From: gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell)
Newsgroups: alt.horror
Subject: Re: Jacob's Ladder (was Re: Flatliners
Date: 9 Apr 92 16:54:42 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <204637@unix.cis.pitt.edu>, seawasp+@pitt.edu (Ryk E Spoor) writes:
> 	That's precisely the difference. Nothing is accomplished by that
> vision. His body is wrecked. He ain't-a gonna live no more. He's dead Jim.
> No matter what vision you show him, it won't change the fact that he's going
> to die.

 This is sort of funny at this point. I really thought, much like an earlier 
poster, that the film was pretty heavy-handed in its symbols and clues
with  respect to the struggle that was going on with Jacob - that is, 
does he accept his death or does he reject it and grab onto the what-ifs.
But after reading Ryk's msgs. I have to believe that it simply might not
have been as obvious as I thought.  I know that I am shocked that anyone 
could watch the film and truly be confused about what happened with respect
to "Visions" and so forth. I agree that the over-all msg of the film gets
cloudy due to the stupid ass "drug/ladder sub-plot", but what makes that
all the more annoying is that I really believe it was intended to try and
give some people a sort of "here's the solution for the symbolism-impared"
ending - I really dislike the subplot and think it only serves to obscure
what otherwise is a very well-done film about death and dying, heaven and 
hell, devils/angels and so on.

> 	Moreover, that vision is not even bad enough to necessarily convince
> him to die. 

Just a note - I didn't write the book or screenplay or anything else to do
with the film but I really do not think you folks are correct about what
was a vision and what was not or what these visions were intended to 
accomplish. First off, I see this as a case of a dying/dead man being
prepared for the afterlife. As is made clear to him by his guardian angel,
he must accept his death in order to "move on" - otherwise it is the job of
the devils to rid the individual of his "what-ifs" - that is, an individual
cannot spend eternity examining the question "what if I had lived"?? My view 
of the "visions" are that many are in fact Jacob's "what-ifs"? They are
his attempt to wallow in his death and wonder what might have come - but
others are previews, if you will, that is, they are little peeks into the
hell that he faces if he does not accept his death and move on. My 
impression was that Jacob's attempts to exmine what might have been were
continuously interrupted with these snippetts of torture, demons, in
general, hell, for the purpose of forcing him to accept his death. The
line between heaven and hell is clearly blurred in the film (or so it seemed
to me) with dialogue describing devils as actually being angels to those
they have cured (i.e. those they have managed to persuade to accept their
deaths) - judging by the flow of the movie, I would guess that Jacob's
guardian angel (Danny Aiello <sp?>) was more or less overseeing Jacob's
travels through hell - he shows up after a variety of troubling visions
and tries to cement the lessons learned into Jacob's head - he tries to
guide him through the necessary pains and tortures. But it is not only
the guardian angel trying to drive Jacob - his son Gabe (who the film
implies actually did exist and actually died before Jacob went to Nam)
tries to influence Jacob as well. In the film, Jacob has a rather
bizarre experience at a party and then goes into the tub with ice scene.
He "awakes" in another place with his wife, Gabe is alive, all seems well. 
He jokes about the nightmare he has just had - anyway, he takes Gabe
back to bed - now I happen to love this scene and may be way off, but here's
my reading of it - Jacob put's Gabe to bed and tries to leave, Gabe
asks him to stay - at some point, the two other kids awake and begin to
in effect interfere in the discussion - remember that they do not exist
and actually represent the what-if aspects of his death, you'll notice that
the reaction and interplay between Gabe and the other son is 
non-existant - no words pass  - nothing - also of course the angelic lighting
of Gabe in his isolated single bed, as opposed to the other two sons in
their dark, bunk beds indicates some sort of conflict. So Jacob begins to
leave and *shut the door* - symbolic I assume of closing the door on 
the correct path - Gabe says something like "no! leave it open just a little
bit.... a little bit more.... a little bit more..." and Jacob leaves only
to return to the "what-if vision" which is becoming more and more foreign
to him as his angels do their work.

 Again, I may be totally wrong about this but having seen the film a
number of times now I think I'm close at least.... certainly the drug
subplot is not a truly major aspect of the film's purpose or meaning IMHO.

> Hell, it might more convince him to live, if only to spread the
> word about the drug! 

Again, I realize that the drug plot was a very obvious black-and-white
issue that is easily understood but I really think you're putting way too
much weight on it - it was also just a part of the process nothing more - 
face it, the drug did not exist - it really does not even come into play until
the what-if world begins to crumble around Jacob, and he begins to see
more and more hints at what is to come should he not accept death and move on.
It seems to me that it is simply a last gasp effort to save the what-if
world and force some logic into what is happening - of course I could be
very wrong.

> At least ONE of those vision-life timetracks was actually
> pretty decent. 

Yes - see above. 

			gln