Wha??? - El habitante incierto (2005) Discussion

[–] joan_manel_vilaseca 18 years ago

Well mate, one thing I will tell you for sure: There are no recorded commentaries on the movie, nor even in Spain. And I read an interview to the director where he stated something like "It is not my purpose to give a closed, fully logic story, but rather one that will result in different readings and meanings."
I, for one, appreciate that. Should I try to answer your questions...

About Martin... You can explain some things he did, others are wide open to speculation. Why did she show up at Felix's Place? Well, he was exploring that old tunnel in his own basement. He realized where the tunnel lead, went to Felix's for a look, and maybe he really was planning to break through the basement at the other side of the tunnel's wall -so asked whether Felix's house had one or not- and flee from his own house, from his crippled life, into another man's huge house. Anyway, IMHO, Martin is an embodied feeling: the loneliness breaking into Felix's House.

But if you still need to explain why Martin died next to the Felix's basement wall... Well, one can die from a diabetic coma in a really short time, with few warnings.

I like, however, the oniric reading of the story. Both woman are played by the same actress. Claudia is another image of Vera. The dream of a woman who needs you, whom you can watch in silence, who cannot run away... Wouldn't that be Felix's perfect dream...?

reply

[–] TheShadow22 18 years ago

THIS CONTAINS SPOILERS!
Hopefully, we can temporarily keep this thread alive. Just saw the movie and I got to say I loved it...was OK by it... and then was absolutely disappointed. The entire first half was perfect with all of the suspense, mysterious sounds, and the possibility of the ex-girlfriend being in on it. Then later, when he comes back from the police station to his house, gun in hand, he finally encounters someone in the attic, shoots them, locks the entire house making it imossible to get in or out, and then all of a sudden dwells in the house of one of his neighbors without her knowing? I don't understand why he wouldn't go to the police station one more time to just end the whole thing altogether. I know that would've made the movie shorter but a) It would have given the movie a little common sense and b) Would have given a chance for the girlfriend to have lived through the shots (although technically she hadn't died at the end of the movie). So mail, as you seems to have some idea on what this movie was all about and I'm done criticizing the movie in my point of view (do you agree with me in a little bit by the way), would I be correct in saying that after Martin made his phone call, he returned home, was locked in the basement by his wife, and tried to escape by tunnelling to Felix's house? And, if that were to be true, the sounds Felix was hearing throughout the entire first half was nothing at all? Or, like this and another thread had mentioned, the entire second half of the movie was all made up or contained a hidden double meaning for the movie?

Perhaps, if these questions were to remain truly unanswered (I pray to God there's a special edition DVD with commentary...), then I would have taken out the entire second half (or at least the part where he learns the neighbors routine and starts living there literally, and had him return to the house, discover his ex girlfriend was the one he had shot, have him call the police/ambulance and then, to make the movie have an interesting ending, fast foward the movie to a year later with the three of them in a different house (she having had her baby, which somehow survived) and then all of a sudden having the two of them hear something up in the attic on a dark, quiet night...

What do you all guys think?

reply

[–] vetbridge 18 years ago

I have watched this movie twice. The first viewing left me perplexed. I viewed the film the first time as a movie picked up off the shelf with no preconceived thoughts or knowledge about it.

My second viewing looked at the movie as a "David Lynch Movie". I really enjoyed Mulholland Drive and a few of Lynch's other films. When I watched Habitante incierto, El with this mindset it was much more enjoyable. Instead of picking away at the oddities, I just enjoyed the ride.

reply

[–] joan_manel_vilaseca 18 years ago

I absolutely agree, that's the spirit.

reply

[–] heywoodfloyd 18 years ago

I really liked it.

reply

[–] questor2-1 18 years ago

I really liked it.

Houses make a lot of noises. When you are left alone after a long term breakup you are more susceptible to interpreting these noises as an intruder.

Martin wanted a look at the house as he was "exploring" where the tunnel he found might be heading. (this project seems to have been an escape from the crippled wife he couldn't deal with)

Felix over-reacted and caused the death of several people. His living in the other house was sureal and gave the movie a spooky feel. The surprise birthday party was a masterful stroke in adding to that feeling. Same actress playing both female roles - I like the comments other people made about that. Overall, an enjoyable movie experience. Superior to most Hollywood blood and guts which passes for scary entertainment.

reply

[–] lateacher 18 years ago

You are completely right about the viewing as if it were a David Lynch one. It's a complicated puzzle after all. I liked it, and of course it left me thinking....

- He had broken up with his girlfriend, apparently because he was all the time by himslef, not paying much attention to her.... something just like what the other woman (same actress) said about her husband, that he was always escaping from her , locking himself up in the basement.

- I had a feeling that the stranger and main character might be the same person, that is, making all this a journey in his mind. The stranger dies, he dies, his girfriend dies as well, complaining in her last words about his usual behaviour, and the disabled woman dies too. The houses are connected underneath..... this sounds like too many parallel things out there.... like a mirror...him and his other self, a split personality, or a mixed reality...

- Once in bed, too frightened, he starts conceiving the idea of what living like a parasite would be like... becoming a shadow....

- Too many unanswered questions or just theories...

I'd better watch it again .... let's keep analysing this...

Carolina Dorronsoro (Argentina)

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] explainmyself 17 years ago

I've only seen it once, and I know I'm going to have to watch it a few more times, but I'm taking a fairly-literalist route for the first half (he is going mad, but the audience is still able to explain it away). i.e., The noises are explainable if you think of Martin poking around in their adjoining basements and then various other "normal" occuring sounds that would likely get blown out of proportion while wading in loneliness and paranoia. And then Vera's "overheard" conversation in the kitchen is clearly her talking to the unborn baby. The old lady with the dog just fell on her own. Etcetera.

As for the rest, I think the "Wha???" title does sum it up pretty well, but in the most exalted of ways. All in his mind or a mixture of real life and madness or.....??? This is one of those movies that you should watch with a group of people and just end up talking about for hours afterwards (because chances are, no two people will interpret everything the same). If anyone here has seen the little-seen French gem called "Lemming," that one had a similar vibe to this.

reply

[–] yespat 14 years ago

I'm SO glad that others are as perplexed by this film as I was. I wish I had known that the film was like this before I spent my limited minutes on earth watching it. It was not worth my time and I'm sorry I spent my time watching it.

reply

[–] MadRotaryOne_DDCgod 11 years ago

If you really do agree about viewing it like a Lynch movie,
then you would have ending your post with that, and not all
the questions, analyzing, a Lynch movie would never be
questioned, it just is, whatever you see on the screen, that
is it, it is not some painting or sculpture that requires
one to ponder what the artist was thinking about at the time.
Lynch himself never questions his work, which is why he never
has, or ever will make a commentary track for one of his movies.

http://www.facebook.com/mike.d.keith?ref=profile

reply

[–] lateacher 11 years ago

Hi, there MadRotaryOne_DDCgod

I think that if David Lynch's films do not require any sort of analysis, then they ARE like art, a painting or a sculpture, they just are, as you say. You appreciate them, like them or not, and you may know nothing about the artist; therefore I humbly disagree with your comparison there.
On the other hand, why has Lynch got this inmunity? He does not analyse, ok, but why are we forbidden to do so. That is why I have never liked his films, too arrogant, too surrealistic, too much for me.
Regards, Carolina-

HAL: It can only be attributable to human error.

reply

[–] MadRotaryOne_DDCgod 11 years ago

That is why I have never liked his films, too arrogant, too surrealistic, too much for me.

I find it funny that after that, I noticed your post sig. you
don't mind kubrick, who, like lynch, sometimes(most times) make
movies or parts of movies that are something that he does not
care if you "get it" only that you watch it. in a telegram from
arthur c. clarke to michael caras about working with kubrick
on an upcoming project that turned into 2001, clarke calls
kubrick an ENFANT TERRIBLE, which of course was a compliment,
but he knew then before meeting him that he had his own way
of doing things. Lynch is no different, in fact there are many
directors that refuse to do commentary tracks for their films.
It is nothing new to have a maker of art, if you wish to classify
movies as such, not wish to divulge info on his/her creation, but
also to "forbid" ,as you say, to have others try to define it.
It just is. But regardless of the fact that it is human nature to
try to solve puzzles, it doesn't mean that sometimes puzzles are made
to simply not be solved, but just to look at the pretty pieces.

http://www.facebook.com/mike.d.keith?ref=profile

reply

[–] lateacher 11 years ago

STANLEY KUBRICK IS MY FAVORITE DIRECTOR EVER! I have watched his movies many, many times, and they are a puzzle indeed, but every time you discover something new. I accept I'm obsessed with him, I admire him profoundly and as an English teacher, every year I teach my students a 5% of his masterpieces, and we watch a movie together by the end of the year.
Even though I have tried many times to watch and try to get something out of Lynch, he is not my cup of tea, on the contrary I get angry, upset, I have this feeling his laughing at me, LOL. But well, I do respect him, it's my issue entirely with his works.

Saludos desde Argentina!

HAL: It can only be attributable to human error.

reply

[–] MadRotaryOne_DDCgod 11 years ago

To be honest, if I had to choose a favorite director, I would
have to choose Lynch. To me, and of course to most people this
would sound crazy, but to me Kubrick is too mainstream. I will
admit that some of Lynch's work is basically unwatchable, or
artsy crap, of course "eraserhead" being at the top of that
list. On the other end if that list would have to be his other
masterpiece "twin peaks", which brought Lynch into the small
screen. If you haven't seen the show, I would at least watch
the first season, which is only a few episodes, and is what
lynch had the most involvement into, he even does a cameo
(like he does in most of his work) as Gordon, which he is
insanely funny. peaks probably is his most accessible work,
and is so brilliant, funny, quirky, has more quotable lines
than all of the 80's movies put together, lol.

the first movie that I seen was probably Dune, which is another
of his more accessible mainstream movies. If you can see it
on bluray, then you would be in for a treat, they had to have
put a dent in De Laurentiis' bank account with those costumes
and fantastic sets. I will take any of those dune interior
sets over all of the models in 2001, lol.

reply

[–] voyager1560 17 years ago

I also felt, at first, that the movie sort of fell apart after Martin comes back from the police station. But after watching it a second time, I realized that the second half sort of compliments the first. In other words, in the beginning, Felix is afraid that someone is lurking inside his house. Then, later, the roles reverse and HE is the one secretly living inside another's house (Claudia's). So I found this aspect of the movie interesting.

I also feel the movie illustrates quite well the classic theme of 'what you see is not necessarily what you get', or, what appears to be real may not be. In this sense the movie reminds me of Antonioni's L'Avventura, in which a lady seems to disappear off the face of the earth.

Overall, I think there are enough pieces of the puzzle to put the movie together in a logical enough fashion. Like in life, we may not always have all the answers to things, but we can still understand them well enough to make sense out of them. I think this director gives us just the right amount of answers and leaves us with just enough questions to make the movie seem all the more real.

reply

[–] Chapaev36 16 years ago

Wow - you are incredibly dense. Not every plot has to be situated in the real world. Some are symbolic, Freudian, Lacanian even. Not everything has to be explained at the most base level for children to understand.

I will admit that this film layed it on too thick with the symbolism - it's just remarkable that some folks can't interpret a film beyond the mere literal. It's sad. What did you schools teach you?

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Chapaev36 16 years ago

Actually, you're right. I did come on a bit too strong in that post. I must have been in a bad mood that day.

Oh, well. La-dee-da. Point taken.

reply

[–] MadRotaryOne_DDCgod 11 years ago

it sounds like you are just rooting for the girlfriend, for her
to live, to have a happy ending, so to speak.
But not every movie will end happy, certainly you have seen movies
that end worse than this one, "The Mist" perhaps, lol.

http://www.facebook.com/mike.d.keith?ref=profile

reply

[–] Raylathotep 17 years ago

I'm watching this a second time now..... may need a third go... and yeh, "Lynch-esque" or not i's a little too confusing; opps, I mean "deep and mysterious".

reply

[–] dreamonforever1 17 years ago

i love the mystery of this film. don't need any questions answered. and, love the fact that there are many possible ways to read several scenes.
i also love that it combines (or maybe "intermingles" is a better word) several different genres: thriller/horror/black comedy, even romance.
don't get much spanish cinema where i am. would like to see more if more's like this.

gregory 052007

reply

[–] gaieto 17 years ago

I just read all the thing you said and I wanted to add that it's honorous to de director that you guys said he's like lynch, because he loves him (and he loves polanski too).
And yes, there're a lot of things without 'explanation' but if you the movie not a second time, but a third, you would realize is all that Morales wanted, nothins has left.
He's a genius (but I love him so much! I'm not objective;)

reply

[–] cengelm 17 years ago

It's surreal and thus up to you to compile some meaning into it. I don't think that the first half of the movie is anything special. It's just another haunted-house story. Something is knocking and there are strange voices ...

I liked the idea that the movie gave the impression that the architect was the hunted victim but later showed him as the psychopathic killer. Naturally that's only my interpretation.

reply

[–] iwontheboobyprize 17 years ago

I think its best to just sit back and enjoy the show without trying to answer every question. Isnt kind of cool to have all these different possibilities rather than have it wrapped up nice and neat in the end ala Hollywood style? Letting the viewer use their imagination as this film does just makes it all the more better for me. I dunno. Maybe Im weird or something? I just didnt find the need to have all the questions answered at the end. it was...different from the usual and I really liked that.

Ash <3

reply

[–] sitenoise 16 years ago

I think all this puzzle talk is fine. Many things here I had not put together on first pass. Two of those being:
"Is there someone else?" "Yes, but not how you think" = the baby.
Vera was talking to that baby when Felix overheard them/her in the kitchen.

It was strange that at first Vera denied talking to anyone and then, just before she is conveniently, conversation-endingly slashed with the knife, blurts out "I can explain!"

The problem with this movie is it could have been written better. The hyper-expository monologues Claudia dishes out were so unrealistic I laughed. It's a sign of a director in trouble when he has to give lines to a character for the sake of the audience that can't be delivered organically no matter how good the actor. Those plot-getting-in-the-way-of-the-story lines polluted an otherwise poetic, dream like, metaphorical film. I would never call this film "Lynchy"—which is just shorthand for "I don't get it but I liked it anyway ... I think. Didn't I? Did you?"

Hence, the sudden remake. El Habitante incierto was a brilliantly conceived film that could have been executed better so the director takes a mulligan. That's cool. I look forward to it and hope he does a better job explaining Vera's sudden muteness upon being shot in the plot hole we all saw coming like an eighteen wheeler.

OK. She was shot in the mouth/vocal chords and it just took a couple days without food or water to get her voice back so she could do a voice-over narration to wrap things up at film's end.

I give the first half a 9, the second half a 5. Let's call it a 7 and anxiously await the do-over.

reply

[–] vbgraphix2003 16 years ago

**spoilers galore**

I think all the characters were supposed to be real. Especially Martin and Claudia whom some have guessed might be figments of his imagination

My evidence is that a) he was able to draw Martin perfectly without ever having known him b) he drew him well enough that the kids were able to recognize it was Martin.

However, that is not to say they weren't some sort of foils for Felix and Vera. I think it is clear that they were supposed to be seen as representative of felix's emotions. For instance, Martin's house looked almost identical to Felix's... especially the stairway.

I agree that Martin signifies Felix's lonliness. I also agree that Claudia represents his desire for Vera to be immobile.

I think the Bruno character was supposed to signify Felix's suspicion that Vera was being seduced by someone else. That is why he attacked him for no good reason in the basement.

As for whether someone was in his house, that is probably the only figment of his imagination.

reply

[–] dboero 16 years ago

I only watched this movie once and it was last night, me and my girlfriend live together and we had an argument so she's over at her parents house for a few days so it was the perfect setting. I enjoyed this movie, it was a THRILLING ride and myself, for one, don't really care too much about what this meant or the other thing meant, every single one of us understood and interpreted the movie in its away.

But there was one thing that didn't make sense to me. First, we must all remember when his girlfriend mentioned how he always had to have everything organized and in order. When he comes back from the police station(If I remember correctly) he finds out someone had shaved in his bathroom. That didn't seem to make sense to me, since he was so organized and always kept things in order... now the odor factor, that's something more believable if it was his mind playing tricks on him... I mean could've fogotten to clean up, but like I said that's not very believable(that apparantly no one lived in his house) since he was so organized.

I must also add, I LOVED the scene in which the shadows were hiding for the surprise party, that was the climax of the movie for me and the ending was great too, I saw it coming, but I didn't expect she was pregnant. That meant could've gotten back with her and raise the kid....that final scene in which see the misery in his face how he blew it all away,was an amazing ending.

reply

[–] tom-sugnet 14 years ago

The movie is really boring and predictable:

1. you already know there's going to be a twist: he invading the house of another person;
2. the person shot is his [ex]girlfriend and not Martín

boring and predictable!

reply

[–] lunchboxattacks 13 years ago

The idea of unanswered questions and confusing plot swerves is an admirable one. I've seen enough Lynch movies to be able to get on for that ride with no qualms.

BUT

The first 45 minutes of this film were RIVETING. It was being set up as a straight mystery/thriller and was being very well executed. The second half of the film, though, it was just a left turn. Not necessarily bad by any means but it felt like the film equivalent of starting to have some great sex with an attractive woman and then halfway through pulling out, going over to bathroom where her sister is sitting on the toilet and letting her manually finish you off through a crack in the door. Both things you could enjoy in their own right and they're sort of related but weirdly not as satisfying as going through with just one of those things on their own (kinky devils may disagree). I respect what the writer was trying to do but I think that they should have stayed in the house and followed that through to it's conclusion, whatever that may have been.

reply

[–] lml1492 11 years ago

*SPOILERS*

I disagree with the majority here. I found the first half of the movie entirely derivative- basically working like any other thriller works in the genre. Not to say it didn't work out well, it did, and I was still very much entertained by it. But personally, I suddenly began to LOVE the movie during the second half. I immediately realized that it was his girlfriend that he shot halfway into the movie and so the movie had two endings to me- the one halfway through and then the actual ending (granted, I did not know she was pregnant, but by now that plot trope is so reused, everyone everywhere is bound to get pregnant in a movie these days). Thus, with two endings, I have a hunch the second half of the movie is meant to be entirely symbolic...but I being the traditional literalist that I am (what can I say, I'm from the south?), I refused to interpret it as such and in turn enjoyed the movie so much more. Naturally, it made no sense with this interpretation, but it became SOOO MUCH funnier if you look at the scenes as him actually following that girl around all day. I couldn't stop laughing-- the sheer absurdity of it was beautiful. So personally, I liked the second half a lot more- far more original, far more satisfying.

There are a lot of plot holes in this movie. I'm not big on plot holes, and I get annoyed when lazy writers say it is because they don't think their viewers are stupid and want them to interpret it for themselves. Nonsense! Finish the freaking plot triangle you bastards! But for this movie I think it worked out really well and made the movie all the more absurd. And the absurdity is what made the movie awesome.

reply

[–] Duallusion 11 years ago

Not necessarily bad by any means but it felt like the film equivalent of starting to have some great sex with an attractive woman and then halfway through pulling out, going over to bathroom where her sister is sitting on the toilet and letting her manually finish you off through a crack in the door.

Haha, how eloquently put. I wouldn't mind something like that happen to me and I really liked the movie. Hey, maybe you're onto something here!;) Seriously though, I really like when elements of a movie rhyme with themselves. And oh boy do they rhyme in this one.

Oh and by the way (talking about the thread in general); Lnych movies are as meaningless as dreams. Which is to say, they're not.

reply

[–] arkast 11 years ago

The second half is definetely symbolic.
Noone noticed the similarities between the two houses? They are exactly the same. Look at the stairs at Felix's house. The only thing missing is the moving wheelchair (i don't know what it is called).
Claudia and Vera beeing the same person. Only the first needs her husband, as Felix would like her to.
Bruno is the person that Felix thought was the reason his wife was leaving him.
Martin doesn't exist in reality. Only in Felix's mind.
All in all, i think the movie was not consistent. Not in terms of quality or entertainment but in terms of what it was trying to achieve. It went from from one end to the other and maybe it was trying to be like a sucker punch of some sorts?

reply