MovieChat Forums > El habitante incierto (2005) Discussion > The home of Claudia was... -SPOILERS-

The home of Claudia was... -SPOILERS-


a representation of Vera, the basement of the home was a womb (where Martin always was) and the tunnel the birth canal to the "real world" of Felix's home. So starting with the assumption that Felix's home and what happens therein is the "real world" and what happens in Claudia's house is the dream or metaphoric sphere, I took away the following symbology:

Martin was the symbolic unborn child of Felix and Vera who died/will die before he was able to escape the womb and break through into the "real world" of Felix's house (think the first half of the film is the "real" part, and the second half is dreamlike). Vera and Claudia were played by the same woman because after he shot Vera she became "paralyzed" on the floor (symbolized by Claudia in a wheelchair).

The "other man" that Felix was jealous of was represented by Bruno but the "other man" was actually his own unborn child, represented by Martin that he in reality "trapped" in his house when he shot Vera but was metaphorically trapped in the tunnel.

That's my take at least...Discuss.

reply

[deleted]

I think what you write has to be true otherwise the whole thing doesn't make sense. Not that sense is required, but I can't imagine the creators of this project to be hodge-podging along and say "Oh! Hey, Monica, why don't you play Claudia too!?!" That will save some cash and cause people to speculate as to why and then maybe one of them will come up with what this is all about!"

The similarities in dialog between what Claudia says to Bruno and what Vera says at the end strengthen your theory.

The birth canal part is a little odd. When Felix broke through at the end, I immediately concluded he had been in his own house the whole time living as a stranger or ghost.

This was a pretty good thriller sans all the metaphor except for the comedic moments, and by that I don't mean the light-hearted segue as Felix settles into his new home, but the ridiculous way some of the dialog went down in hyper-expository manner.

I laughed at the end of this film and thought it kind of silly until I came here and read some of the theories. I suppose there was a reason I was interested in further exploration of the film as opposed to simply dismissing it. In the end, I think it was an ambitious project, wonderfully imagined, but could have been executed better. The ideas were there, solid, but they could have benefitted from another pass through a better script writer.

reply

I just saw the film tonight and I agree with what both of you say. One of the most odd things that struck me was how so much time passed when he was in Claudia's house, yet Vera was still alive all that time later?

reply

Then what was represented by the surprise party?

reply

This is basically correct. The ending gives away the psychoanalytical premise of this. The symbolic child and the resentment of the child by the father.

The whole film thus cannot be merely comprehended literally, because it attempts to explore subconscious states. There is no real man in the house - no crime, no perpetrator, no good guys or bad guys.

No doubt a disappointment to those looking for a straightforward thriller. I think this was a bit too obvious if anything - the symbolism layed out thicker than in Bunuel.

reply

Yuh, it must be symbolic. Otherwise it makes NO sense. It started out like any cheap and cliche haunted house movie, moved onto a black comedy when he becomes the uninvited guest, then at the end becomes a symbol for something bigger. Interesting flick...


"Look, Hank. Have you ever seen such a beautifully punted baby?" - King of the Hill

reply