What I mean (To avoid unwanted spoilers) is: Why did Greg lie about how Rachel would live when she actually died at the end? Was that some type of thematic or moral element in the story? If anyone could answer, that'd be great. :)
shareIt was bs .......something that was used to make the ending more dramatic. Bad gimmick
shareterrible cheap trick. Very overrated film
shareA bit overrated considering its imdb rating. Not terribly.
my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings
i thought it was reference to what the guy who played Shane from The Walking Dead told him in his office about learning new things about the person after they die, sorta how they live on.
shareI thought it was predictable that he was lying. Especially when it got to the point where she said she was quitting treatment.
shareHas no one ever heard of the unreliable narrator?
shareIt is not that Greg is unreliable, there seems to be a deeper meaning to his words.
Celebrating 100 Years of DADA * Feb. 5, 1916 * Zurich
It is not that Greg is unreliable, there seems to be a deeper meaning to his words.
WHY does no one understand this?
It was not a CHEAP TRICK. The movie is describing how he himself felt.
And he flat out tells you, "I really thought she wasn't going to die."
He kept reminding us and reassuring us that she wasn't, because that is what he had been doing for himself, and he was in disbelief when it actually happened.
Sure, he was in SHOCK but the part was not in there just for a "cheap trick".
Cancer patients die every day that constantly are reassured "Hey you will be okay" and families are in constant disbelief that cancer patients they knew actually died. We know cancer is a disease that kills millions, but once it actually happens to someone you know, you are sort of in a state of disbelief and somehow convince yourself they may pull through. And when they don't, you are still shocked as if they just up and died with no warning.
I feel most people on this board that feel that the movie was planned that way purely for shock have never experienced a close family member or friend with the disease.
You always try to have more hope and tell yourself by some small chance, they will get better. And a lot of times, they don't.
[There are spoilers in here, and the blocks may not reliably avoid them]
That was more or less my take.
He was putting us in the same frame of mind he was in at that point in the story: no matter what indications there might be to the contrary, it's all going to work out somehow, and she won't die. He fools us (somewhat, and for a while) because he fools himself in the same way. Moreover, I think that's pretty normal for someone in that situation.
Also worth noting: the lie sells itself in the context (we know we're watching a movie) because we're pretty accustomed to movies that manage happy endings against all odds (maybe even against their own titles).
As someone else mentioned in an earlier post, the lie lost believability when she said she was quitting treatment. It was supposed to. At the risk of noting the obvious, he lost the ability to believe that it'd all be okay at that point as well.
Humanity_Youve_Failed, what a bitch you are! "OFC" you are!!!!!
Humanity_Youve_Failed, what a bitch you are! "OFC" you are!!!!!
Humanity_Youve_Failed, what a bitch you are! "OFC" you are!!!!!
AAHHAA
Upon a recent rewatching, Greg clearly says at the beginning of the movie that "he made a film that literally killed someone"
The tipoff was there from the beginning. Y'all (and me) missed it.