Movies and your personal therories when you watch them.

[Dead kate moss]

Who or what is being redeemed anyway?

(If Andy is innocent, which I had my doubts about as the movie doesn't prove to the viewer that he's innocent as would usually happen in such a movie, right?)

[Ignatius_S]

Who or what is being redeemed anyway?

(If Andy is innocent, which I had my doubts about as the movie doesn't prove to the viewer that he's innocent as would usually happen in such a movie, right?)

I wouldn't say that the title has a set meaning, but can be interpreted as people see fit.

Personally, I thought it was very strongly suggested that Andy was innocent - the whole subplot about someone claiming evidence that might free him and his subsequent murder by the corrupt power that operates the prison (perhaps it's the institution is being redeemed) works best if he's innocent.

That said, one thing that I think is a neat touch is that the information that the audience has about Andy's innocence or guilt is that which other characters like Red have.

However, I wouldn't say that the main story is about whether Andy is guilty so there are other elements to focus on. As for, 'the movie doesn't prove to the viewer that he's innocent as would usually happen in such a movie, right?', by the same token, one can also argue that the movie doesn't prove that he is guilty as one might expect from such a film.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

I think the film leans towards him being innocent anyway (it would have been a stretch for Tommy to have been describing a different crime that happens to match the details of Andy's case), but it's interesting to think that he may not be.

[Dead kate moss]

I think the film leans towards him being innocent anyway (it would have been a stretch for Tommy to have been describing a different crime that happens to match the details of Andy's case), but it's interesting to think that he may not be.

I just read via wiki that in the original short story, that crime involved a lawyer being framed, and Andy theorises it's probably a mistake and he means banker... a bit more (unnecessary) ambiguity, though it may not seem so if you've read the original, which I haven't.

[hummingofevil]

Are you saying "Boo" or "Boo-urns"?

I think it makes it more interesting if he's guilty. Red was guilty and we didn't lose sympathy for him.

[Scouse accent]

I agree... sometimes a lot.

[confettiinmyhair]

I know there is a sequel to the novel, but after watching Trainspotting I've always had it in my head that Renton blows the cash and ends up going back to drugs.

[Dead kate moss]

I think it was Fables writer Bill Willingham who made the point when he couldn't use the character for the main villain (for the same reason my friend who is JM Barries descendent isn't rich because of it), but now to me Peter Pan is clearly a 400 year old child-snatcher. Paedo Pan more like. Captain Hook is probably a misunderstood hero trying to kill the monster.

[Custard]

Drag Me To Hell was actually all about the central-character's battles with bulimia.

Don't believe me? Watch again, and see how often food features in her worst moments.

Spoiler alert

I stole this theory from IMDB.

[close]

[Jemble Fred]

Drag Me To Hell was actually all about the central-character's battles with bulimia.

Don't believe me? Watch again, and see how often food features in her worst moments.

Spoiler alert

I stole this theory from IMDB.

[close]

Funnily enough, I saw this for the first time at the weekend. I can not think of a single notable sequence where food is mentioned even vaguely. The cursing and the fight in the car which seems to go on forever? No food. The big seance showdown at the end? No food. The train station? Again...

There is a lot of spewing, admittedly.

[Custard]

Well, there's the whole scene at her fella's parents dinner, off the top of my head. There are other bits, and someone did a list, so I'll report back once i find that. I also remember her commenting on struggling with weight, and once being really overweight, and she listens to self-help Don't Eat Cakes Please tapes in her car. There
is more. There is more!

[Jack Shaftoe]

I think it was Fables writer Bill Willingham who made the point when he couldn't use the character for the main villain (for the same reason my friend who is JM Barries descendent isn't rich because of it), but now to me Peter Pan is clearly a 400 year old child-snatcher. Paedo Pan more like. Captain Hook is probably a misunderstood hero trying to kill the monster.

Ha, I've written a whole kids' book on that premise. Peter Pan really is creepy as fuck, with his gnashing teeth, oozing sap and leaves, and (I think) being 'the last person children see when they die'. Or summat. Brrrrr.

[Jemble Fred]

Well, there's the whole scene at her fella's parents dinner, off the top of my head. There are other bits, and someone did a list, so I'll report back once i find that. I also remember her commenting on struggling with weight, and once being really overweight, and she listens to self-help Don't Eat Cakes Please tapes in her car. There
is more. There is more!

Don't get me wrong, it is an interesting theory... it's just really, really badly done if it was at all intended – just the few bits I already mentioned must make up for half the running time (the car sequence goes on forever!), comprise the genesis and conclusion of the whole plot, and aren't food-related.

It is the norm for films where a character is being haunted or affected by the supernatural for those around them to suspect it's down to normal psychological problems, like anorexia; but I'd be surprised if Raimi intended any specific connection to be made.

Now if the theory was that she was allergic to forms of transport – cars, trains – that might be on to something...