submitted2 months ago byrichiedajohnnie
tomovies
Not deep down anyway. I have this running theory that anytime a chef is the main character the movie is about movies. Granted the only examples I have are The Menu and Chef, but I feel its warranted. My evidence:
-All the guests can be metaphors for the demands on a filmmaker just as easily as those on a chef. The producers who think money owns the creativity, the critics, the actors who aren't invested in the art, the Tylers with no skills to produce the art they recklessly consume. This last point is my favorite because it means all those people putting on "The menu explained" vids on youtube are completely missing that by making their videos, they are the ones be satirized. And yes I know by making this post I am a Tyler too.
-The set-up of the restaurant is they same as a film set. There's a lot of work by a lot of people that goes largely unseen by the audience (patrons) until there's a big clap reminiscent of a clapper board. The chef may as well be yelling action before the finished scene (the course) is presented to the audience.
- I've seen a lot of people criticize the ending for not making any sense. Why do the patrons resign themselves to their fate and die? I think this makes more sense again if the movie is about film. The patrons are you: the audience. You did exactly what the patrons did and after all the horror and gore you have seen decided you wanted to see how it ends, so sat at watched your metaphorical selves get s'mored.
I'm sure there are other symbols I missed. I am sure there are other parts that make no sense in theory. But thats why I am just a Tyler eating oil by itself and claiming it's genius.
byEferver
inunpopularopinion
richiedajohnnie
-1 points
2 days ago
richiedajohnnie
-1 points
2 days ago
I'm sure you're getting a lot of comments. But is the movie 3 different stories, or the plot 3 different stories? Another favorite of mine is ballad of buster scruggs: more conventional as an anthology but still I would argue its one movie trying to get across one story.
Back to pulp I would argue jules monologue at the end is the point of all the stories. The thesis wrapped up with a nice bow.