Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend
Lobby Pass The Popcorn Pass The Popcorn Archives topic #103582

Subject: "Finally saw it. That was one of the best things I've seen in a while." This topic is locked.
Previous topic | Next topic
stravinskian
Member since Feb 24th 2003
12753 posts
Sun Nov-01-09 01:53 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
49. "Finally saw it. That was one of the best things I've seen in a while."
In response to In response to 0
Sun Nov-01-09 02:05 PM by stravinskian

          

I think one angle a lot of people are overlooking is all the references to quantum mechanics, particularly Schroedinger's cat.

Let me quickly explain what all that stuff with the cat was about. No equations, just the "stories" that Larry said help illustrate the math. Intrinsically quantum mechanical objects can exist, before being measured, in a 'superposition' of seemingly independent states. For example, a radioactive atom, if left to its own devices, doesn't simply just 'decay' at some fixed moment. The way it works is that it starts out non-decayed, and it slowly reaches a superposition of the "non-decayed" state and the "decayed" state, each with different "amplitude" values associated with them. Once the state of the system is measured, it collapses to one or the other state, either decayed or non-decayed, with a probability dictated by the amplitude values that the two states had. Before the atom is observed, it is both 'decayed' and 'non-decayed.' It's tempting to see this stuff as just empty philosophy. But it turns out that this kind of behavior implies certain statistical properties for the behaviors of quantum mechanical objects, and these properties have been measured and confirmed with extremely strong accuracy. So this strange quantum behavior is a matter of scientific fact.

But a physicist named Schroedinger (one of he creators of QM) saw a paradox in this. Imagine that you put a radioactive atom next to a Geiger counter. Attach this Geiger counter to a hammer that breaks a vial of poisonous gas right next to a housecat. So if the atom decays, the cat dies. Now, enclose the entire system in an ideal box that closes it off from the rest of the world until the box is opened. To the external world, before the box is opened, the atom is in a quantum superposition of 'decayed' and 'non-decayed,' so the cat is in a quantum superposition of 'alive' and 'dead.' The cat is both alive and dead until someone opens the box to take a look at it.

In the movie we see a few examples of these 'superposed' states of affairs. The strange opening scene is an example. The dybbuk (if I remember the word right) who enters the house is both alive and dead, until the wife finally makes a measurement of the question.

**SPOILERS BELOW**



A bigger example is Sy Ableman. Even after Sy dies (in an event strangely "entangled" with Larry's life, to raise another bit of QM jargon) he's still showing up in Larry's dreams, he's still costing Larry large sums of money, he's still endangering his tenure, and he's still breaking up his marriage and forcing him to live at the Jolly Roger. Also, one thing that can't be a coincidence: the symbol that physicists conventionally use to denote a quantum state is the Greek letter Psi.

And there are other examples. There's the "culture clash" argument with the Korean student's father. Larry either has to accept a bribe or be accused of defamation for claiming that it happened. The father tells him to "accept the mystery." Rabbi #2 tells him the same thing. And Larry himself tells the Korean student the same thing (or words to that effect) with regard to quantum mechanics. It doesn't make sense that the cat is both alive and dead, Larry himself says he doesn't understand it. It's just the way it is.



EDIT: And now that I think of it, all this stuff with the doctor kinda fits into this interpretation as well. At the beginning of the movie, the doctor is making measurements with regard to Larry's mortality. Throughout most of the movie, these measurements are ongoing without Larry's knowledge. Larry is the cat, in this example.

  

Printer-friendly copy


A Serious Man: the newest Coen Brothers film [View all] , Frank Longo, Thu Jul-30-09 09:31 AM
 
Subject Author Message Date ID
Well, I'm intrigued
Jul 30th 2009
1
Please stop it.
Jul 30th 2009
2
I'm there.
Jul 30th 2009
3
I hope its better than Burn After Reading/Refund After Watching
Jul 30th 2009
4
me too
Jul 30th 2009
6
RE: me three nm
Jul 30th 2009
10
I don't get the Burn After Reading hate
Aug 05th 2009
12
that movie was hilarious.
Sep 30th 2009
14
      I just saw it recently, and thought the same.
Nov 04th 2009
54
I'm there.
Jul 30th 2009
5
Looks more "significant" than "Burn After Reading" ...
Jul 30th 2009
7
Me too.
Jul 30th 2009
8
      This film is pretty freakin' dark. Don't let the ads fool you.
Oct 14th 2009
23
           It's about as dark as their last one. Everything came off hokey.
Oct 14th 2009
28
                I too didn't like the opening scene. The rest worked for me, though.
Oct 14th 2009
31
                     It only worked for me, because I saw it for free.
Oct 14th 2009
32
                          RE: It only worked for me, because I saw it for free.
Oct 14th 2009
35
                               RE: It only worked for me, because I saw it for free.
Oct 14th 2009
38
Any Coen brothers movie without A-list celebroactors is usually great
Jul 30th 2009
9
I can think of one: Blood Simple, 1985
Aug 04th 2009
11
Seen it. Mazel Tov, Coens! It's good! And funny!
Sep 30th 2009
13
excellent.
Sep 30th 2009
15
They must love fuckin with the audience on these endings
Oct 08th 2009
16
DAMN. They cranked out another winner here.
Oct 10th 2009
17
the ending isnt shocking
Oct 11th 2009
18
      Did yall see the boom mic in that one scene? (spoiler)
Oct 12th 2009
19
           Peeped it last night in Chitown...
Oct 13th 2009
20
           Boom mic is the projectionist's issue, not the director's.
Oct 13th 2009
21
                Ah ok thanks. Always wondered how that could go overlooked.
Oct 13th 2009
22
not sure i understand the message/meaning behind the film
Oct 14th 2009
24
You felt bad for the main character the entire time?!?!?
Oct 14th 2009
25
oh i hear you, but that still goes against the message in the film
Oct 14th 2009
26
      RE: oh i hear you, but that still goes against the message in the film
Oct 14th 2009
27
           RE: oh i hear you, but that still goes against the message in the film
Oct 14th 2009
29
                You know how I know you're Goy?
Oct 14th 2009
30
                     Because I said I didn't get a lot of the jewmour from the jump
Oct 14th 2009
33
                          word up, but you also didn't get the movie.
Oct 14th 2009
34
                               Congrats. The over/under was set at 40 for this reply.
Oct 14th 2009
37
                                    ^^^ dead-end
Oct 14th 2009
39
                                         ^^^A Serious Stan
Oct 15th 2009
40
The opening scene:
Oct 14th 2009
36
The message, as I saw it:
Nov 01st 2009
52
Wow. The densest Coens movie ever?
Oct 19th 2009
41
The scene at the beach.
Oct 23rd 2009
42
Great moment in a movie full of them.
Oct 28th 2009
45
What the movie was about, aside from taking L's?
Oct 27th 2009
43
What do you think it's about?
Oct 28th 2009
46
      ^^Rabbi #2
Oct 28th 2009
47
           LMAO
Oct 29th 2009
48
           lol
Mar 01st 2010
87
And how many breaks were in this flick, 2-3?
Oct 27th 2009
44
^
Nov 01st 2009
50
That feels like a pretty undeniable interpretation.
Nov 01st 2009
51
wow
Nov 19th 2009
56
*tips hat*
Nov 19th 2009
57
      I think it's easy for film people to dismiss the science
Nov 19th 2009
58
well then.
Mar 01st 2010
88
Hmm, actually this interpretation sorta changes how I see the film.
Jan 14th 2011
105
that was the most jewish thing I've ever seen in my life
Nov 04th 2009
53
How many crosscutting sequences were there? 3?
Nov 19th 2009
55
How comes u aint tell me wollawitz was in this?
Nov 29th 2009
59
Wow, this is tough to sit thru, worst Coen movie I've seen
Feb 16th 2010
60
Um
Feb 16th 2010
61
I'm sure he meant The Ladykillers
Feb 16th 2010
62
      I did, apologies to anyone thinking I meant Coens & Rodney collaborated
Feb 16th 2010
63
      no kidding
Feb 16th 2010
64
My take:
Feb 17th 2010
66
RE: My take:
Feb 17th 2010
69
      RE: My take:
Feb 17th 2010
70
           RE: My take:
Feb 17th 2010
71
                well, it's a parable.
Feb 18th 2010
73
                     Excellent analysis, you are spot-on
Feb 18th 2010
74
                     Gorgeously put in that last sentence. Spot on.
Feb 18th 2010
75
                     I understand/appreciate the parable angle along w/the virtues expressed
Feb 18th 2010
77
                          That's fair.
Feb 19th 2010
78
                               I had no problem with the acting performance, he played a nebbishy guy
Feb 19th 2010
82
it's a movie that wasn't really made with you in mind
Feb 19th 2010
79
      Moonstruck wasn't made w/me in mind either, I found it entertaining tho
Feb 19th 2010
81
           yeah it was actually
Feb 19th 2010
83
                it was?
Feb 19th 2010
84
                     cmon.
Feb 20th 2010
85
                          wasnt so much the lack of 'relatability' (though I had trouble relating
Feb 22nd 2010
86
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a155/jkfitzpa/in-living-color.jpg
Feb 17th 2010
65
Snatch is too British
Feb 17th 2010
67
Apparently I've struck a nerve
Feb 17th 2010
68
      Not a nerve, and not just you
Feb 18th 2010
72
           lol @ this whole line of thinking
Feb 18th 2010
76
                First of all, no, you can't.
Feb 19th 2010
80
Joel: "The goy didn't get the movie."
Mar 01st 2010
89
^^^If This Reply Slayed You, GO RENT A SERIOUS MAN ASAP!!!
Mar 01st 2010
90
      a rabbi & a goy walk into a movie theater together...
Mar 01st 2010
91
           *rolls credits*
Mar 01st 2010
92
           ^^^'You Mad' Lovingly Explored In Jewish Parable Form
Mar 02nd 2010
93
                jew mad, son?
Mar 02nd 2010
96
                     no shlomo
Mar 02nd 2010
98
                          LOL
Mar 02nd 2010
99
someone has to have a picture
Mar 02nd 2010
94
aaaagh
Mar 02nd 2010
95
      ha yeah that shit had my dying
Mar 02nd 2010
97
The Tyler Perry movie of Jewish cinema
Mar 02nd 2010
100
Daddy's Little Girls>>>>>>A Serious Man
Mar 08th 2010
101
      i enjoyed it
Mar 09th 2010
102
Loved it,
Mar 09th 2010
103
most stylistically accurate "high" scenes ever.
Mar 09th 2010
104
I don't want Santana Abraxis. I've just been in a terrible auto acciden...
Jan 14th 2011
106

Lobby Pass The Popcorn Pass The Popcorn Archives topic #103582 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.25
Copyright © DCScripts.com