Talk:Premonition (2007 film)

message: One question: Is the tragic finale involved with the negative reviews received? The Reception section does not explain the causes of the critic failure. Anyway, the message from the movie is pointless, making you believe that the future can't be changed. 200.71.186.240 20:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We cannot change the future, yet we are given opportunities to make the best of it, as in this case, the death was inevitable, yet she could alter it, and have the grace of a child, and a closure, in a sense her husband died on a happy note! :) (Ekabhishek (talk) 11:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reception

message: Having seen the DVD, and scanned it backwards and forwards, the Scars are inconsistently seen on the girl's face. The director created a special summary in the special features that shows the narrative from the point of view of the friends and family.  He makes a compelling case that the events are consistent with no time discontinuity, and the woman is just having a breakdown. However the directors narrative, and the edited summary scenes fail to mention the lack of scars on Thursday. I believe that this is an intentional bit of subterfuge because it heightens the dramatic tension when the scars are revealed to the audience, at the same instant where the mother first sees them in her timeline. They sacrificed causality rigor for the sake of emotional impact. In the theaters we cant re-wind and by that time the audience is too turned around anyway. --Tbmorgan74 20:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm inclined to agree that there's likelihood that the discrepancy exists as a means to produce a jarring moment for both character and audience. However, that's just my opinion. What can be taken away from the above is that the special features and commentary of the DVD release (featuring both the director and Sandra Bullock) shed no light on the significance - or lack thereof - of the facial cuts not existing on Thursday. D.brodale 08:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you look at it as not just experiencing days out of order, and as time travel (which is essentially her experience), the girl not having the scars on Thursday is at least a little consistent. There's always two timelines in time travel - the initial point of departure and the subsequent changes. There already were changes to the past - the fact that she was present during Jim's accident when she experiences it, but that fact was not present when the Sheriff told her about his death. This is a direct result of paradoxes which occur during time travel, especially time travel to multiple points. I don't think this is a plot hole at all. It's a result of divergent timelines which are resultant of time travel. gomer43 (talk) 17:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Face Scars Problem

message: Can a case be made that she, or some alternate personality, deliberately engineered the incident to occur as it did?--Tbmorgan74 21:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Given her apparent level of distress at the time of the "incident" it seems unlikely the protagonist brought it on herself. Her discussion with the minister on Sunday leaves the door open for an outside force to have pressed the situation upon her at a time of emptiness. Or not. D.brodale 08:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Did she engineer it on purpose?

message: Wonderful to find plot details, out here! Seem necessary considering such a complicated one as this! (Ekabhishek (talk) 11:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot Details

message: Download's revert of edits by 24.191.84.41 as a test/sandbox style edit was inappropriate.  The user was adding information crucial to the context of the article and the plot of the movie.  The same user has added similar, more explanatory text back into the section header, and I for one think it should stay. - The Dark Ride (talk) 06:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I am attempting to clean up the plot section a bit to eliminate some the excessive detail. I am mostly focused on going paragraph by paragraph and simplifying sentences. i.e. To understand the story, you don't need to know that the wife's eyes were covered when they pulled up to the new house, just that it was a surprise. Jabba in the pit (talk) 07:50, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

text: actually, it is probably better to revert to the version of the plot from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Premonition_(2007_film)&oldid=117059097 which has a quick plot summary without too much detail and then a list of "clues" from the movie. Anyone else agree with that? Jabba in the pit (talk) 08:22, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Going from the 15 june 2014 state and cutting back. I have removed most of the unnecessary detail such as the details of stories Father Kennedy tells about other people having similar things. The only detail needed is that he has seen this before and has a solution. Things like this are not part of the plot. I have tried to remove these details in good faith to make the article readable for someone who has not seen the film, but I may have inadvertently taken out semi-relevant details. If you don't like the changes, rather than whole scale reverting them, I recommend checking the details on a case by case basis. By the wikipedia policy on plot summaries, we should be aiming for clear and concise. Thanks Jabba in the pit (talk) 19:12, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot reverts/edits 

message: I didn't understand this (drawn out) film. The woman twigs her husband is due to die at a certain place on a certain road. So, if she didn't want him to die, why not just tell him not to use that particular road? Why beat around the bush? Why keep it schtum?
Are we suppose to deduce that she wanted him to die? If so, why tell him to turn around, at the end of the movie?
Baffled of London 213.48.46.141 (talk) 15:26, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why didn't she simply tell him not to use that particular highway? 

message: Anyone heard anything about this movie possibly being based on Julia and Julia? Banaticus (talk) 10:09, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Movie it was based on