good flick, a different take

Rating: Null/10 (25 January 2004)

First, don't read if you do not want any spoilers. Second, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie (and this was shocking given my low expectations and skepticism regarding 'kelso' in a dramatic role). Second, I just saw this tonight, have not fully processed the movie, and have had numerous cocktails before writing this. Now, on with my comments.
Though I enjoyed this movie, I left the theater torn between 2 interpretations. In one interpretation, like just about every review I have read in the last 2 hours, I viewed it as a time-travel flick focusing on the idea that trying to change the past has unintended consequences-nothing new or earth shattering here, but I still felt that they did a good job at pulling it off. My other interpretation, however, is a bit more interesting I think.
Consider the idea that the entire movie is a delusion (as is alluded to in the 2nd to last 'revision' of his past). Evan had some horrendous experiences as a child no doubt, and also inherited his father's 'disease.' What if Evan did in fact have a tumor of some sort that caused psychotic symptoms (certainly feasible given our knowledge of structural brain abnormalities that can lead to schizophrenic-like symptoms), in addition to having actual repressed memories, his blackouts, due to childhood trauma. What if the entire movie, from his college year where Thumper tells him "Maybe you shouldn't read those journals because maybe there is a reason you don't remember that crap," is a dramatic recreation of his subconcious struggles with the recollection of previously repressed memories (similar to ideas in Identity). Evan is dying of a brain disorder (tumor, etc.), and he decides to attempt to recollect his repressed memories and "rewrite" his own personal history. In an attempt to prevent this (possibly because his subconcious realizes that he cannot handle it-i.e., memories are repressed for a damn good reason) his subconcious will not allow him to 'trick' himself into believing a false reality. Before his death he wants to create a "nice" story of his life, but his subconcious, which knows the grim truth of it all, won't allow it-thus, every attempt to rewrite his past turns out horribly. Instead of the message being "You can't change the past without changing just about everything else, often with horrendous consequences," the message may be "You cannot rewrite your past, and sometimes we repress memories because that protects us from the harsh reality of what truly happened."
I am aware that there are likely numerous flaws with this interpretation (remember the cocktails please), and please share any that you may have. But I am just throwing out another idea that may or may not make sense upon closer inspection (and yes, i realize that at the end we supposedly see Evan '8 years later,' but isn't it possible that this was just a dying man's attempt at peace before he is gone from this earth).
On another level (the supernatural one), more similar to the thoughts of many others, the film was about Evan's attempts to create the perfect story for himself (notice the self-interest). Only when he decided to change the past and not try to make everyone in his own life happy (thus making himself happier) was he able to "get it right." Thus, things turned out OK only when he put Kailee's future (even if it was without him) ahead of his own. Maybe it's OK to manipulate the past as long as we are not trying to make our own present better.