Nocturnal Animals : The story was a suicide note.

The story was a suicide note.

To me it makes perfect sense. We know it was all a metaphor for what she had done to him. But does anyone else think that he committed suicide and that's why he didn't show?

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Yes, that's exactly what I thought. An elaborate suicide note which explained how her actions had impacted him.

In this world you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Damn that's a good interpretation and theory

I was thinking he just stood her up as payback for all the crap she did to him

Re: The story was a suicide note.

That's what I thought too.

My interpretation was that he felt she left him because she thought he was weak. I saw the story as a way for him to work through his feelings about loosing her and her daughter because of that. So he writes a story were the character is too "weak" to take revenge on the people who killed his wife and daughter but then in the end he does do it. When he didn't show up at the restaurant I assumed he had stood her up to hurt her. He is no longer as good of a person and has learned how to take revenge, like his novel character.

If the book was a suicide note, why would he get in touch with her to make dinner plans?



I was not a fan of the movie by the way. I prefer movies with more intention.


There is no such thing as too much time 

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Yes, I agree.
Although I think he had also been diagnosed with cancer, which is the main reason he was going to kill himself.

Getting cancer finally inspired Edward to write the book for Susan I reckon.

i'm tired of dancing here all by myself

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Right now I'm in the, "he didn't kill himself camp," but this makes me think about it more.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Or both of their old selves died back then, in her hands. He just let his 1.0 avatar live longer for closure.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

And I can't get over how fitting the metaphors are: Now she's literally in a glass mausoleum. He's a shadowy figure in genre thrillers. Stinging, Ford!

Re: The story was a suicide note.

I really like this idea but the only reservation I had about it was the ambiguity surrounding the novel's protagonist's death. Why die via accidental suicide and not make it more clear cut?


The two of you killed everything I ever loved. **** you both.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Because she drifted off when he wrote about himself. This was a way to keep her interested in what he was writing.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

I think you're overthinking it.

It was a revenge story, pure and simple.

He wrote the story of what she did to him in the book (metaphorically, of course), then he built her up whilst she was at an emotional weak point in a way that played up his success without her whilst also forcing her to live through what she did to him from his perspective. At the end, she was stood up. It was a middle finger that drove the point home just in case she still thought that he was interested in patching things up with her and just in case she was still entertaining notions of running off with him and living happily ever after. He didn't show because he wanted her to feel bad. Because the whole thing was a revenge story, just like his book within the film and just like the various pieces of art work dotted around throughout the film - most blatantly, the one that simply says "revenge" that she stops and stares at.


Movie sequels podcast: www.facebook.com/diminishingreturnspodcast

Re: The story was a suicide note.

then he built her up whilst she was at an emotional weak point in a way that played up his success without her whilst also forcing her to live through what she did to him from his perspective

how did he know she was at an emotional weak point ?
how do you know he is successful without her ?
has the book been published ?
or are you just saying he's successful cos you liked his story ?

At the end, she was stood up. It was a middle finger that drove the point home just in case she still thought that he was interested in patching things up with her and just in case she was still entertaining notions of running off with him and living happily ever after.

How could he know or be reasonably confident that the book he wrote would mean she would immediately be interested in patching things up (after 19 years of no contact) ?
What do you mean by still entertaining notions of running off with him ?

The book was about having things taken from you and feeling helpless and weak in the face of others doing bad stuff. Then the quest for justice/revenge and how this can be frustrating and ultimately futile.

And it was Susan who whilst reading the book was putting two and two together and worrying about revenge and stuff.

Even if you can explain some of the things i have mentioned, and you reckon he simply wrote this so that she would want to get back with him, then he would surely want to make sure of this and turn up to give her the slap down she deserved.

The satisfaction he would have got from meeting her and seeing her desperate attempt at reconciling things would be greater if he met with her. Standing her up is akin to Tony and Andes pinching Ray's toilet roll and running off giggling.

Because for all he knows (as he did not turn up), she could remain happily married and just wanted to meet for a chat, to say sorry, and that it was a good read.

unless your suggesting he has been watching her and spying on her life.





i'm tired of dancing here all by myself

Re: The story was a suicide note.


how did he know she was at an emotional weak point ?

It's the sort of thing one could make a reasonable assumption about based on talking to friends of friends or things as simple as Facebook - not to mention the likes of press releases for her artwork and the like.


how do you know he is successful without her ?

It's a fair point that he wasn't due to be published - I missed that when I was watching it. However, he's finally finished his book that he was struggling to piece together when he was with her. He knows her very well and he, no doubt, knows that she would see the successful completion of a passion project (and one beautifully written as she puts it) as a success. He presumably has faith in the quality of his work at this point and, so, it's in stark contrast to his insecurity that came through when he asked her to read some of his work as seen in one of the flashbacks.


How could he know or be reasonably confident that the book he wrote would mean she would immediately be interested in patching things up (after 19 years of no contact) ?

He couldn't. That's irrelevant. People do things all the time without a guarantee that they'll pay off. I expect that he was writing the book as a means of working through various emotional things and the idea that it was revenge was secondary, anyway.


Even if you can explain some of the things i have mentioned, and you reckon he simply wrote this so that she would want to get back with him

That's not what I said. She was in an unhappy relationship and clearly looking back to mistakes she made in her past. It's not unreasonable to think that he might have banked on the idea of her being interested in getting back together with him purely from getting in touch with her - though, I doubt that that was at the forefront of any motivation for him. It probably wasn't worth mentioning in the first place.


...then he would surely want to make sure of this and turn up to give her the slap down she deserved.

I disagree. He wasn't a confrontational man and some people would see the rejection of seeing him again, face to face, as far more cold and, arguably, emotionally devestating that simply going there, pointing and shouting "haha".


Standing her up is akin to Tony and Andes pinching Ray's toilet roll and running off giggling.

I disagree. There's far more emotional mindplay that comes with standing someone up. There's ambiguity to it that will play on her mind. She'll never have that satisfaction of a final interaction. He's witholding something very simple from her. Going and telling her to "eff off" would be the more childish option akin to stealing toilet paper; not that either are necessarily "mature".


Because for all he knows (as he did not turn up), she could remain happily married and just wanted to meet for a chat, to say sorry, and that it was a good read.

And if that was the case and he appeared in person, then he'd look like an idiot. Worst case scenario of standing her up is that he causes her a bit of embarassment. Best case is his revenge comes to complete fruition.


Movie sequels podcast: www.facebook.com/diminishingreturnspodcast

Re: The story was a suicide note.

I think I'm with you on this one but I just want to say:


It's a fair point that he wasn't due to be published - I missed that when I was watching it.


If I recall correctly he was. He told Susan the book is due to be published next spring.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

This is not his first book.

He is an academic at a prestigious University (I forget which one), but she was surprised to know he wasn't at Texas.

Two things about academics at prestigious universities: they produce research and/or they publish.

You can't be a professor and just teach students how to write gud.

So his success extended well beyond some unpublished text.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

I think it's safe to assume Edward does not have reconciliation on his mind, so how could he fear looking like an idiot.

The worst thing that could happen would have been like I said (she would be happy with her life and just wanted to say Hi), unless he thought she might not turn up.

When I referred to slap down I simply meant he would have been able to see for himself how the book had affected her, and soaked it up, only to be cool and polite about it. He would not have had to be confrontational.

We're talking about a man who, judging by the book he's wrote has suffered years of torment and self doubt after she did what she did, and you think that him simply imagining or picturing how the book has affected her and then not turning up at a restaurant to meet her is satisfaction/complete fruition.

Or will he check face-book to see her status has changed to devastated.

I don't think so.

All he knows for certain is that she has read the book, liked it and wants to meet him. You, as the viewer of the film know far more than him, which is why you see it the way you do.

And also,
She was shown by the director to be shaken to the core when he did not show. That's not the reaction of someone who thinks she's simply been stood up.

i'm tired of dancing here all by myself

Re: The story was a suicide note.


I think it's safe to assume Edward does not have reconciliation on his mind, so how could he fear looking like an idiot.

Because if she didn't care, herself, then his whole plan would probably just make himself feel even worse. Not to mention that he'd probably have to make some degree of a scene. Even if he didn't care about her, there'd be loads of other people to deal with and he doesn't really seem like the confrontational type.


The worst thing that could happen would have been like I said (she would be happy with her life and just wanted to say Hi), unless he thought she might not turn up.

In which case, he'd either have to look stupid because she doesn't care or play along with being on good terms with her, when he clearly hates her and, presumably, wouldn't want to make pleasantries with her for an hour or two.


When I referred to slap down I simply meant he would have been able to see for himself how the book had affected her, and soaked it up, only to be cool and polite about it. He would not have had to be confrontational.

He can probably still do that. The film implies that they hear bits and pieces about each other through the grapevine, not to mention the likes of things like Facebook and her public persona, artworks and press releases as I mentioned before.


We're talking about a man who, judging by the book he's wrote has suffered years of torment and self doubt after she did what she did, and you think that him simply imagining or picturing how the book has affected her and then not turning up at a restaurant to meet her is satisfaction/complete fruition.

I think he likely knows her well enough to know exactly how it will effect her and not everyone who wants to strike out at others necessarily wants to sit back and watch the results of what they've done in full detail - it can make them feel bad among other things. It's very realistic, frankly, that some people do take a "hit and run approach".


She was shown by the director to be shaken to the core when he did not show. That's not the reaction of someone who thinks she's simply been stood up.

You're right, it's the reaction of someone who's been full of remorse and guilt for what she did to her past - most likely, "true" - love, not to mention the fact that they were split apart over an issue where he was ultimately proven to be in the right, and, as her current relationship falls apart, has been mulling over the events, making them fresh, only to be extended an olive-branch of peace by said past love and to start contemplating wild fantasies of reconciling things with him and running away together to be happy after all given the confirmation that her current partner is cheating on her, only for it to turn out that (excluding relatives) the one person she appears to still truly care about actually despises her and has such contempt that he would publicly humiliate her to drive a point home, which also confirms what was in the back of her head, but she assumed wasn't the case given that he'd agreed to meet: the idea that the book he wrote was a direct expression of his feelings about what she did to him.


Movie sequels podcast: www.facebook.com/diminishingreturnspodcast

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Susan didn't love anyone or anything. Not herself, her husband, her mother, Edward, her daughter, her job.

One true love? These are Edwards words, not hers.

Edward loved her, and she threw it away because she didn't value it.

Her regret isn't losing Edward, it's being unworthy of love (her husband's, Edward's, hers, whoever's).

Re: The story was a suicide note.

A lot of what you mention about human psychology is fair enough.

But your opinion/theory on Edward's motivation is based on a lot of assumptions as to what type of person the Older Edward is now and how he feels towards Susan these days. You also assume he knows her well these days but he definitely didn't know her so well when he was married to her.

And, you almost suggest that his plan all along was to get her to read the book, get all emotional and regretful about her life only to not meet her when she requests. Revenge complete.

If he did stand her up it was never planned that way. It can only be because he was indifferent.

It just does not stack up to me that this was the plan all along and the book was just part of a quest for revenge.

Edward clearly did not know the older Susan as intimately as we got to. You have formed your theory having been privy to far more than Edward. It fits better in your mind cos the audience sees more.





i'm tired of dancing here all by myself

Re: The story was a suicide note.


And if that was the case and he appeared in person, then he'd look like an idiot. Worst case scenario of standing her up is that he causes her a bit of embarassment. Best case is his revenge comes to complete fruition.

I believe first and foremost, it was about getting the point across that on an emotional level, everything in the novel really happened and is just a metaphor for their breakup.
Her wanting to meet up with him just showed that she didn´t really get or believe it.
So he did the only thing that was left to do and stood her up.
Revenge played a part but the way I see it, his main motivation is moving on and getting closure by expressing himself to her.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

No. That would be cheapening the metaphor and taking it a bit literally.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

exactly

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Thought about that too. Or he just decided not to show as a final F You for the past relationship.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

When we think of revenge, our minds entertain the more overtly destructive examples. Building someone up only to leave them hanging can be just as devastating.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OyTmy8AwTw

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Part of me thinks this. Then the other part disagrees. Writing a book, dedicating it to his ex wife and then killing himself would seem: 1)sensitive/weak 2) romanticized. Two things she constantly called Edward during their time togerher. I think he was showing her he is no longer weak, that person he once was is dead and gone (hence the book suicide) he has killed that part of himself. Just another possibility. I'm loving that this movie has so many routes and possible underlying contexts.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

"I think he was showing her he is no longer weak, that person he once was is dead and gone (hence the book suicide) he has killed that part of himself."

The thing is, Tony was never actually "weak" to begin with, Susan was the weak one all along, throught the entire film. Tony was the one who believed in himself, who never gave up on his dream and ultimately managed to write a novel which, judging by Susan's reactions, was pretty good too.

He didn't kill himself, because that would be way too silly for him to do. It would be out of character. He may have been devastated by her dumping him the way she did, but Tony seemed way too reasonable to literally end his onw life because of the pain she caused him many years ago. He obviously found a way to deal with his feelings throughout his talent and he managed to create what seemed to be a pretty good book, so after all, he became an accomplished writer and that's what matters at the very end. That Tony never gave up on his "weakness" as he perceived it as a strenght from the very beginning, and by dedicating his work to Susan, he did in fact mean to be "grateful" in a way, because by dumping him like that, she actually helped him to become a better writer. He doesn't show up at the end because there wasn't really any resaon for him to do so. He probably has a girlfriend, maybe even kids too, and he indeed has simply moved on with his life. When she read his novel, Nocturnal Animals, it is then, after 20 years of no contact, when she actually realized how talented he really is (a talent she didn't actually believe in), and only AFTER she realized that, she sent him a message, trying to reach him, which was a major sign of weakness from her part. Tony understood all that, and that's why he didn't show up. She thought he was pathetic when she left him, and in the end she realized just how wrong she was all along.

A lot of people seem to have missed the point. It's quite simple, really, and that's what makes the movie so brilliant.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

I think people are overthinking this.

He has turned the table on her. She left him. Now he has shown her what he thought about that, and when she wants to meet up, he snubs her. Now she's stuck with rekindled feelings, while he moves on with his life.

Quidquid Latinae dictum sit, altum viditur.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

I don't think you can relate. Watching super hero films all the time doesn't help your argument.

Edward's feelings ran very, very deep and suicide is certainly not out of the question.

The tear we finally see on Susan's face reflects her deepest fear and despair.

I can't say for sure he kills himself, but it certainly is possible. Ford leaves the end ambiguous, thus it's the viewer choice to decide just how deeply Edward was hurt. If in fact he had cancer, then ending his life would have been quite simple.

I still wonder why, at the beginning of the film, we see the old Mercedes pull up to Susan's house?

Re: The story was a suicide note.


Edward's feelings ran very, very deep and suicide is certainly not out of the question.


So you didn't understand it at all.

Read up on the concept of "catharsis", and then maybe you can begin to understand.

Quidquid Latinae dictum sit, altum viditur.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

I guess you missed the writing on the wall.

Clueless.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

So you didn't understand that it was a tale about catharsis, from Edward's point of view.

Marvellous.

Before you try to lord it over others about something, maybe you should make sure you've actually understood it.

I suggest you read the novel and then watch the movie again.

We're done now.

Quidquid Latinae dictum sit, altum viditur.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Not so much a suicide note - more like a notification he was terminally ill with cancer.
Personally I interpret Tony's death in the novel as an omen for what was to come for Edward in real life - either accidentally or deliberately via pain-killing drugs.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

It wasn't. You're reading into it. He just achieved artistic success. The important thing is how she feels about his book.

And if the writer-director wanted to kill of a character, he'd let you know about it. He wouldn't leave you guessing.

Re: The story was a suicide note.


And if the writer-director wanted to kill of a character, he'd let you know about it. He wouldn't leave you guessing.

This statement is a million miles from the truth. Lynch has done it at least twice. Horror scripts do it all the time.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

There's just no indication of this plot point what so ever. The audience has no idea what state Gyllenhall is mentally when he sends her that book. And if he's just written a good novel chances are he's feeling *beep* great.

I actually think only stupid people would think that it's a suicide note because the fictional Gyllenhall character ends up dead in the book...

The fact is his character isn't even important. The important thing is the last scene with Amy. It's a film about her. And what people like her represent.

Re: The story was a suicide note.


There's just no indication of this plot point (Edward's suicide) what so ever. . . . I actually think only stupid people would think that it's a suicide note . . . The fact is his character isn't even important. The important thing is the last scene with Amy. It's a film about her.

I don't think you've understood the film at all. The bulk of it is devoted to Edward's interior journey which is represented by the events of the novel. Susan is a far less central character than Edward.
Several posters on this thread alone consider Edward has died one way or another. Even poor old FartyKat, who isn't the brightest kid on the block, has acknowledged that possibility, along with the likelihood of him having cancer.
All we know about Susan in the last scene is that she's sad about something - there are differing explanations for the cause of that sadness. Personally I think she's decoded the novel and realizes Edward is dead or dying - not because she's been stood up for a dinner date as some kind of infantile revenge over a break-up two decades earlier.

Re: The story was a suicide note.


All we know about Susan in the last scene is that she's sad about something


Sweetie, you did not understand the film at all.

Re: The story was a suicide note.


Sweetie, you did not understand the film at all.

Enlighten us, O Wise One.
I can guarantee all you have to offer is more speculation - and there's plenty of that here already.

Re: The story was a suicide note.


You're disregarding the other aspect of my speculations - which have been posted in other threads. I concluded Edward died between arranging the dinner date and Susan's lonely wait. As far as I'm concerned, he had cancer (Bobby Andes) and accidentally OD'ed shooting up painkillers (Tony's strange demise.


Hypocritical much?

Re: The story was a suicide note.


Hypocritical much?

Not so much - I try to back up my speculations with references to events depicted. Others just go on flights of counter-intuitive fancy - e.g. Susan=Tony - and get angry and defensive when you ask them to correlate their theories to the actual film.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Tony grabbing his gold chain. Susan grabbing her gold chain. Bobby is not Tony. Bobby is representation of Susan's mother. Duhhh. Bobby represents the law meaning the standard of society.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Susan realizes that the novel is an allegory for the loss Edward endured during their separation and that he dedicated the novel to her as a form of revenge, having sent the manuscript to prove to her that he was capable of writing a successful novel. Susan reevaluates her current behavior and contacts Edward. She arranges a meeting with him in hopes of mending their relationship, but Edward does not show, making it clear that he does not forgive her.

That's from wikipedia. The whole world agrees about what Adams is said about as it's so bloody obvious. However, I will spell it out for you:

By listening to her materialist mother, Adams had let go of Gyllenhall and entered a life pretty on the outside but rotten on the inside. (A recurring theme for Ford, remember A Single Man). She's in a sham marriage with a "strong", wealthy man who doesn't love her. She lives an empty, loveless existence and she thinks her perfect apartment, her perfect reading glasses, her perfect hair will help her feel better, but it doesn't. She traded real love for money and style. Even her gallery is home to art she doesn't stand behind. She's not an artist she once wanted to be. She's not even a good collector.

The novel she reads, as an obvious parallel, make her realise her life mistake. She wipes off her lipstick and goes to the date with Gyllenhall looking more natural. Like her old self. The artist. It's her chance to get things right. Get back with Gyllenhall. Close the door on Hammer. But Gyllenhall's a no-show. She is where she is. It's done. She's all alone in life. Her designer dress, that mind-blowingly beautiful Japanese-themed restaurant - it's all picture perfect, yet she's she's the most miserable person there. And that ties in with the opening credits -a bunch of ugly, fat women who're having a ball and just happy being themselves. So, the meaning of life isn't in possession and the look of things. It's in finding oneself. Who you belong with. The end.


I also think that the fact that Ford lets her not shed a tear means that she has indeed, in a way become her mother - coldhearted, vain, bitter, self-centred. That's how I understood that.

So, you see Gyllenhall doesn't matter. We don't even see him in present time. For all we know, he could be fat, bearded and bold. The point of the film lies in Adams and her character arc. I hope that clears it for you.

p.s. I actually can't believe I had to explain all that. If you don't believe watch any of the reviews on youtube. Just don't bother me again with your sarcasm and stupid questions...

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Not bad as an analysis, but you're missing a couple of points. Susan's arc is reactive - entirely dependent upon her response to Edward's novel, some of which was clearly erroneous. And what you claim she understands at the end is merely your own projection. I came to a very different, equally sincerely-held conclusion based on the information Ford presented to his audience.
As for your advice about giving up thinking for oneself and accepting Wiki synopses, youtube reviews and your own opinion as gospel truth - meh!

Re: The story was a suicide note.

So, you saw the movie, you listened to Ford and you still managed to come out of it as if you've watched paint dry and you're here questioning things.

And there's nothing subjective in my 'analysis'. It's just the plot of the film. Bye now.

Re: The story was a suicide note.


. . . you still managed to come out of it as if you've watched paint dry . .

I've no idea what you're talking about here. I liked the film from the beginning and continue to appreciate it as I gain more understanding of its complexity.

And there's nothing subjective in my 'analysis'.

There are several subjective statements in your 'analysis'. Perhaps you don't know the term's definition.

Re: The story was a suicide note.


.I came to a very different, equally sincerely-held conclusion based on the information Ford presented to his audience.


Here's what information Ford had to say about his piece.

Tom Ford: "I like that device. It’s a moral allegory, and I love what he’s saying to her: “Look what you did to me. Look how you made me feel. You thought I was weak, but look at what I did. I stuck it out and wrote the great book.”

BM: I couldn’t stop thinking about those people. That’s how you know a movie got you. I pulled over to get some coffee on the way home, and as I sat there, I kept thinking about them and that piece of art that says, “Revenge.” They stayed with me for a long, long time.

Tom Ford: Good!

Do I need to spell it out for you. REVENGE. If it was wrong he would've corrected him. But he approved of the interviewer assessment as it was obvious that he inserted it as an clue for the viewer to contemplate.

Re: The story was a suicide note.


It’s a moral allegory

Yes, Edward's novel most certainly is a moral allegory - but it would instantly become something immoral if it's writing was tainted by the spirit of REVENGE.

Every decent mystery story has a red herring. The REVENGE theme is Nocturnal Animals' red herring. It's an elementary skill of screenwriting to require the viewer to grasp the red herring before discarding it, and eventually arriving at the truth.
Tom Ford said: "Good", because his interviewer had arrived at a certain point of understanding and digested that clue. Later he stresses that red herring element again to lead his viewer further astray. But if you think that's the whole story, and that Ford would give it away so early in the narrative and so easily to a journalist, you really need to stay with Rom-Coms.
Ford is a smart, cultured fellow. He loves film and knows these basic tricks of the trade. Like any party magician, he has other tricks up his sleeve - and he's going to turn that revenge theme on its head. I rejected REVENGE because it's so pitifully unsophisticated, unsatisfying and juvenile - I'd seen 'Single Man' and knew Ford was smarter than that.
If you're satisfied with the revenge theme, stick with it - you have plenty of company. If you're not, keep observing what the characters do and say - and keep thinking. Hidden inside the REVENGE card-trick is a beautiful, sad, unconsummated love story containing the hint of a long journey out of darkness. That's why Gyllenhaal described the ending as upbeat.

Have you ever heard the expression: "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him"?
Do you think it means you should literally kill the Buddha? No - it means something very different. It's a spiritual red herring. Think about it.

Re: The story was a suicide note.


I also think that the fact that Ford lets her not shed a tear means that she has indeed, in a way become her mother - coldhearted, vain, bitter, self-centred. That's how I understood that.


She did a shed a tear.

Susan doesn't really put 2 and 2 together until she is stood up at the end. Until then she just thinks it's a really good story, but who is she to judge anything?

And wiki is not fact. Many times it's just opinion. You get your news from YouTube too?

Millennial dweeb.

Re: The story was a suicide note.

Did you just call me a dweeb! Lol. By the looks of it I am a genius to this board median iq. But then so would a cat be
Top