Talk:Trance (2013 film)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Budget
Box Office Mojo does not list a budget. Where does the listed £13 million come from? It is probably accurate, early sources said "around £15 million" and various other sources have a vague mention of about the same budget as Boyle usually gets. -- 109.76.151.247 (talk) 00:24, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Synopsis
The synopsis of the plot is garbled and inaccurate — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndriesduToit (talk • contribs) 10:38, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
About the plot...
204.38.52.66 (talk) The movie uses flash forward and back effectively, but my assessment is that the therapist is deceptively beguiling even more so because she comes off as honest. Simon is indicted as violent, the one example outside of hypnosis is when he yells strongly at someone in the street at the beginning of the movie. Perhaps this supports the therapists claim that he was violent toward their relationship which she started (!) but I think not. Frank is more knowledgeable and rightly suspicious of her motives. She asks when in bed together to 'tell him something' and he (lucky guy) says: I think not. She had ended the relationship with Simon with hypnotic suggestions he forget her but also included the command BRING IT TO ME which Simon read when staggering out of the art building with his head injury just in time to be hit by a car. The last thing he sees before the hit is the therapists face on the cel phone. The driver of the car becomes to Simon the therapist who he remembers commanded him to forget her. His anger leads him to choke this innocent driver to death. He hides her body in the trunk of her car and leaves it in an undergound car park after which he collapses and is hospitalized. On his release he remembers nothing. The therapist is responsible for the death of this car driver, the others shot by Simon (who had never used a gun the movie makes clear) and one is left wondering how much of Simon's violence is real and how much stoked by this therapist. One wonders if the theft of the painting is not actually an idea inspired by her and not Frank, especially as Frank tells Simon in one scene that he was the mastermind behind the robbery. If it was his idea was it really his? The therapists seems to revel in her explicit honesty; she tells Simon when they have all gone to the car park and recovered the painting from the trunk with the dead girl all of their relationship emphasizing his violence. Up to this point she had no knowledge of the car accident and the resulting dead girl and even tho appearing shocked at the dead girl she later makes totally evident her lack of empathy when she send Frank a tablet with a video of her and the stolen painting. She beguilingly offers Frank the choice of remembering or no. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.38.52.66 (talk) 21:33, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Mark Poltimore
There seems to be a dispute around linking Mark Poltimore to the article Baron Poltimore. I have changed this to "Mark Poltimore (7th [[Baron Poltimore])", which avoids ambiguity and fixes the stated problem that the article is not about Mark Poltimore specifically. Guy (Help!) 12:58, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, a good compromise. I did add a the citation is needed that they are the same person.AbramTerger (talk) 13:10, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
- I added a citation.AbramTerger (talk) 13:25, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
repeated undo of link to nothing
For the second time I have undone an edit, by an IP User, that posted a link to a non-existent article. Such a link put the name of an individual in red in the article. Perhaps the edit was merely a mistake by its editor, or perhaps it was a deliberate attempt at promotion. Either way, or whatever the reason, the edit should not be repeated.Chjoaygame (talk) 22:29, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
hunching at the bit
James says: "I was hunching at the bit, as we say in Scotland... It just means I was desperate...I was hungry to play this part. This is impossible, this must be a mis-quote by the interviewer. I can find no use of this idiom in Scotland, or even Scottish usage of "hunch" in this way. It has to be "chomping at the bit".
http://www.npr.org/2013/03/30/175709286/why-actor-james-mcavoy-almost-turned-down-trance
BeckenhamBear (talk) 12:00, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
- I have exhaustively researched this and can find no use of this idiom in Scotland, or even Scottish usage of "hunch" in this way. Or the rest of the world even. I have come to the conclusion that what James must have said was "champing at the bit", rather than the sometimes used chomping. As its' not an encyclopaedias job to broadcast mistakes like this I've quietly deleted it.BeckenhamBear (talk) 14:05, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
- Nope, it's evidently a thing (2010):
- "...All we needed now was a couple of thugs hunching at the bit to make a scene..."
- Silenced - Chapter Nine Author: czobermeier Word count: 1637 Views: 15 Submission date 23/06/2010 2:43:10 AM
- http://www.webook.com/submission.aspx?p=66dae7cc473f424890e5035bbd23d6d8&st=653bb144422d4ac79ccd1544a5f49ffb JohndanR (talk) 06:09, 30 September 2017 (UTC)