Sergio Leone Web Board
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 16, 2017, 04:03:35 PM
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
News:


+  Sergio Leone Web Board
|-+  Films of Sergio Leone
| |-+  Once Upon A Time In America (Moderators: cigar joe, moviesceleton, Dust Devil)
| | |-+  How could it possibly be a dream?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Go Down Print
Author Topic: How could it possibly be a dream?  (Read 22669 times)
guy
Road Apple
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 23



View Profile
« Reply #45 on: March 09, 2004, 05:04:38 PM »

i believe this is an issue we'll never work out. sergio himself has left it to be an ambigous subject, he has often been quoted as saying with regards to this subject, "i say it here, i deny it here." he wanted us to make our own conclusions. let us remember that this is more than a gangster film it a grow up fairy tale.

Logged

"i like the stink of the streets, it makes me feel good. i like the smell of it, it opens up my lungs - and it gives me a hard on!"
TimeDest
Road Apple
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


I'm a llama!


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: March 09, 2004, 09:00:56 PM »

It wasn't a dream.  When you smoke opium it causes the muscles to contract momentarily without will.  Opium puts you in a dream state.  Everything that happened actually happened.  He just went to the Opium house to forget about what he did.  Remeber he turned his friends in and got them  killed.  He goes there to forget about what he did.  Opium also retrieves back memories.  Just like they did when he met his long time friend in the mansion and has those flashbacks.  Noodles lives for something that died a long time ago.

Logged
guy
Road Apple
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 23



View Profile
« Reply #47 on: March 15, 2004, 07:35:05 PM »

you know what the more i think about this the more i am leaning towards the idea that all of the 1968 scenes are all a dream....guybrush,  you say how can one have objects like frisbees' and phone booths etc as they are in the real future, well the point is when you dream you still have the ability to picture what things might be like in the future...however then perhaps sergio would have made this more obvious and actually had phone booths differing from what they actually were in '68, to make it clear to the audience that it is a dream induced state noodles is in....however then again i refer back to my original point that he wants us to decide for ourselves, so all our opinions are correct, its whatever we want it to be, our own version. i stick to my guns though and say its a dream. having read the hoods, the book the film was based on and knowing that the end of the book noodles( aka harry grey/goldberg) has to flee to save his life from the boys from murder inc, the jewish assasination squad, the author harry grey(goldberg) actually uses the real names of members of the group, slightly dangerous, altough he was alreay on the lam from them so he probably thought what the hell. this is why i love the film so much, its a true story written by a real jewish gangster. as you may or may not know, at the time 1930's - 50's legit jews did not like the negative image the gangsters gave to them, which one can understand as they were pretty new to the country and did not want a bad rep for their people, so for anyone to profess to being involved in the business is quite remarkable. so in the end of the book noodles/grey has the same plan to stop max from killing them all he does grass them up but under different circumstances. he is very drunk, due to the guilt he feels from his mother dying and him not being a great son while she lived.everything came together at once. his mother dying and the last chance he has to grass the others while they go on an easy reguar alcohol pick up and him being pissed.he remembers to call the feds, but the desk sergeant is unsure about hte tip off, as they must have got put through many wildgoose chases to put them off the real ones, he gets annoyed and while pisssed and angry spills his name. he ruins things more by missing the funeral whilst high on opium. the reason i include all of this is because, he worked on the film script with sergio and had a certan amount of say. so i think that he liked this version of events as put to him by sergio...he openly admits to smoking opium and probably thought this version to be the best choice...what do you think bearing all of this in mind people? Smiley

Logged

"i like the stink of the streets, it makes me feel good. i like the smell of it, it opens up my lungs - and it gives me a hard on!"
Cusser
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1552


Remember, I always see the job through !


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: March 16, 2004, 12:49:03 PM »

If 1968 was a dream, then Noodles "invented" television (color television), 1968 model cars, 1968 fashions, etc.

Logged
guy
Road Apple
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 23



View Profile
« Reply #49 on: March 16, 2004, 06:01:58 PM »

If 1968 was a dream, then Noodles "invented" television (color television), 1968 model cars, 1968 fashions, etc.

why is it so important to you that 1968 has to be defined either way. i merely said i was leaning towards feeeling that 1968 in my opinion is all a dream sequence, for the reasons that i explained above. if you have read the book maybe you'd feel more inclined to believe that as i do. i refer to a point i made before that rather than being a pure  gangster film sergio wanted ouatia to be considered a grown up fairy tale and further he initiated the idea that it could be a dream. it is frustrating that sergio made the whole subject ambigous and indefeinite, but thats the way it is. he did this so we can all come to our own conclusions. mine is it is a dream.

Logged

"i like the stink of the streets, it makes me feel good. i like the smell of it, it opens up my lungs - and it gives me a hard on!"
cigar joe
Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12591


easy come easy go


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: March 21, 2004, 04:52:36 PM »

Its not important in the least that the 1968 sequence be defined either way.

I beginning to look more and more at it as one of the possibilities or maybe say perhaps glimpses into one of the possibilities of the future, much like in Charles Dickens' Christmas Carrol, Ebenezer Scrooge asks the Ghost of Christmas Future "Are these the shadows of the things that Will be, or are they shadows of the things that May be only?"

So 1968 may be a shadows of one of the futures of Noodles.

This sidesteps having to define the 1968 sequence as a dream.


Logged

"When you feel that rope tighten on your neck you can feel the devil bite your ass"!
Don Uittone
Road Apple
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


I'm a llama!


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: May 31, 2004, 06:56:18 AM »

I think the "How could Noodles had dreamed all the TV's, phone booths etc."-comment quite...well, stupid. Does that mean that you can't never predict the future in the films because "you can't know what will happen"? That's crap, in films you are able to show these things to the viewers. How else could you show the future in films? All the surroundings are just grey blur? Hmm, don't think so.

So that comment is quite irrelevant in my opinion.

Logged
guybrush
Bandido
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 76



View Profile
« Reply #52 on: June 04, 2004, 11:29:53 AM »

I think the "How could Noodles had dreamed all the TV's, phone booths etc."-comment quite...well, stupid.....
stupid, huh???
well, you know, it is so stupid that people have been discussing about it for four pages now  Roll Eyes

Quote
Does that mean that you can't never predict the future in the films because "you can't know what will happen"? That's crap, in films you are able to show these things to the viewers. How else could you show the future in films?
one thing is when you are setting a story in the future from the point of view of the present, and you have to imagine the future.
In this case your image of the future cannot be contradicted, because nobody knows what the future will be like (that's science fiction).

one completely different thing is when you set a story in the present from the pov of the past, of someone who has to imagine what the present will be like. in this case either you are able to dream of the present as it really is (like in ouatia - IF it is a dream), or you imagine it different.

can you see the difference?

being able to live in the thirties and suddenly dreaming of the sixties as they really are (IF this is a dream) can make people wonder whether it makes sense or not, whereas nobody would do the same (unless he's nuts) had the film been set in the present, with a character who has the imagine the future (why should anybody discuss about credibility of a science fiction movie?).

« Last Edit: June 04, 2004, 11:32:14 AM by guybrush » Logged

Thank God I'm an atheist
---
“What have you done all this time?”
“Going to bed early.”
elgado
Road Apple
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5



View Profile
« Reply #53 on: July 24, 2004, 05:28:01 PM »

I'm open to the idea of the film being a dream, but I believe that the events in 68 are real for a few reasons:

- One ought to keep in mind the relationship between Max & Noodles. Leone's theme of betrayal plays prominently in their relationship. This is best illustrated in their first meeting and the memorable scene in the sea where Max tricks Noodles into thinking he's drowned (just like he later tricked him into thinking he was killed). The symbolism here is far too strong for me to ignore it.

- After Noodles is released from prison, we sense a feeling of friction within the gang, namely the grasp for power between Max & Noodles. As time passes, Noodles becomes more of a burden to Max and his ambitions. While Max wants to keep rising the criminal ladder, Noodles prefers a somewhat more down to earth life; one can argue that he may even want to give up his life of crime. Max, therefore, schemes of taking all of the gang's assets, getting rid of them, then branching off on his own.

- Who gave gave Noodles the idea to tip off the cops? Carol. What made this idea so good? Max's idea to rob the Federal Reserve Bank. Throughout the film, Max is shown to be a clever man; after all, before Noodles and his gang met Max, they were earning crumbs. To get to the point, one problem in the Dream Theory is that it requires the viewer to believe that Max was completely serious about robbing the Federal Reserve Bank. I don't think he'd do something that rash.

- and finally, on the night that Noodles makes the call to Sgt. Halloran, I find Max's behaviour to be extremely supportive of the Plot Theory. He conspicuously adjusts the phone's horn; harrasses and provokes Noodles so as to help Noodles dislike him (so he won't change his mind about turning Max in); and, more importantly, Max insists that Noodles stay at home. This is the first time in the film that one can see Max wanting Noodles to keep away from him. Up to the point, it was always the other way around.


But anyway, whats important is that both theories have strong arguments in favour of them. One of this film's strength is that people are still debating on the nature of the ending/meaning. This is one of the things I love about Leone; his films not only have the power to touch the viewer, but also to keep him thinking about them.

As to Noodle's smile at the end of the film, I think its nature is nostalgic (nostalgia, for me, is a strong theme in the film and is backed up by Morricone's main flute theme). He can't help but smile when he looks back at more pleasant times. The times when Dominic was still around; when he and his friends engaged in 'fun' jobs; when he spied on Deborah...

Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Visit FISTFUL-OF-LEONE.COM

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.048 seconds with 19 queries.