SHERDOG MOVIE CLUB: WEEK 122: Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

Which leads me to think the end does not actually happen. Riggon dies on stage and everything that happens afterwards is during his dying moments. He believes he has accomplished greatness, he fantasizes about his daughter's love, he jumps out the window and flies and she smiles at him flying away. It is the only scene with another main character where that character buys into the MR presented on screen.

....

The fact that everything that happens to him is too good to be true and goes against the darkness that was prevalent in the rest of the film Do you really think Iñarritu would create such a happy ending in a film about ego and failure and the need for acceptance? It was all too far fetched. It was what Riggon would have dreamed for himself, nothing more than a dying man's hallucinations, including finally getting the peonies and adoration he wanted from his daughter, affection from his ex wife and global success and recognition.

Sam shares his MR reality with him because he is dead. He is finally experiencing his unexpected virtue of ignorance.
Interesting take.
Notice also in that final scene we didn't hear a peep (see what I did there?) from Birdman. Riggan's head was silent maybe for the first time in 20 years. Then he looks out the window and sees small birds flying away, as a look of peace and contentment washes over him. As @MusterX earlier pointed out, there are sparrows tattooed on his daughter's shoulder in a similar pattern, which we first see (I think) when she's telling him he's not important.
4HHF.gif


 
- The fact that everything that happens to him is too good to be true and goes against the darkness that was prevalent in the rest of the film Do you really think Iñarritu would create such a happy ending in a film about ego and failure and the need for acceptance? It was all too far fetched. It was what Riggon would have dreamed for himself, nothing more than a dying man's hallucinations, including finally getting the peonies and adoration he wanted from his daughter, affection from his ex wife and global success and recognition.

Sam shares his MR reality with him because he is dead. He is finally experiencing his unexpected virtue of ignorance.

I would argue you perhaps highlight why Iñarritu had him survive, so he doesn't get his grand egotistical send off. I mean there is plenty in the film looking to push him towards a less egotistical view so I don't think that as a conclusion is so unrealistic. Again as well I wouldn't say the ending is that light satirising the media and publics obsession with seedier personal drama over art of worth.

In terms of the mechanics of his visions we see someone try to stop him jumping off of the rooftop so theres clearly some shared view there. I just think its the case that the film is not intended to have a logic reading of these events, they can be explained by characters but not in a practical sense.
 
Last edited:
I want to get lots of likes

Chicks. :rolleyes::D


Which leads me to think the end does not actually happen. Riggon dies on stage and everything that happens afterwards is during his dying moments. He believes he has accomplished greatness, he fantasizes about his daughter's love, he jumps out the window and flies and she smiles at him flying away. It is the only scene with another main character where that character buys into the MR presented on screen.

That makes quite a bit of sense. If that's the case then I would have preferred some quick shots of him imagining those things after he puts the gun to his head but before he pulls the trigger. I think one thing is clear though, he dieded at the end one way or another. He didn't simply fly off into the yonder.
 
Rewatching it yesterday it did strike me that the flying scene in Birdman is rather like the out of body exspereince in Rumblefish....



Beyond the blissed out flying itself you have the same kind of mix of dramatic seriousness but also deliberately playing things a bit tongue in cheek.
 
This film was both enjoyable and depressing.

Raw and emotional. Interesting filming.

Overall I'd say I liked it.

Still getting used to the idea that I don't matter.

Sorry I don't have much to add !

:)
 
Still getting used to the idea that I don't matter.

Buck up. So long as you matter to yourself it's all good. That's the moral of this tale. If mattering is seeking validation from hoards of social media accounts and the power that brings then it's out there to pursue. If it's love, kindness, charity, and all that sappy shit then you've a much greater chance of mattering than Birdman.
 
0:04 : A lady asks Riggan, "Is this for real or are you shooting a film?" Riggan replies, "A film", to which the lady replies, "You people are full of shit." I would say this is the dose of pessimism and negativity that is peppered into the entire movie to represent the doubt of any artistic endeavor. Never good enough, critics lurking everywhere. Riggan fears that he's full of shit.

I think it's interesting that the only people who goes out of their way to compliment Riggan for his endeavors are Norton (a crazy artist) and his best friend the producer.

Besides that, he gets constantly derided. The woman on the rooftop. The black guy screaming "you suck" when he's in his underwear. His daughter. The theater critic.

Maybe only Norton really understand what Riggan is going for?

2:42 : BONUS - At 2:42 you can see a pedestrian pull something off Riggan's back, probably his wire from flying.

lol, good catch.

Right but its not just a delusional moment. Sam is there holding his hand and hugging him. The transformation, at least in the sense of his relationship with his daughter, does in fact seem to be transformed.

Sam might just be part of his delusions though, not the real Sam, but his imagination. Especially since she sees him flying at the end.

As for the ending, I agree it was too ambiguous to be sure. It was the weakest moment in the film I thought. Just kind of a worthless addition, imo.

Yeah. It really does obfuscates a lot of themes.

The shooting suicide attempt and the aftermath I'd say poking fun at media and public obsession with personal drama over art.

Isn't that sort of embedded in the whole film though? Throughout the narrative, we don't really get any good inspection as to why the theater or this play has so much to say about the art or the human condition. The focus is pretty centered on the inter-personal clashes that are happening during its production. So in a way, the movie itself is more interested in drama over art. Unless the message is that going through these inter-personal clashes is the art in-and-of-itself, I suppose.

Which leads me to think the end does not actually happen. Riggon dies on stage and everything that happens afterwards is during his dying moments. He believes he has accomplished greatness, he fantasizes about his daughter's love, he jumps out the window and flies and she smiles at him flying away. It is the only scene with another main character where that character buys into the MR presented on screen.

Tufts parlance = Magical Realism

europe1's parlance = Look they're doing the Taxi Driver-ending mcTingy!!?:p

I find it ironic that in a film full of MR, he is praised for achieving Super Realism from his act of shooting himself in the head. When Tabitha walks out, we see the first clear cut in the movie. Is it because he is dead? The entire movie was fluid, this cut feels like a change in reality.

Nice catch!

- The fact that he received a great review, even though we see Tabitha walk out without clapping. There is no indication she liked the play. this happens around :50 seconds.

Hmm... considering she sitts dead-still for several seconds as the audience is thundering in applause... to me it seems like she's more shocked than anything. Possibly so affected that she doesn't know how to react and chagrined that she came-in with the intentions of hating this play.

I found this to be especially heart breaking because she got him the part and he was cavalier, disrespectful and hateful towards her as a person and towards her dreams. Several times she said that being on Broadway was her dream, and to please not ruin it, and he showed complete disregard towards her as a human, as his partner and as a colleague. Even Jake was inappropriate when he kissed Naomi on the lips after she got Norton to take the role.

I think there is this theme going of Norton not being able to empathize or relate to anything that isn't related to a performance. His erectile dysfunction is part of it, he can only get it up while playing a part, not as himself, he's simply to disconnected from himself to do that. His relationship with Sam changes that. It is sort of weird that he's derisive towards Naomi's artistic ambitions, while he's almost the only one who compliments Riggans. Could he percieve Naomi Watts line about "I finally made it to broadway" as merely attention-seeking, her trying to become a celebrity?

And yeah, he's a douche.

Another little Easter egg I noticed was that when the club watched Mulholland Drive

I was thinking that more when Naomi Watts and Annie were staring into the mirror. You had the mirror and homosexual motif going.

giphy.gif



I think we can see from the way RIggan behaves he's not suffering from some extreme form of hallucinatory mental illness, rather these images are a visualisation of his mental state.

Well... Riggan himself believes that he is witnessing these hallucinations and possesses these powers. After the lighting-equipment fell on the actors head, he took the producer aside and told him that he caused the accident to happen with the power of his mind. That, to me, seems to indicate that he's actually having visions rather than them merely being visualisation of his mental state.

Rewatching it yesterday it did strike me that the flying scene in Birdman is rather like the out of body exspereince in Rumblefish....
 
Buck up. So long as you matter to yourself it's all good. That's the moral of this tale. If mattering is seeking validation from hoards of social media accounts and the power that brings then it's out there to pursue. If it's love, kindness, charity, and all that sappy shit then you've a much greater chance of mattering than Birdman.

Again I do think the film is deliberately ill defined in its judgement because its dealing with a subject that's impossible to define, just how do you judge the importance of different aspects of your audeinces life? I don't think its negative of the idea of having some kind of personal pride is a positive and to some degree I think everyone does just that its best self focused. Honestly I admit I feel pretty close to that message given that I jacked in a warehouse job a few years ago to become a landscape photographer, early on I did have some dreams of grand success but really dispite income not being that different its actually enjoying doing it and pushing myself thats kept me with it.

Generally I think theres been a lack of films that take a less preachy approach to the subject and leave things more in the eye of the beholder. I would actually recommend Abdellatif Kechiches work here, I mean its in some ways the total opposite of Birdman typically being played very straight indeed but in The Secret of the Grain and Blue is the Warmest Colour look to touch on the same subject, the former is maybe most famous as a sex drama(and a very good one) but you've got a lot of the same themes of the need for selfworth and how different careers are viewed by different social classes.

Well... Riggan himself believes that he is witnessing these hallucinations and possesses these powers. After the lighting-equipment fell on the actors head, he took the producer aside and told him that he caused the accident to happen with the power of his mind. That, to me, seems to indicate that he's actually having visions rather than them merely being visualisation of his mental state.

True but I don't think the effort it to cast what we see as soley an explainable form of mental illness, it perhaps has hints at it but I don't think looks to focus on showing use events with a view to highlighting this. Rather I think what we see is focused on how it plays into the characters other motivations.
 
Last edited:
Again I do think the film is deliberately ill defined in its judgement because its dealing with a subject that's impossible to define, just how do you judge the importance of different aspects of your audeinces life? I don't think its negative of the idea of having some kind of personal pride is a positive and to some degree I think everyone does just that its best self focused. Honestly I admit I feel pretty close to that message given that I jacked in a warehouse job a few years ago to become a landscape photographer, early on I did have some dreams of grand success but really dispite income not being that different its actually enjoying doing it and pushing myself thats kept me with it.

Generally I think theres been a lack of films that take a less preachy approach to the subject and leave things more in the eye of the beholder. I would actually recommend Abdellatif Kechiches work here, I mean its in some ways the total opposite of Birdman typically being played very straight indeed but in The Secret of the Grain and Blue is the Warmest Colour look to touch on the same subject, the former is maybe most famous as a sex drama(and a very good one) but you've got a lot of the same themes of the need for selfworth and how different careers are viewed by different social classes.

Sorry, I'm not really picking up what you're laying down. Lost me from the beginning. :oops:
 
Sorry, I'm not really picking up what you're laying down. Lost me from the beginning. :oops:

The film isn't trying to give a definitive message on how someone should live their life in terms of the importance of different aspects, rather than the egotistical and the empathic both have a place(and there pitfalls)and need to be balanced somehow that's going to differ greatly from person to person.

A message as simple as "Riggan was wrong to focus on artistic achievement and should have looked alter his family instead" or alternatively "Riggan was totally correct to focus on artistic achievement" would have been ham fisted and ultimately dishonest if the intension was to have the audience think about these issues in a wider sense.
 
The film isn't trying to give a definitive message on how someone should live their life in terms of the importance of different aspects, rather than the egotistical and the empathic both have a place(and there pitfalls)and need to be balanced somehow that's going to differ greatly from person to person.

A message as simple as "Riggan was wrong to focus on artistic achievement and should have looked alter his family instead" or alternatively "Riggan was totally correct to focus on artistic achievement" would have been ham fisted and ultimately dishonest if the intension was to have the audience think about these issues in a wider sense.

Gotcha. Seems we agree it's a matter of personal perspective.
 
PS, does anyone think Iñárritu one-take extravaganza is a way of one-upping Alfonso Cuarón -- the other Mexican Hollywood Wunderkin -- similar love for the long-take? Alfonso the dude who made films like Children of Men, Gravity and Prisoner of Azkaban.
 
I don't mean to wander into your thread and drop a steaming turd and leave but,

Birdman was a steaming turd
 
PS, does anyone think Iñárritu one-take extravaganza is a way of one-upping Alfonso Cuarón -- the other Mexican Hollywood Wunderkin -- similar love for the long-take? Alfonso the dude who made films like Children of Men, Gravity and Prisoner of Azkaban.

Maybe. They are good buddies. I’m sure there is some of that.... loved that Children of Men shot!
 
I'm glad most folks liked the movie. I thought we would have more discussion though....Maybe this is a good amount and I just don't realize it. I guess Eyes Wide Shut blew the forum open and I shouldn't expect that for all the movies....
 
I'd guess perhaps held back a bit by Birdman being talked about so much when it was released?
 
For me it was too soon to watch Birdman again. :(

@Tufts Any other good films that you think fall under magical realism than Pan's Labyrinth and Birdman? I liked Gilliam’s Man Who Killed Don Quixote btw and I think it qualifies.
 
For me it was too soon to watch Birdman again. :(

@Tufts Any other good films that you think fall under magical realism than Pan's Labyrinth and Birdman? I liked Gilliam’s Man Who Killed Don Quixote btw and I think it qualifies.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind? that's sci fi perhaps but sci fi that remains deliberately ill defined to the degree it might as well be magic.

Seven Psychopaths I think goes over similar kind of ground to Birdman although I spose the whole thing is deliberately rather larger than life.
 
I'm glad most folks liked the movie. I thought we would have more discussion though....Maybe this is a good amount and I just don't realize it.

I think part of it is just unfortunate line-up. The two blue guys loathe this film. Muntjac is busy with work. Yotsuya had seen it to soon to rewatch it. I was quite busy too and didn't really give it my full attentions. So there just wasn't that many grasshoppers in the discussion.
 
Back
Top