Reflection: “Shutter Island”
4 Mar
click the image to see the article full-size
In the March 3rd, 2010 issue of The Exponent, I decided to write a review on Martin Scorsese’s Shutter Island. Overall I was pretty happy on how it turned out in the newspaper and I feel that my writing ability is slowly getting better by each piece. This was also my first movie review that I actually went to the theater with the mindset of writing a review on it, instead of watching it on DVD like I have been doing in the past. If you want a spoiler-free review on the film, just click the image above. If you don’t mind spoilers I am going to give my thoughts and my interpretation on the ending after the break.
However you interpret Shutter Island, you got to admit, Scorsese did a terrific job balancing out evidence to support different conclusions throughout the film. What makes this film so enjoyable is not just the pure enjoyment of watching it, but also the conversations we can have after we walk out of the theater. After the film was released, I found it amazing to read other people’s opinions online and just having casual conversations with people I know about it and what they felt truly happened. The ability to have discussions in this kind of detail gives the film such lasting appeal for years to come.
My interpretation of Shutter Island is not the common consensus, but I found it to be the most enjoyable. I believe that Teddy Daniels was truly sane and when he spoke the line “be worse to live as a monster or die as a good man” was meant for Chuck Aule. I mean no matter what Teddy was stuck on Shutter Island and the betrayal of Chuck was his last chance of hope. So when he gave the last line to Chuck, I got the impression that it was in a way suppose to guilt-trip Chuck and question his decision and alliance to the Shutter Island staff.
From Teddy’s perspective, Chuck was living as a monster because he sold out his partner. However, Chuck has the opportunity to expose what was happening on the island and he could most likely die attempting to do it, but at least he would die as a good man. I just have a hard time believing that the Shutter Island staff would actually perform this large-scale role play experiment for several days just on one person. What about when the Bridget Kearns patient tells Teddy to run, why would she tell him that? Was it just an “illusion”? Why did the lighthouse have a security fence around it if there wasn’t anything important in there?
I also realize my interpretation is not very strong compared to many other theories, but I find it more appealing and satisfying to believe that he was caught in a huge government conspiracy and he couldn’t leave the island. How did you interpret the ending of Shutter Island?
- Dan Dreher
Tags: Dan Dreher, March 2010, Martin Scorsese, Movie Review, Northern State University, Shutter Island, The Exponent
Interesting observation about the environment. I feel like I need to see it again and REALLY pay attention to get the full experience.
Thanks for commenting Marshall!
When I was watching it, I was envisioning the environment as almost as a silent secondary character. The opening scene alone when the boat is coming out of the fog and they arrive on the island, you can just feel that something is not right.
Interesting insight DB. I tend to adhere to the conventional straightforward interpretation that Teddy was deranged. How would you explain those hallucinations then: He sees a body at the bottom of the cliff but when he gets there, it has disappeared, the rats, the Patricia Clarkson character in a clearly impossible location to be in, especially barefoot. Just too many clues supports the main theory so I guess I did not think of that… Nice post!
Don’t get me wrong, I also see the deranged interpretation as well, I just choose to accept the sane conclusion because it’s seems more entertaining to believe. For seeing the body at the bottom of the cliff, it would of been because of the chemical the staff was putting in the cigarettes and food/drink that was suggested by the “real” Rachel. How she was able to get in there, I don’t know, but Teddy was able to so why couldn’t she? Even though I didn’t noticed, I heard (someone on the internet so take it for a grain of salt ’till i see it again) that she was actually wearing shoes in the scene when they both wake up the next morning. So maybe Dr. Crawley was lying about the pairs of shoes. Thanks for commenting again Castor!
I agree with your theory on the ending. Supposedly in the book it’s clear that he was insane. Here’s my thoughts on the movie…http://pablochiste.wordpress.com/2010/03/02/shudder/
Dreher Bear,
Thanks for visiting my blog! Your theory is really intriguing. Would you consider the flashback to the deaths of his children and wife a false memory? It’d be great to watch the film a second time with all these possible interpretations in mind. If you haven’t, please check out my review of the film: http://wp.me/ps2NL-he
I’ve subscribed to your page. Keep it up!
Michael
21stcenturyboy.net
I know it’s really stretching it and probably a weak link in my interpretation, but i interpreted the “flashback” to his children and wife as a dream sequence. For Teddy, if he believed it or not, was a bombshell what Dr. Crawley was telling him. When he went to sleep it was most likely on his subconscious and it seeped into his dream. It was his way (and the audience) to envision what the doctor told him.
Also, from survey and word of mouth, it seems that most people believe that Leonardo DiCaprio’s character is actually truly mad at the end and that his short-term lucidity is all but gone. I don’t agree with that. What is your thought process on that DB?
I feel that it’s completely plausible to believe that Teddy Daniels was insane. The evidence definitely seems more laid-out to believe that. At the same time, I really don’t believe that there’s one true conclusion, but it’s up to the individual of what they want to believe. That’s why I feel the film is so entertaining because everyone had their own unique view on Shutter Island. Does that answer the question Castor? haha
Completely agree with your take. Teddy is walking away from this life with his head held high; Chuck cannot say the same.
Yeah, I just find it more intriguing and fun to believe he was actually sane.
I felt like you were supposed to still feel confused when you walked out of the theater. You were supposed to think back to all the moments and clues and piece things together. There is so much information and it can constantly be viewed in contradictory ways, which I believe was the intent. I’d like to see it again to confirm that. I think the end was supposed to be ambiguous. As Teddy kept pointing out, everything a sane person does in an insane asylum can be viewed as crazy. The constant confusion is what makes it so damn interesting.
I think Teddy is wonky myself, but I can see where you are coming from DB.
Exactly Heather! Couldn’t say it better myself. I’m not saying my interpretation is the only right one, but it’s left open for people to come up with their own conclusion.
Rachel doesn’t have shoes when Teddy comes in, but she has shoes when Teddy leaves.
Hard to make anything of that.
Excellent post, now I have to go and mull this over…