Now, to fold Space/Time, it's common theory that the entirety of all 3 dimensions + Time need to be folded in a higher, 5th Dimension. Our human minds can;t even imagine the 5th Dimension (outside of our notion/perspective of Time). It would be like explaining to the house-fly that it was actually aboard a submarine at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean. "What's an ocean?" asked the housefly.
In as far as this means anything at all, it's irrelevant to the film.
A mother and a father with identical DNA produce a child, so that child has identical DNA to them both. That happens exactly *once* in the film. To say there are "numerous Jane(s)" is to miss a basic plot point of the film.
Many theorize that perhaps a Prime Jane-0 was born to normal parents and that Catalysts #2 and #3 were met and "Robertson" saw an opportunity to cut out the middle-man (natural parents). But we know Robertson(Catalyst #3) is just one part of this puzzle.
I thought that too. But a John Jane born from himself wouldn't be the same as one born from other ppl.
In fact, even one born from himself wouldn't be the same as himself. The way he was concepted isn't as bacteria, that multiply from thelselves, and even them mutate and aren't exactly the same.
The way John Jane born involved resorting the genes. Some of them were doubled while others were discarded. We could say that the John Jane born from himself would always be the same in case he is in a perfect loop where *nothing* changes and *always* happens the same, but he'd be different from the prime one.
As I asked on another thread, I didn't see Robertson doing anything to make things go as they did. I'd rather believe that a Prime John Jane was able to be hired by the agency and uses his hermafrodite capability to date himself and have a child, starting the loop. He'd to that breaking some of those rules, and then Robertson just chose to let it go instead of stopping it.
Another problem with the Prime John Jane theory is that, if that was his origin, than he *had* a history and a begining. His original father and mother were alive at some place and time. And if they exist, they could have a child, and the Prime John Jane would also be around and some place and time.
IF "many worlds" is at play, maybe there's enough micro-diversity between Cross-Plane, Doubles of John/Jane to allow biological progression to flourish.
If nothing changes, than the whole paradigm falls apart. John catches Fizzle too soon, or worse, a agent not-named-john catches Fizzle too soon. With a prescient traveler older than Fizzle (Robertson), Fizzle is required to change the dates so Robertson, himself, doesn't catch him too soon. In fact, the changing of the dates is as mysterious as Prime Baby Jane herself. In that without changing the dates, Baby Jane #n won't be delivered on time.
The written tale / short story hints greatly at the 11 other agents being just as important as Robertson. Maybe Robertson is really just the face, while other agents are the tentacles (prescient seeding). We lack data.
I think a clue is in the Space-Recruitment-Agency (cover). It would be another catalyst for farming the "likeness" of TPH (that perfect hermaphrodite).
Sorry I don't understand how that would make a John Jane born from 2 normal ppl be the same as one born from himself.
I believed Robertson wanted Fizzle to succeed, so the agency would always improve itself.
Fizzle is the oldest John Jane, so he always knows where he'll be and other agents and avoid them.
Of couse, that wouldn't work like that. Memory isn't that perfect. John Jane can't just come there, years after chasing himself, and just remember all his steps and work avoiding himself.
Yes this is a cat-mouse chase where both cat and mouse are the same. But memory isn't precise, so it facts change. For Fizzle to succeed he can't rely only on memory, he'd need to travel his cosncience back to redo his mistakes. But this is outside the movie's scope.
So it is indeed all the doing of John Jane?
Yes good point. They could be searching for a hermaphrodite while they hire agents. But that would bring back the idea that the agency created the loop, which, at least on what's presented to us on the movie, they didn't create it neither acted to keep it.
I'm suggesting that, even in a closed loop within a Many Worlds system (infinite baby jane's; all unique (progressive)). So that all Jane(s) in the loop are unique w/ completely separate RNA/DNA markers, this would make it easier to supplant the Jane-Loop at any singular point w/ a perfect hermaphrodite.
See, I don't think the cat and the mouse are the same at all. I think it's a long series of EVER INCREASING ANGLES in a fractal_art painting:
Yup, The Loop and loop(s) opened within The Loop are a self-inducing Catalyst; or at least -- for intents and purposes -- all three: Chicken, Egg, and Rooster.
And essentially, turning on the Time Machine for the very first time and having anything "step out of it" implies that the Time Machine had already been turned on prior.
I will make an example. I apologize for the size of the post. Please draw the sequence of actions to help understand it.
Say I take a paper, draw 3 circles on it, and number these circles from 1 to 3. I glue the paper on a ground I know is secure and won't be messed.
Now I go around and grap a rock. I put the rock over the circle 1, and leave to do my things. This is year 1.
3 years later, on year 4, I come back to the paper. No matter what I find, if the rock is over circle 1, I take it. I go back 2 years.
Now I'm on year 2. I go back to the paper. I see the rock on circle 1. I leave the rock there and place the rock on my hand over circle 2. And go 5 years to the future.
Now I'm on year 7. I go back to the paper. No mattter what I find, if there's a rock on circle 2, I take it. I go back 4 years.
Now I'm on year 3. I go back to the paper. I place the rock on circle 3. Then I go 7 years to the future.
Now I'm on year 10. I go back to the paper. If there's a rock on circle 3, I grab it and leave.
This is a non-conflicting time travel. The same rock meets itself most of time, there were times that 3 rocks were together, but they never affect each other. Let's review how it was, now following the normal world chronology. These are the circles that had rocks for each year:
year 1: the rock is "born" on circle 1
year 2: circles 1,2
year 3: circles 1,2,3
year 4: circles 2,3
year 7: circle 3
year 10: the rock "dies" on circle 3
This example is perfectly fine and doable, considering that time travel is a reality.
But now, let's get back to me when I arrive on year 4. Say I see the 3 circles each with its rock. If I follow the plan I created, I'll just ignore the rocks on circles 2 and 3 and grab the rock on circle 1.
But what if I break my plan, and grab the rock on circle 2?
See, the plan is perfect and should work, if followed. And I was following it up till now. Using logic, if all 3 circles are filled, I know that *I WILL* arrive on years 2 and 3 and put the rock on those circles. Otherwise, they'd not be there.
But still by knowing that, I'm still a normal person, in my current time, totally capable of making choices and acting over the choices I make. So, considering the 3 circles are filled with rocks, I can just choose to disregard my original plan and grab the rock on circle 2.
Then I return to my original plan. I go back 2 years to year 2. Circle 1 is filled because I filled it on year 1, and the other 2 circles are empty. I just place the rock on circle 2 and continue my job. I go to year 7, to grab the rock that would be on circle 2. But now I face circle 2 empty.
I filled (did I?) on year 2, but I emptied it (did I?) on year 4. And now, on year 7, circle 1 should be empty by my original plan, but no it's filled. Because I didn't empty it on year 4!
In the original plan, I was traveling the rock thru time. Yes, the rock met itself and there were 2 and even 3 rocks living together, but it was still a unique rock, traveling in a linear way.
But I *CHOSE* to disobey my plan, and now I have a huge issue here. I'm on year 7 and the rock I placed on circle 1 is still there, it never left its place, it never traveled thru time! And the rock I grabbed (did I?) on year 4 from circle 2 and placed (did I?) on circle 2 on year 2 is... *another* rock! A rock that never existed! I grabbed it before I placed it, I "killed" it before it could be "born"!
My point is, even if time travel exists, everything must have an origin, and in that object's own timeline, its origin *must* happen before its destruction.
See Back to the Future 3. Doc would die around 40 years before he was born. In the world's timeline, he'd die before he was born. But in his own timeline, he *still* was born before he died: he was born in 1925, in 1955 he was 30yo, in 1985 being 60yo he went back to 1885, then died.
In my example, on year 4, I can't grab the rock on circle 2. Because, in my and in its timeline, the rock on circle 2 still *doesn't* exist. I can't take before putting it.
I either:
1) follow the plan, see rocks on the 3 circles, grab the rock on circle 1 and continue, or
2) disobey my plan, not grab the rock on circle 1, the rock *never* travels thru time, and *that's it*!
If I disobey my plan, on year 4 there will be rock only on circle 1. The other circles will be empty. I *can* choose what to do, I *"can"* travel thru and fold time, but I *can't* use time travel and folding to create things over nothing. And if I try to do so, that thing will just not exist to begin with. I'll imagine it existing, but it won't.
We can start talking about alternating timelines, so that I arrive on a timeline that I follow the plan and grab the circle 2 rock, then this action breaks the plan on a second timeline where the rock never travels, then I arrive on that second timeline and find only the rock on circle 1 and decide to grab it, this fullfills the plan on the first timeline where I then arrive and find the 3 rocks, and so on.
But this is a theory where parapell worlds exist. This means that there's not only 1 rock, there are infinite rocks on infinite paralell worlds. And I'm not time traveling, I'm actually traveling thru dimensions and moving rocks not thru time but thru dimensions.
Back to my point, our brains are able to imagine what happens in Predestination, but even if time travel was possible, what we see on the movie would *still* be impossible. As, in the movie Inception, we can dream of folding space and change the direction of gravity, and even live that on our imagination (and watch it on a movie), but that can't happen in reality.
Our brain is just able to imagine things that don't exist on reality.
John Jane can't exist, he can't give birth to himself. There *must* be a parent *before* the child is born. The child *can't* exist before the parent and become it. As we can have non-chicken eggs before chicken existed, and we can have an egg that gives birth to a chicken who puts many other eggs, but we can't have a chicken put an egg and be born from it. As a rock can't appear and vanish in loop on circle 2.
And, if we suppose that somebody, anybody, gives birth to a "Prime John Jane", then the loop continues impossible. John Jane can travel thru time as many times as he wants, he'll still have an origin and a history outside of the loop. And he can make as many babies as he wants with himself, these babies will *never* be him.
We can have centuries worth of generations of hermafrodites having time traveling babies, and this generation will still have its serial (if not linear) timeline.
If we try to replace a person for his son, this attempt just destroys the timeline and nobody else starting from that moment will be born. The person we try to grab won't be there when we arrive. As on year 4 the rock will either be on circle 1 or on circle 2 (and 1 and 3). We either find a rock on circle 1 and have the plan broken, or we find a rock on circle 2 (and 1 and 3) and have it fulfilled.
We *can* choose, but the result of our choice will either be the plan working or not working, it *can't* be the rock remaining on circle 1 and a rock "born from itself" existing on its own on circle 2.
Another interesting brain puzzle is the irreal numbers. We can't have the square root of a negative number. That's because any number multiplied by itself will always be a positive number, regardless of the number being multiplied by itself being positive or negative.
Still, there were math operations that people were making, where a negative number was coming inside a square root, when made reversely. Those operations don't exist in reality, but exist on math operations.
Still, there were math operations that people were making, where a negative number was coming inside a square root, when made reversely. Those operations don't exist in reality, but exist on math equations.
Still, even if a perfect hermafrodite fecunds himself, the born person would very very hardly be the same as the father/mother.
Yeah I think I understand now what you think. Each iteration is feeding the next.
That would explain why Robertson said that Fizzle makes the agency better. The better the agency, the more clever Fizzle can become, and that makes the agency better.
But that doesn't explain why John is always the same, and why Fizzle is never caught.
Regardless if the loop is stable or in fractal, every encounter is a new attempt. Some time John as Fizzle will make a mistake. He may even know what to do and when, but he still can make a mistake and get caught by himself.
Let's work on the idea that, once time travel had become possible, the agency started searching for a perfect hermafrodite, to create what we see in the movie.
...
An hermafrodite to fecund himself doesn't require all that trouble.
Now I don't see how to close the loop.
We lack data on prior Loops, we only ever see the one iteration and only in the fact that the dates keep changing do we have ANY proof of numerous iterations. Outside of a romantic need to wrap this all in "Many Worlds" to make it more sensible.
Once the Agency is tracking date(s), which are changing, they could also begin cataloging every change and passing it down the line. Patterns would naturally occur given enough iterations.
Say The Agency has been at this for over 1,000,000 years; only the phase-space is carved out of a tiny bubble in space-time (the Earthly date-range we see in the film). There would be a legacy of pre-knowledge at play. And Self-Consistency would allow for Loops to simultaneously be Closed/Open at the same time within that particular phase-space. Schrodinger-style.
However, to any John() within either Closed/Open Loops would lack access to the pre-knowledge and therefor anything he experienced would be Prime from his perspective. Stable. Unaware of all the swirling above and beyond his role in any of it--for only this iteration.
Could they be using him for something?
Well, he didn't say anything.
shareI don't understand your numbers after the names, so perhaps I'm answering a different question.
Yes, according to the movie, Jane gives birth to herself.
Also, according to the movie, there is no "first" Jane. There's only one Jane.
Also, according to the movie, there is no "first" Jane. There's only one Jane.
Well, they're all the same Jane. No "first" among them.
share
Well, they're all the same Jane. No "first" among them.
Yes, Jane's life will have many "firsts" within it, just like anybody's would. First Jane to learn to drive. First Jane to get published. First Jane to see a total eclipse.
Somehow, I don't think this is what anybody means when they're wondering "which Jane is first?"
Yes, Jane's life will have many "firsts" within it, just like anybody's would.
Perhaps the most logical is just chronologically. In 1945, Barkeep appears in the timeline with Baby. So there are actually two Janes that at first in the timeline. Again, no "first Jane", unless we decide to say they're both tied for first.
share
Perhaps the most logical is just chronologically. In 1945, Barkeep appears in the timeline with Baby. So there are actually two Janes that at first in the timeline. Again, no "first Jane", unless we decide to say they're both tied for first.
I just have to say, judging by your posts on this film, you're someone who I'd love to go out for a beer with and just LISTEN. There are a lot of low-information people who post on places like YouTube and IMDb, it's refreshing to read someone who actually makes complete and rational sense.
shareKind words. These sort of scripts (memento, primer, etc.) require a deconstruction. How many loops? We know it's nested_loops in Predestination: Jane(s) within Robertson(s).
Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.
Like the poster Carl Johnson said, there was only one Jane. She was born once, lived once, and died once (as John). Given the premise of the film, that time travel is possible, it's also possible she was her own parents. That's the point of the film.
Still pond / A frog jumps in / Plop!
The problem is that you wouldn't give birth to yourself, that would be a clone, not a baby.
shareA clone wouldn't come out of your nether region.
shareAnd, if you are your own mother and father, you could well produce a clone. It's unlikely to happen by chance, but essential for the time loop to work.
sharelmao no
A clone is when you take the DNA of somebody and put on a ovulo/zigoto, and let it develop and be born.
If a zigoto duplicates, we have twins.
That's nothing related to what we see in this movie. That's why John couldn't be the same as his father/mother/child.
I'm with you in that I am more confused than someone watching Inception and the Matrix at the same time while drunker than a sailor.
I guess I'll watch again and figure out how hermaphrodite time travel sex and reproduction works. WTF is all I know right now...
There's only one Jane - she gets born, lives out her life and dies, after giving birth to herself.
The movie is inspired from the idea that there is no linear time - only cyclical - and that every element is the reason for its own existence. From this POV - it's not even a paradox, but an idea. According to it - you can't exist in space-time without having paradoxically given reason for your own existence.
And if it's true..
We all might be like Jane in a lot of important ways. :)
The important thing is that 'things are happening in the correct order' to her. Don't forget that line, as it's the most important one in the movie. Time loops, but it loops perfectly around her POV so that the paradox can remain intact.
Maybe I'm just not that smart (which I don't believe), or maybe it's just too hard to comprehend things because of my fibromyalgia and meds and the "brain fog" and concentration problems they've caused, but n omatter how much I read here, I still do not understand this movie. It gives me a headache just trying, lol.
Fiction is a lie, and good fiction is the truth inside the lie.--Stephen King
correction
John (barkeep) tells Jane on the tape that 7 years have passed.
So it's john(45) and Jane (38) or something.
What year was Jane born, 1937?
What year is it when they meet in the bar?