Pan's Labirythn Discusion (spoilers involved)

[ThaSaltCracka]

Hey All,

I know many of you have seen this movie already, including our esteemed overload El D. Of course I liked it as well.

Anyways, I am sure there are several topics from the movie worth discussing. Some of the stuff I don't understand, some I do.

As soon as the movie ended, I immediately thought this movie had several connections to Christianity and Christs life. One being, life after death, in a kingdom which could be described as heaven. In this movies specific case, the main character is God's sibling. Also, the main character gave her life for others. Pretty amazing stuff really. So I am wondering does anyone else feel the same way? I found it quite profound actually.

Another question, and this is one I asked in the OOT thread. What was the story with the evil child eater thingy? What purpose did it serve? Is there a backstory, maybe one based in Spanish Folklore? I also mentioned that I had a hard time trusting the Faun during the movie and when I saw all the kids shoes in the evil dudes room, I thought he sent her there to die. Was this just a trick by the director?

The third question. Did she just imagine the whole thing? Or were parts of it dreams since the main portions of the "fantasy" tales happened at night? A little strange if you ask me, especially since the tree story happened during the day.

last question, Since the labirythn was real, what was with the hole in the ground? Was it based on some ancient civilization in spain or something.

Sorry if these are dumb questions, feel free to bring something new to the table.

[dknightx]

i dont understand the part where she, instead of opening the middle lock, opened the lock on the left, and still was able to get the "correct" item.

my vote is that it was all in her head ... one reason is because when the evil dude came to kill her, the camera from his angle did not show the girl talking to the faun, just to herself.

[pete fabrizio]

I liked this movie up until the scene with the guy with eyes on his hands. I liked how she disobeyed the fairies and got the knife. And then when she ate the food, I thought she did it on purpose so that she could kill the monster, and that would be the real test -- like whether she had the will and courage to break the rules in order to save lives. It just didn't make sense why she would be so dumb otherwise.

Oh and it was too violent.

[Georgia Avenue]

I agree I think it was supposed to be all in her head, Dancer in the Dark-style. I mean, I know there's ambiguity, but I think that the director's point could be that people triumphing over evil in the real world by working together for justice is the real magic.

Also, I loved the scene where she's eating grapes and that monster is coming after her...It's sick that she'd create a fantasy world where she sets herself up to fail and be berated for acting like an idiot.

Lots of penetration in this movie don't you think? People getting stabbed and stuck with needles and sewing themselves back together and sticking their fingers or bodies in tiny holes and cupboards.

What can it mean I don't know?
--GA

[JaBlue]

Here are my takes on your questions:

[ QUOTE ]


As soon as the movie ended, I immediately thought this movie had several connections to Christianity and Christs life. One being, life after death, in a kingdom which could be described as heaven. In this movies specific case, the main character is God's sibling. Also, the main character gave her life for others. Pretty amazing stuff really. So I am wondering does anyone else feel the same way? I found it quite profound actually.


[/ QUOTE ]

I took the ending as "the girl is imagining herself living forever in the kingdom but she actually just dies" because of when she's holding the baby, talking to Pan, and general sees her but not the faun. I felt like the movie took place in two different realms: that of reality as represented by everyone except the girl, and that of faerie tales as represented by her adventures. Of course there was the introduction that seems to imply that the world of faerie tales is actually here, but I still think that in the movie's reality the girl just dies.

[ QUOTE ]

I had a hard time trusting the Faun during the movie and when I saw all the kids shoes in the evil dudes room, I thought he sent her there to die. Was this just a trick by the director?


[/ QUOTE ]
I think part of Pan's appeal is that its impossible to know whether or not to trust him. The girl's whole imagination and the part of the movie coming from this is based on trust in faerie tales.

[ QUOTE ]

The third question. Did she just imagine the whole thing? Or were parts of it dreams since the main portions of the "fantasy" tales happened at night? A little strange if you ask me, especially since the tree story happened during the day.


[/ QUOTE ]
I think the girl was imagining everything. That doesn't make it any less real for her, though, and since she never had the chance to outgrow her imagination like the maid and her mom, it doesn't matter [for her].
something new to the table.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
i dont understand the part where she, instead of opening the middle lock, opened the lock on the left, and still was able to get the "correct" item.

[/ QUOTE ]

I figure it meant she was the "chosen one". Like she knew which one to pick even tho the fairys effed it up.

Personally I think the whole thing was in her head. It makes much more sense and I think makes the whole thing a much better movie. It also jives more with the feel of the movie. I mean the whole movie is shot so dark and violent, and the fantasy being a fantasy fits in more with that.

I really want to (and should) watch it again before I argue either side tho. I think a second viewing specifically watching with that particular theme (real or not real) in mind would be very illuminating.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
i dont understand the part where she, instead of opening the middle lock, opened the lock on the left, and still was able to get the "correct" item.


[/ QUOTE ]

Forgot this part. I think this may be another part of the movie where the director is trying to trick us into thinking the Faun was bad. Also, any speculation on what would happen if she picked the wrong item?

[ThaSaltCracka]

if you think its all in her head, do you think the made up characters are based on people in her real life?

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree I think it was supposed to be all in her head, Dancer in the Dark-style. I mean, I know there's ambiguity, but I think that the director's point could be that people triumphing over evil in the real world by working together for justice is the real magic.

Also, I loved the scene where she's eating grapes and that monster is coming after her...It's sick that she'd create a fantasy world where she sets herself up to fail and be berated for acting like an idiot.

Lots of penetration in this movie don't you think? People getting stabbed and stuck with needles and sewing themselves back together and sticking their fingers or bodies in tiny holes and cupboards.

What can it mean I don't know?
--GA

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's all in her head, as there's too much supernatural stuff that has real effects, but the movie obviously tries to walk that line. The fact that it's subtle and only witnessed by the girl I think is just standard "there's magic in the world that we're too caught up in our adult troubles to see" stuff. I.e., I think it's supposed to be a real fairy tale, but it's still important that no one notices.

[Wires]

I don't think there is any doubt that the fantasy world takes place in the child's imagination.

Ofelia is forced to live in a terrifying military compound where her mother is dying and her new father, the Captain, is a sadistic maniac. Ofelia is horrified by this and is powerless to do anything about it. She creates a fantasy world not only as an escape but as a way of regaining control over her environment. As challenging as the quests may be there is never any doubt that she will succeed.

Over one of their first nights at the compound Ofelia rests her head on her mother's belly and recites the fairy tale about the princess to her unborn brother.

All of Ofelia's quests are a continuation of the original princess story. The faun reveals to Ofelia that she is the princess from her fantasy and she must complete three quests in order to return to her kingdom. Once there she and her mother will be safe.

I never considered the fantasy world to be anything more than her imagination. I think the final scene where she is talking to the faun reveals makes this clear.

[dknightx]

there is one reason that may support that is it NOT all in her head. basically how when she put that root/milk thing under the mom's bed, the mom somehow got "better", and then when the evil dude puts the root in the fire, somehow things go wrong from there. Maybe just a coincidence ...

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
there is one reason that may support that is it NOT all in her head. basically how when she put that root/milk thing under the mom's bed, the mom somehow got "better", and then when the evil dude puts the root in the fire, somehow things go wrong from there. Maybe just a coincidence ...

[/ QUOTE ]

She also uses her magic chalk to break into the captain's room.

[casaubon]

I think the one thing that answered a lot of the "was it real or in her head" questions for me was when I asked my girlfriend (phd in film, we geek out on this stuff) who actually told the story, and she said "oh, I thought it was mercedes telling the baby a story."

And it occurred to me how parallel Mercedes and Ofelia's adventures are, and that the entire story is in fact the story of how his big sister saved his life, and how she's in a happier place.

that didn't come out quite right, but you get the gist. I don't think it's either real or imagined, but something reimagined from a point outside the movie.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the one thing that answered a lot of the "was it real or in her head" questions for me was when I asked my girlfriend (phd in film, we geek out on this stuff) who actually told the story, and she said "oh, I thought it was mercedes telling the baby a story."

And it occurred to me how parallel Mercedes and Ofelia's adventures are, and that the entire story is in fact the story of how his big sister saved his life, and how she's in a happier place.

that didn't come out quite right, but you get the gist. I don't think it's either real or imagined, but something reimagined from a point outside the movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah that's such a film-studies kind of interpretation. But that's really just another vote for fairy-tale, albeit based on a true story.

[El Diablo]

GA and others,

When you say it's all in her head, are you talkng about just the fantasy parts, or the real world parts around those as well.

Specifically, something like the dinner party where she ruined her dress when she went into the tree. Do you think that was made up too, or that was real and she really did sort of sleepwalk or whatever?

This is one of those movies I really do want to go sit through again.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
GA and others,

When you say it's all in her head, are you talkng about just the fantasy parts, or the real world parts around those as well.

Specifically, something like the dinner party where she ruined her dress when she went into the tree. Do you think that was made up too, or that was real and she really did sort of sleepwalk or whatever?

This is one of those movies I really do want to go sit through again.

[/ QUOTE ]

The theory would be that the whole toad mission was just an imagined story about why her dress was all messed up.

[Wires]

[ QUOTE ]

When you say it's all in her head, are you talkng about just the fantasy parts, or the real world parts around those as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just the fantasy parts. Unfortunately for Ofelia the rest of the world is real and the reason why she regresses into this fantasy world.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]


Specifically, something like the dinner party where she ruined her dress when she went into the tree. Do you think that was made up too, or that was real and she really did sort of sleepwalk or whatever?

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be real. I mean that she really ruined her dress crawling around in the mud with some rocks she found that she pretended were magic. It wouldnt be anything like sleep walking, just the imagination of on a young child,. her enviroment is real, but her actions in it are based on her imagination.

[divides_by_zero]

I think everyone gets so caught up in the question of "was it in her head or was it real?" question that they ignore the real question of: What is reality?

What is real for one person may not be real for another. There is no way to know since we cannot experience another's reality.

I think saying that Ofelia is making it all up to cope is far too simplistic and dismissing. She's a child, it's fantastic, so of course it's all in her head. I say - so what? What does that change?

The kingdom is no less real for her because of our disbelief.

[traz]

I guess I'm sort of naive, but I never really thought of it in terms of everything being in her head. I just kind of assumed that the fantasy events really happened, and she was the only one who saw them because she was the one.

I have to rethink things now

[Georgia Avenue]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the one thing that answered a lot of the "was it real or in her head" questions for me was when I asked my girlfriend (phd in film, we geek out on this stuff) who actually told the story, and she said "oh, I thought it was mercedes telling the baby a story."

And it occurred to me how parallel Mercedes and Ofelia's adventures are, and that the entire story is in fact the story of how his big sister saved his life, and how she's in a happier place.

that didn't come out quite right, but you get the gist. I don't think it's either real or imagined, but something reimagined from a point outside the movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the best interpretation I've heard so far... even if I don't agree with its specificity (I wouldnt say its directly a story being told to the little brother) but thinking about it in that way makes viewing the film more interesting. The movie does address the distinction between fantasy and reality, but not as opposites, I dont think. Remember that the mother dies "because" she doesn't believe in Oph's fairy tales, right as she says, "There's no such thing as magic!" How to untangle that?

So the distinction between: A. She was imagining the fantasy parts, or B. magic is more real than the dirty, cruel reality...isn't really the point. People need stories in order survive and struggle to do things, whether they are real or not. Something like that?

Still not sure I liked the movie that much,
--GA

[Wires]

The theory would be that the whole toad mission was just an imagined story about why her dress was all messed up.

The story of the toad was not invented to explain her dirty dress. Her dress was dirty because she was in the woods acting out the quest. When Ofelia regresses into her fantasy world it isn't just a little diversion. I imagine her out in the woods acting out the toad quest or sitting catatonic in the corner of her room while in her mind she is escaping from the child-eating monster.

To Ofelia this is all very real.

[traz]

I don't see how there can be any doubt whether ofelia is actually doing the things she thinks she's doing. This can be seen when the commander sees her talking to no one...clearly she is still going through the motions.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the one thing that answered a lot of the "was it real or in her head" questions for me was when I asked my girlfriend (phd in film, we geek out on this stuff) who actually told the story, and she said "oh, I thought it was mercedes telling the baby a story."

And it occurred to me how parallel Mercedes and Ofelia's adventures are, and that the entire story is in fact the story of how his big sister saved his life, and how she's in a happier place.

that didn't come out quite right, but you get the gist. I don't think it's either real or imagined, but something reimagined from a point outside the movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

explain this better please.

[ThaSaltCracka]

where does she get the root from?

[Georgia Avenue]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the one thing that answered a lot of the "was it real or in her head" questions for me was when I asked my girlfriend (phd in film, we geek out on this stuff) who actually told the story, and she said "oh, I thought it was mercedes telling the baby a story."

And it occurred to me how parallel Mercedes and Ofelia's adventures are, and that the entire story is in fact the story of how his big sister saved his life, and how she's in a happier place.

that didn't come out quite right, but you get the gist. I don't think it's either real or imagined, but something reimagined from a point outside the movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

explain this better please.

[/ QUOTE ]

He just means that the story is told as Mercedes might tell it to Ophelia's younger brother as a child. When he's young, he'd only see the fantastic elements as real. As he gets older he'd realize that she is imagining those things, or that Mercedes made them up, and that the story is actually about his father and the Resistance. When he learns wisdom, he'll understand that both of the parts of the story are true, even if only one of them is real.

Even if that sounds far-fetched, I think the viewer can usefully look at the movie on those levels.

--GA

[ThaSaltCracka]

When you refer to the "story", do you mean the story without all the war stuff? As in, she tells just a fairy tale, and us as viewers only get to see bits and pieces of this story?

[Georgia Avenue]

[ QUOTE ]
When you refer to the "story", do you mean the story without all the war stuff? As in, she tells just a fairy tale, and us as viewers only get to see bits and pieces of this story?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm, no I meant the whole thing, just the plot of the movie, told as if it was a fairy tale by M to the baby.

[Wires]

No. By "the story" he's referring to both elements - fairy tale and war/events on the compound. Mercedes would be telling him the entire story as a child and as he ages his own perception of the reality of these elements may be altered.

BTW, Georgia - I like this line in your post:

"When he learns wisdom, he'll understand that both of the parts of the story are true, even if only one of them is real."

While I don't necessarily subscribe to the interpretation that it is Mercedes recounting the events to the son, this line nicely summarizes my thoughts on the film. Ofelia's fairy tale and quests are just as real to her as what is actually happening outside of her imagination. She is a traumatized child who can no longer distinguish fantasy from reality.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
where does she get the root from?

[/ QUOTE ]

outside?

[El Diablo]

All,

How many of you are like me and don't really care? Don't mean that in a dickish way, but moreso that I believed this fantasy world was made up in her head as an escape from some of the brutality of everyday life in that environment. The logistics of where exactly the lines of fantasy/reality are here, or even whether the little girl herself is real or if it's all a device for the mom to tell the baby a story, I dunno, it just doesn't matter to me. I feel like the more important parts to appreciate are in the actual story itself. Who/how the messenger is for this stuff is much less important, and I think too much focus on that actual distracts from appreciating the movie as a whole.

[dknightx]

someone please list the reasons why this movie is so good, and if any of those reasons depend on whether or not it was all in her head, or real, or some other explanation.

[PokerFink]

What's with the evil child eater thingy?

Her task is to steal a dagger from the Pale Man, presumably so that it can be used to sacrifice her brother. I thought the paintings gave an excellent backstory on the Pale Man in the matter of seconds - he's a horrific, child-eating monster. What more do you need to know about him? The shoes are there because he eats everything but the shoes. I have no idea if he is based on Spanish/Hispanic folklore. (PS the Pale Man is played by the same guy that plays the Faun - neither character is CGI.)

Did she just imagine the whole thing?

No, the labyrinth and its creatures are real, although not visible to mortals. There are numerous examples of mortal characters interacting with objects from the labryinth. The most simple example is that the Faun gives Ofelia a piece of chalk for her tasks, which she leaves on the Captain's desk. The Captain picks up the chalk and crushes it. If the Faun was in Ofelia's imagination, then the chalk would be in her imagination as well, and the Captain would not pick it up and crush it. The shot of the Captain crushing the chalk is specifically put in by the director to say, "hey audience - this [censored] is real."

The Captain cannot see the Faun because he is a mortal and does not/cannot exist in the god's realm or interact with its creatures. He's also high as [censored].

The director has also said that the labyrinth is real (http://www.twitchfilm.net/archives/008507.html) .

[ QUOTE ]
Del Toro: Yes, of course. And it's intimate. If the movie works as a piece of storytelling, as a piece of artistic creation, it should tell something different to everyone. It should be a matter of personal discussion. Now objectively, the way I structured it, there are three clues in the movie that tell you where I stand. I stand in that it's real. The most important clues are the flower at the end, and the fact that there's no way other than the chalk door to get from the attic to the Captain's office.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ThaSaltCracka]

haha, [censored] you guys saying Mercedes is telling a story. Mercedes is a stripper's name anyways.

[Jurollo]

I JUST saw this and the movie is great imo. I still havent really put together everything as I just got back from the theatre but I plan on going to see it again to really dig into the minutia. I was too busy enjoying the story the first time.

A few posts in this thread intrigue me. I think the whole idea that this is Mercedes telling the little boy about how her sister saved him from everything is interesting but likely not the director's intent.

The points about the Captain crushing the chalk and Ofelia using the chalk to get in the Captain office are valid and make me lean more towards the fact that Ofelia was indeed not imagining it.

The connection between Ofelia's quests to save her brother and Mercedes quest to help overthrow the Captain's reign was a nice touch and both played the parts quite well in "saving their world" respectively.


Great film, will see again, everyone should see it.
~J

[ThaSaltCracka]

All, according to Pokerfinks post, the flower is suppose to mean something. Thoughts?

[Jurollo]

[ QUOTE ]
All, according to Pokerfinks post, the flower is suppose to mean something. Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]
Well it likely hearkens back to the story she was telling her brother when she was in bed with her mother. About the flower that gave immortality? I am assuming there is some connection there.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All, according to Pokerfinks post, the flower is suppose to mean something. Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]
Well it likely hearkens back to the story she was telling her brother when she was in bed with her mother. About the flower that gave immortality? I am assuming there is some connection there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, the flower is just "proof" that she really did the toad quest and wasn't just imagining it.

[cobrakai111]

I loved this movie first and foremost.

Am I the only one that thought the fantast aspect simply was just written weakly by someone with poor fantasy writing expertise? The tasks, the storyline and even the payoff all just seemed slapped together and done haphazardly. Maybe I'm just underanalyzing and not reading deep enough into it but that was my initial thought.

[ThaSaltCracka]

Well Cobra, if you are referring to the absence of a wizard, dragon, and elf's yeah it was a sorta weak fantasy story. /images/graemlins/wink.gif


Pete, I think you are right about the flower. If you all recall, the ROSE the girl mentioned in her story was surrounded by an impenetrable field of poisonous thorns. This looked like a flower on a fruit(date or was it fig?) tree. Thus signifying its rebirth.

So there are at least three signals. The chalk/door, the flower, and what else?

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
I loved this movie first and foremost.

Am I the only one that thought the fantast aspect simply was just written weakly by someone with poor fantasy writing expertise? The tasks, the storyline and even the payoff all just seemed slapped together and done haphazardly. Maybe I'm just underanalyzing and not reading deep enough into it but that was my initial thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this is another reason I didn't love the movie. your average Sandman comic book will prob contain 2-3 fantasy plots that are more interesting. I mean, how obvious was it that NOT hurting the baby was the third test? so generic. it ended up kind of like a live-action Miyazaki movie, except darker and less creative.

[Jurollo]

It was a fig tree, so that makes sense and backs the idea that it wasnt in her head since she saved the tree. The Mandrake root is the other thing that lends to this all being real. As the Captain found it under the bed and when it was thrown in the fire her Mother took a turn for the worse.
~J

[troymclur]

I thought it was pretty clear that the fantasy portion did take place, and the quesiton of Ophelia succeeding or dying was the blurred line.

As noted earlier, the chalk did exist, as proved by The Captains interaction with it; but Ophelia also escaped out of the locked and guarded room by using teh magical chalk. This could not have happened if it was all in her head.

Also, i assumed that her picking the other lock was another point of reference to the idea of Refusing Authority (hence the facist background). She must not simply do what she is told. She should do what she feels to be the correct choice.

The movie was immaculate, save for two instances. I understand she is young, but it would be obvious to all but the most severely retarded that eating anything off the table would have awakened the beast. The book and The Faun both explicitly stated not to eat anything, and the freaky looking beast doesn't move even when you play with it's eyes. I wonder why they told me not to eat any food...

The second was Why the [censored] didn't she kill The Captain?. Seriously, she took the time to threaten him to not hurt Ophelia and then slice up his cheek rather than cut his throat?

And a third gripe is that the movie was marketed as much more of a fantasy film than it was. Not a problem with the movie, but i would have rather not been shown the only fantasy characters in the entire film.

Other than those two (or three) i will be buying this movie so i can not have to pay as much attention to the subtitles and instead more fully enjoy the camera work.

[ThaSaltCracka]

Listen, the director says its real, so thats good enough for me. Which is odd because I thought it was real up until the end when the Captain couldn't see the Faun, but after reading a few things I can see why that shouldn't be an issue.

[Jurollo]

When she walked by the food I swore I saw something like dust in the air or something which made me think that the food had special powers and put her into a trance.

[cobrakai111]

[ QUOTE ]
Well Cobra, if you are referring to the absence of a wizard, dragon, and elf's yeah it was a sorta weak fantasy story. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh I'm not some Harry Potter nerd!

[dknightx]

i keep hearing people saying that this is (one of) the best movie of 2006/2007, yet i havent really heard exact reasons for this ... not that i think it was a bad movie, i thought it was a solid, pretty good, movie.

[traz]

I don't think it's one of my top movies of 2006/2007, just a solid movie.

[Jurollo]

I said it because it is the first (or 2nd, V for Vendetta) that has had me thinking about it afterwards and the meaning of several things. Its rare to find such engrossing films in today's fast paced, put out as many movies as possible as quickly as possible culture.

[Hoya]

I didn't really get how she knew to choose the left door - maybe just "chosen one" intuition.

I also didn't really understand why Mercedes didn't kill the captain, when she was happy to have it done later (perhaps because he had killed Ofelia at this point).

As for her eating, I thought she got a bit of a weird look on her face before doing it, perhaps suggesting that there was a sort of spell that she couldn't resist.

As for it being real/fantasy, the mother getting better, her using the chalk to get to her brother, the fig tree showing new growth, and the labyrinth opening for her and closing for the Captain all make it pretty clear.

[cobrakai111]

[ QUOTE ]
i keep hearing people saying that this is (one of) the best movie of 2006/2007, yet i havent really heard exact reasons for this ... not that i think it was a bad movie, i thought it was a solid, pretty good, movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think many us "film geeks" put it very high on the lists because of its near perfect cinemetography, fntastic soundtrack that nails every scene, and excellent acting (I think). I personally can often forgive a mediocre plot, storyline, acting, etc if enough of the other pieces can pick it up and for me in Pan's Labyrinth they are picked up to an extreme level.

[troymclur]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i keep hearing people saying that this is (one of) the best movie of 2006/2007, yet i havent really heard exact reasons for this ... not that i think it was a bad movie, i thought it was a solid, pretty good, movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think many us "film geeks" put it very high on the lists because of its near perfect cinemetography, fntastic soundtrack that nails every scene, and excellent acting (I think). I personally can often forgive a mediocre plot, storyline, acting, etc if enough of the other pieces can pick it up and for me in Pan's Labyrinth they are picked up to an extreme level.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is almost exactly what i was going to say. While the movie may not have broken barriers, or set new standards, it executed the story with perfection. THe pacing was spot on, the story arc was smooth, the characters were perfectly fleshed out and the film had a smooth landing (something that The Departed failed at miserably).

On top of all that, it was an interesting story that, while not ground breaking, wasn't a re-hashing of a stale genre (like so many Bruckheimer films). One aspect was, the lost princess, but laying it against a backdrop of the crumbling Franco Dictatorship added a new demension to the movie that most others either neglect to try or fail by overstating the political and idealogical message. I don't think you can walk away from this movie without Authoritarianism on your mind, yet it was very understated in the movie.

All too often, potentially great movies are brought down a notch when they sputter throughout the film or when they try to achieve more than they can. The Fountain struggled by wanting to be much more than it gave us, The Departed didn't try hard enough and failed with an ending, so many movies have moments of greatness but lack the consistency of the long term classics. While Pan's Labyrinth was possibly over-hyped, it was certainly a solid film throughout.

[ThaSaltCracka]

this movie was very clever without trying too hard.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't really get how she knew to choose the left door - maybe just "chosen one" intuition.

[/ QUOTE ] Did someone else in this thread mention why? Or do I just have an answer because I read that interview Pokerfink linked?


It is another way to show how to not blindly follow orders. To make up your own mind based on gut and intuition about whats right and whats wrong.

[Hoya]

I suppose, but I don't think it works that well as an example of choosing what is right and wrong. I've seen that part of the movie questioned often, and I don't think it really added anything. It probably should have been left out. It's a small nitpick, though.

[ThaSaltCracka]

Did you read that interview he linked? Some interesting stuff in it, especially about what Pale Man represents. Although, reading the article effected my vision for a bit because of the color scheme.

[PokerFink]

[ QUOTE ]
the flower is just "proof" that she really did the toad quest and wasn't just imagining it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct.

[ QUOTE ]
So there are at least three signals. The chalk/door, the flower, and what else?

[/ QUOTE ]

The mandrake root and the book, although the book is weak evidence because no mortal directly interacts with it.

[daryn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't really get how she knew to choose the left door - maybe just "chosen one" intuition.

[/ QUOTE ] Did someone else in this thread mention why? Or do I just have an answer because I read that interview Pokerfink linked?


It is another way to show how to not blindly follow orders. To make up your own mind based on gut and intuition about whats right and whats wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

right.. like the doctor tells the captain.

i also think the fruit/food cast some type of "spell" on her, but possibly not. she could have been just defying orders again. it was only two grapes!

[Jurollo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't really get how she knew to choose the left door - maybe just "chosen one" intuition.

[/ QUOTE ] Did someone else in this thread mention why? Or do I just have an answer because I read that interview Pokerfink linked?


It is another way to show how to not blindly follow orders. To make up your own mind based on gut and intuition about whats right and whats wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

right.. like the doctor tells the captain.

i also think the fruit/food cast some type of "spell" on her, but possibly not. she could have been just defying orders again. it was only two grapes!

[/ QUOTE ]
I am almost sure of this now that two people have said so too, I swear there was pixie dust or something when she walked by. I think that is why it was such a hard task, she had to resist the temptation, etc, etc. Or it might have been a setup to test her faith, resilience? I am pretty sure the food put her under a spell though. Otherwise she could have just walked by the damn food!

[daryn]

right, plus the pixies make it clear more than once that the food is a no-no, not to mention she knows from pan and the book too

[Jurollo]

[ QUOTE ]
right, plus the pixies make it clear more than once that the food is a no-no, not to mention she knows from pan and the book too

[/ QUOTE ]
I might see it again tomorrow if I am bored, or Children of Men, I will know for sure if I see it again.

[kitaristi0]

I just finished watching this ten minutes ago and am in kind of a weird funk where I don't know whether that was the best thing I've ever seen or just complete rubbish veiled in fancy visual tricks and "clever" plot twists. Probably more of the former but I definitely wouldn't say it's one of the best movies I've seen lately.

It was a good story, and I wouldn't mind watching it again, but I'm with El D here in saying that I don't really care too much about the real/fantasy distinction or any other thematic aspects, I just enjoyed it as a nice story.

[cobrakai111]

Slightly off topic but does anyone know of any other movies or books from this time period? I know very little about the Spanish Civil war and I can't recall much being done on it.

[kitaristi0]

cobra,

[ QUOTE ]
Related films

* Raza (Jose Luis Saenz de Heredia, 1942)
* For Whom the Bell Tolls (Sam Wood, 1943, from the Ernest Hemingway novel)
* The Heifer (La vaquilla) (Luis García Berlanga, 1985)
* ¡Ay, Carmela! (Directed by Carlos Saura, Spain/Italy 1990) The title is a reference to the song "Quinta Brigada", which boasts of the valor of the Republican troops and laments their lack of supplies and air support
* El Laberinto del Fauno (Guillermo del Toro, 2006)
* Land and Freedom (Ken Loach, 1995)
* Libertarias (Vicente Aranda, 1996)
* "Vivir la Utopia" (Living Utopia) by Juan Gamero, Arte-TVE, Catalunya 1997
* La Lengua de las Mariposas (The Tongue of the Butterflies), José Luis Cuerda, 1999)
* Soldados de Salamina (David Trueba, 2002)
* Website streaming a number of CNT-produced films

[edit] Related literature

* Homage to Catalonia by George Orwell(1938)
* For Whom the Bell Tolls by Ernest Hemingway (1940)
* 40 Preguntas Fundamentales sobre la Guerra Civil by Stanley G. Payne (2006)
* The Living and the Dead by Patrick White (1941)
* As I Walked Out One Midsummer Morning by Laurie Lee (1969)
* A Moment of War by Laurie Lee (1991)
* The Blind Assassin by Margaret Atwood (2000)
* The Shadow of the Wind by Carlos Ruiz Zafón (2001)
* L'espoir by Andre Malraux
* Les Grands cimetieres sous la Lune by Georges Bernanos

On the immediate Post-Civil War:

* La Colmena by Camilo Jose Cela


[/ QUOTE ]

Wiki knows everything. Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Civil_War)

[Georgia Avenue]

All: I agree with El D (lol surprise suckup!) that the discussion of whether it was real or not is missing the point, but apparently the director disagrees.Just because he says: "The fantasy was real" doesn't settle the question of it though, if his movie doesn't make that clear. I'm glad he's got a stance on it, but I think he also left a lot open to interpretation, which is good fun.

Magic doesn't exist btw, duh.
--GA

[traz]

GA and all,

From my perspective, it was pretty clear that the fantasy aspects were real, and anyone who's making a claim that it wasn't is just digging where there is no water. Grasping at air, for some kind of "deep meaning".

For me, the deep meaning was the cliche yet powerful message that through all the darkness and brutality of the world, people end up missing what's beautiful and magical.

The movie also drives home several points about innocence, trust, and the blurred line between good/bad, and how people often have both good and bad sides within them.

[RiverFenix]

The only thing that ruined it for me was the very ending narration saying that she was indeed a princess and lived many centuries helping out her people.

I love movies/books where it is ambiguous whether or not it was real/imagined and that last bit of narration really annoyed me. Otherwise, I enjoyed the movie enough that I'll probably go see it again.

[Roland32]

I actually took the ending a different way. Kind of a taxi driver ending. Where the moment of triumph is just a dying person delusion. So I took the real meaning as that the faun was going to sacrifice the child and open the gateway to hell or the underworld whatever.

[Roland32]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't really get how she knew to choose the left door - maybe just "chosen one" intuition.

[/ QUOTE ] Did someone else in this thread mention why? Or do I just have an answer because I read that interview Pokerfink linked?


It is another way to show how to not blindly follow orders. To make up your own mind based on gut and intuition about whats right and whats wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

right.. like the doctor tells the captain.

i also think the fruit/food cast some type of "spell" on her, but possibly not. she could have been just defying orders again. it was only two grapes!

[/ QUOTE ]
I am almost sure of this now that two people have said so too, I swear there was pixie dust or something when she walked by. I think that is why it was such a hard task, she had to resist the temptation, etc, etc. Or it might have been a setup to test her faith, resilience? I am pretty sure the food put her under a spell though. Otherwise she could have just walked by the damn food!

[/ QUOTE ]

Wasn't the picture in the book that gave her instructions opening the door on the left?

[creedofhubris]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't really get how she knew to choose the left door - maybe just "chosen one" intuition.

[/ QUOTE ] Did someone else in this thread mention why? Or do I just have an answer because I read that interview Pokerfink linked?


It is another way to show how to not blindly follow orders. To make up your own mind based on gut and intuition about whats right and whats wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

right.. like the doctor tells the captain.

i also think the fruit/food cast some type of "spell" on her, but possibly not. she could have been just defying orders again. it was only two grapes!

[/ QUOTE ]

She is starving. After she shows up at the dinner party with the muddy dress, she is sent to her room without eating, and the scene with the Pale Man takes place right afterwards...

[jaustin]

For those who read the Twitch interview (linked earlier in the thread), Guillermo del Toro (director) explains that the labyrinth/"fantasy" is in fact real. He says that he puts three clues in the movie: The flower at the very end (one of the gifts Princess Noella/Ofelia leaves for the mortal world), the fact that there's no way to get from Ofelia's locked room to the Captain's room except for the chalk door Ofelia creates (as mentioned earlier in the thread, the Captain subsequently finds and crushes the chalk), and, in the final scene, Ofelia reaches a dead end, but the labyrinth opens up for her, leaving the Captain (temporarily) stranded.

Del Toro describes the movie as a Rorschach test for the viewer. Either you don't believe in the labyrinth or you do, and supposedly the viewers who do "get it" (say, these viewers are Ophelia and the non-believers are her mother, that kind of thing).

I found this a bit troubling, however. WHen I had doubts about the labyrinth's existence, I saw one of the main themes of the film being that we create fantasy to escape the brutality of reality. It certainly seems like this is what Ophelia is doing. Is Ophelia more "pure" than the other characters, is this why she can see the labyrinth? Or is it simply because she is in fact "the chosen one," the princess? If this is not fantasy, are all the other characters in the movie trapped in barbaric reality? Do they have any avenue for escape, as it seemed that Ophelia did through fantasy (which was in fact real)?

sorry if that was rambling and incoherent, reading that interview just left me with as many questions as answers it provided. fyi, del Toro doesn't get into real discussion of the movie until 1/2 way down the page (of the interview).

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
What's with the evil child eater thingy?

Her task is to steal a dagger from the Pale Man, presumably so that it can be used to sacrifice her brother. I thought the paintings gave an excellent backstory on the Pale Man in the matter of seconds - he's a horrific, child-eating monster. What more do you need to know about him? The shoes are there because he eats everything but the shoes. I have no idea if he is based on Spanish/Hispanic folklore. (PS the Pale Man is played by the same guy that plays the Faun - neither character is CGI.)

Did she just imagine the whole thing?

No, the labyrinth and its creatures are real, although not visible to mortals. There are numerous examples of mortal characters interacting with objects from the labryinth. The most simple example is that the Faun gives Ofelia a piece of chalk for her tasks, which she leaves on the Captain's desk. The Captain picks up the chalk and crushes it. If the Faun was in Ofelia's imagination, then the chalk would be in her imagination as well, and the Captain would not pick it up and crush it. The shot of the Captain crushing the chalk is specifically put in by the director to say, "hey audience - this [censored] is real."

The Captain cannot see the Faun because he is a mortal and does not/cannot exist in the god's realm or interact with its creatures. He's also high as [censored].

The director has also said that the labyrinth is real (http://www.twitchfilm.net/archives/008507.html) .

[ QUOTE ]
Del Toro: Yes, of course. And it's intimate. If the movie works as a piece of storytelling, as a piece of artistic creation, it should tell something different to everyone. It should be a matter of personal discussion. Now objectively, the way I structured it, there are three clues in the movie that tell you where I stand. I stand in that it's real. The most important clues are the flower at the end, and the fact that there's no way other than the chalk door to get from the attic to the Captain's office.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow! His interpretation just made the movie about 30% worse. Maybe I should go see a couple more of his movies so I'll figure out if they're any good at all, if only this one is good, or if he's the luckiest guy behind a camera.

[jaustin]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow! His interpretation just made the movie about 30% worse. Maybe I should go see a couple more of his movies so I'll figure out if they're any good at all, if only this one is good, or if he's the luckiest guy behind a camera.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that his interpretation didn't sit well with me. His other movies all seem like corny action movies, none of which I've seen so I can't really comment on. Previous films include Hellboy, Blade 2, Mimic, etc. I didn't recognize the names of his earlier films, so I can't be positive, but it seems like this is his first "serious" movie.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow! His interpretation just made the movie about 30% worse. Maybe I should go see a couple more of his movies so I'll figure out if they're any good at all, if only this one is good, or if he's the luckiest guy behind a camera.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that his interpretation didn't sit well with me. His other movies all seem like corny action movies, none of which I've seen so I can't really comment on. Previous films include Hellboy, Blade 2, Mimic, etc. I didn't recognize the names of his earlier films, so I can't be positive, but it seems like this is his first "serious" movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its been a while since I've seen it, but I remember Mimic as being enjoyable.