To answer some of ynwtf's questions:
It is definitely unclear why specifically phosphorous burns the shimmer (and not any fire). One thing that does seem clearly intended by the film is that the copy had to be the one that initially caught fire (meaning, the wall behind Kane when he used the grenade didn't catch fire and burn the shimmer down, the shimmer had to be 'taught' how to burn down. If you make the most-stretchiest stretch you could, you can say it relays to the theme of self-destruction; Lena taught her clone how to *literally* self-destruct, and that clone not only spread fire, but the concept of flammability (and that spread as a 'mutation' along with the fire). Again, that's a hazy connection.
I interpreted Kopy-Kane as not burning because he's outside the shimmer, but specifically I recalled the oil spill metaphor. If a field of oil catches fire, if somehow a bird covered in oil got away from the main pool of oil, it wouldn't catch fire.
As far as projection goes, I think you're right, but I also don't think that's a necessarily bad thing. A lot of my favorite films contain a lot of projection, just like how a lot of my favorite conversations with people are ones where either they or I operate as a screen for their projections to take place. And I think that takes skill. Which, this film fumbles sometimes.
Basically, to take your example of
Dark Tower...yes! I do think it deserves a little credit! If a movie is able to act as a screen for people to project/recall unique and random pieces of their life and relive and/or reflect on them in a meaningful/positive way, then that's a good film! If that film's enjoyment
hinges on those associations, then that film is likely to be divisive, unless those associations are more or less universal.
The film-maker may not 'deserve' credit for bringing out those associations if they are so random, but like it or not, those associations improve the viewing of the film. The baker of the
madeleine may not deserve credit when Proust had a strong involuntary memory of his childhood, but Proust would probably call that madeleine one of the best he ever had.
To be clear, I think Annihilation is just solid, not amazing. But I'll mainly defend the work along the lines of intent and effort, though I won't necessarily defend how
successful it is. I think it had things that completely failed to connect with me, and I liked it less for it.
Originally Posted by Yoda (Post 1918229)
if Slappy's thinking about what to say, he repeats the previous word or phrase.
True, bad habit I picked up from my family that talks over each other given the slightest window. If you want to keep the floor you have to keep saying SOMETHING or else you've lost it.
