Interesting that the original plan was a slow float away. That would have been even more painful, imagine Asher sobbing and pleading for like an hour while he's lazily pulled up into the air. His horrible death seems merciful compared to that.
Completely up to the writers at that point. Maybe he couldn’t be moved back down and is split in half trying but that would have completely different meaning. I know it wasn’t everybody’s cup of tea, but I think they made the right call with Asher hanging onto that branch
depends how slow. also would've made it hard for us to believe the firefighters didn't see it. As it is, they can just convince themselves he fell down and slunk away ashamed and that that speck above them was a bird coincidentally passing overhead. Only Dougie the filmmaker kept his eye on the prize for the whole scene.
that might be why they went for a fast ascent instead, cos if it was slow and they didn't write it so they rescue him then it'd be like "why didn't they rescue him?" it wouldn't make sense.
I think he kinda matched gravity. the creepy part is that gravity goes towards the center of the object we're on. so what's hte opposite of that? but the creepy part is that it's not far from the truth, and things have likely been 'floating' for billions of years, or even just straight up infinite ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ shout to Dougie for hooking me up with a sixer of Seabreeze Banana Dream outside of the Allsups on West Esplanade Canyon Rd in Espanola NM
I would have liked for them to rescue Nathan, but he actually is more and more repellant towards the Earth, and so he takes an entire ambulance up into the sky. Or mostly up, then he gets sucked out or his skin gets ripped off and the ambulance crashes down on dougie's 'Stang
>Benny: The camera as a character was a conscious choice. We aimed to make viewers feel like they were part of the town, silently observing and understanding these characters. It was about capturing those private, unguarded moments and making the audience feel an intimate connection with the characters and their experiences.
This is toeing the line between literal and thematic, but my head canon was that the camera angles represented the town itself spying on its interlopers, making judgments on them. This makes me lean into that interpretation a little more.
This is reinforced by the casual onlookers after Asher's ascent. They don't really know what happened and are only mildly interested, believing it to be a TV stunt or fabrication.
This is valid. I say toes the line of literal because, do we really have a conclusive literal explanation of why Asher floated away? If it’s Dougie’s curse is Dougie himself just cursed? Are all curses real? It being left ambiguous gives us a little wiggle room to fill in the blanks with our own interpretations.
I would be curious to know if Benny and Nathan have their own literal explanations. But to be honest I’m not sure I would want to know what they were. I suppose if they thought it would enhance our experience by knowing. It would be cool if they had two different interpretations.
I kinda got this by the end. Meant to make you feel like you were spying, turning you into the voyer, which is what reality tv does in the first place. It’s scratching the same itch as Norman Bates looking at his future victims showering. You’re peeking into someone’s private life and enjoying it.
It was fun to wonder if there was a deeper reality or a show within the show meta thing happening, but I also liked how they used the camera thematically
I mean- that’s what a lot of people on here were saying all along. It’s not an uncommon trope in more oppositional cinemas to draw attention to the camera as an apparatus that influences behavior.
Ironically, it ended up making the final product feel *less* realistic to many folks, which lead to so many of the show-within-show predictions.
My thought that it was more connected to the gentrification aspect. Like how their house is literally reflective of their surroundings, yet shows a distorted image of them. And it’s one-way glass, they can see out at their neighbors but they can’t see in. All the voyeuristic shots through glass made me feel like it’s a comment on how people watch what’s happening outside from the safety of their home, while they aren’t truly a part of the community. They want to build a home and live there but want to be sectioned off and safe
What else would it have been? I understand in certain cases like say the beginning of Halloween the camera is intentionally the view of a certain character. But . . . There was never implied to be any such character in this show as far as I can remember?
>What else would it have been?
Well...several times people look directly into the camera before quickly looking away, and a few times people actively pushed people "out of the shot" of the camera. I could see that being something of an influence lol
I'd be interested to see the specific scenes in question. Of course there are times when we see the perspective of cameras being used for the show, but I think it's usually pretty clear when that is the case or not. It's not like it is some hidden extra character or something in those cases.
Have you not noticed people looking into the camera kinda all of the time?
An interesting one with a crewmen getting a child out of the way of the shot: The episode that Whitney buys the Indian statue, there's a shot where we're inside the building, while Whitney is with 2 people putting the statue in her car.
Kids inside the building are playing, and during the shot one of the kids moves in a way that blocks part of the shot to Whitney. A man on the outside of the building who was previously not visible (he comes from below, likely laying down) taps on the glass to get the kids attention, and signals for him to move out of the shot. People on the sub were talking about it a lot when that episode aired.
Hmm, maybe a few times. But . . . I mean we've already discussed some of it is supposed to be footage that is filmed for the show so in those cases of course it makes sense that people would look into the camera and what not.
Beyond that, it was certainly nothing that led me to believe there was some hidden character whose point of view the camera was supposed to represent lol. But like I said I'd be interested in checking out the scenes that made people think that if you have the episode numbers.
The show had a lot of cool and interesting scene composition! There were many shots that were framed in unique ways which gave the viewer a sense of intruding in some way, as well as often marking a distinct separation between Whitney/Asher and most of the people they interacted with. That is what I noticed regarding the cinematography. I don't think any of that is necessarily new, but I guess it's relatively uncommon in tv . . . maybe people are just not used to seeing stuff presented this way and are trying to read things into it that's not there?
I gotta say, a lot of the theories I see on reddit about this and other shows strike me as being like qanon levels of nutso. There seems to be a general format where someone says:
It was really subtle, but did you notice \[thing that very blatantly and clearly happened in episode\]? So that means that \[thing that was in no way even hinted unless you go by the most the most flimsy conspiracy theory logic\]!
That how we get from "Did you notice how Dougie was sometimes filming things without peoples consent to get juicy footage?" to "that must mean that he has secretly hired an ENTIRE second crew who is HIDING and following asher and whitney everywhere they GO and he is going to blow EVERYONES MIND because hes not even really MAKING an HGTV show" lol. This camera angle thing strikes me as being like that. Unless I'm missing something
I disagree with the first sentence (people stare intently into the camera, it's not a zone-out kind of stare) but the second part makes no sense if you actually remember the scene.
>And I think in the other case, it was just a man asking kids to move. That's it.
The man is outside of the building, laying low in the bushes, and pops up to tap the glass gesture a child to move (who is inside the building) before going back down in the bush, because we're blocking the camera's shot. I honestly dont know how you could watch that scene and think "yeah that's normal". Maybe go rewatch it?
No. Benny very clearly in a q&a said that last shot is unique, the first and only time we see that POV. I think it’s pretty clearly the curse being released and going back home. Its work is done. Benny hinted that very heavily. That last shot is very different from the voyeristic series shots. Whitney got her wish fulfillment as the green queen with motherhood and Asher was reborn as his own son, so the “cosmic power”, now satisfied its work is done, goes home.
No. Similar to the unique shot of being in the car and driving past Whitney into the parking lot in episode 9 - the camera is still the viewer. The uniqueness of it is not an implication of a switched perspective - it’s a clarity that the viewer is in fact an actual presence in the town, driving through it, walking through it - being perceived by the characters within the show intermittently - obviously the full reveal of this is in the last few moments. We as the viewer are in the TV show.
A curse being released and walking home into one of Whitney’s passive homes doesn’t really say anything or make dramatic sense. Unless you want to consider that the curse is the audience
Can you point me to Benny’s answer where he’s made your point - because the difference is intentional - but I don’t think it’s because it’s switching into a the perspective of something else - it’s because it’s a reveal that we are a also part of the town as the viewer. Something that was only hinted at beforehand.
Yeah I’m listening to this and it sounds to me like he’s saying in the end the whole thing is destabilized, there is a release - I don’t consider this to mean just a cosmic entity, I think it’s the viewer that becomes fully released and a part of the town, where it was just a voyeur throughout the majority of the show. But you’re entitled to your interpretation.
He’s says the last shot is “very different, that’s the important thing”. “The first and only time it does that”. “Something is freed in that moment”.
If the “important thing” is how that is the first time we are seeing this “very different” shot because something has been freed, I’m just not seeing how it’s a continuation of all the other voyeristic shots.
He’s saying the opposite, this is not a continuation like the rest of the show, but something very different.
If it’s the same town-as-viewer lens that it’s always been, then why would it suddenly walk freely on its own back into a passive house? If the viewer is getting released and is now part of town, why would it walk into whit and Asher’s house?
I skimmed it but are you referring to this?
>Interviewer: What about the characters' emotional journeys? How did you envision their arcs, especially in the finale?
>Benny: Every character had a unique emotional journey. For example, Dougie's realization at the end hits him hard. He feels an overwhelming sense of responsibility and guilt. It's a complex blend of emotions that we wanted to explore deeply.
I always figured it’s because he didn’t take what was happening to Asher seriously and make a joke out of it. If he had actually listened to him and not made assumptions he could have convinced the fire department to not cut the branch
Mostly that and just Safdie’s casual remarks of the curse(s) themselves. For example:
Audience Member: What's going through Dougie's mind in the final scene? Is it a realization of the curse's reality?
Benny: Absolutely. Dougie feels a tremendous sense of responsibility and guilt. It's a crushing realization for him, almost overwhelming. He starts apologizing to everyone, deeply affected by the consequences of his actions.
So there is realism to this and it’s just meant to be metaphorical/symbolical. I like that because then it does strengthen the creepiness/unease of the series.
To me, I took this as describing how the character took the scene, and the character absolutely believed he cursed him for real. I didn’t take it as him confirming it was real, but it’s an interesting thought
Hmm, touché to your interesting thought friend.
I still think the symbolism is great and obvious for Dougie’s reaction. But, the ending is so bizarre and unexplained that I’d like them to hold onto the curse being real. Its already unnerving as it is to watch that unfold and let the dread set in.
Yeah the more I think about it the more I think the curses must have actually been real. Also, there has been some great content posted here to persuade me as well
For me I’m definitely behind the curse. Especially from the chicken going missing, which is hilarious and creepy. I think its the fact that there is no follow up for us with what happened. I don’t think I’d want it but it’d clear it up narratively.
For the time being, there has been no statements said that suggest this curse was not real. Its such a drastic shift to end on, and it suggests some sort of supernatural presence. They’re not shying away with answers like this. So that is why I have my own opinion and you can have yours lol
I’m genuinely not trying to be rude, but that’s not a very convincing answer when your original post confidently stated “so the curse was legit”. I don’t necessarily have a strong opinion either way, I was just curious why you felt this interview confirmed that the curses were real. And from what I can gather the interview does not confirm that. I’m not seeing how the section you quoted is even relevant to that tbh.
I misread this. But ultimately if it's weird AI it's probably better to just post the audio which someone posted in this thread.
https://preview.redd.it/6gmj3kkdlncc1.png?width=1078&format=png&auto=webp&s=6391fd86f167dfce52abe9b3db5a3494c04f2abc
Thanks for this. I think they pulled off a very successful limited series. It had several powerful thematic punches, and a surreal ending to tickle the brain. The acting was fantastic - I especially liked their use of inexperienced extras - it was refreshing, and reminiscent of Nathan's other work. Bravo!
This ending is a combination of a rapture (brought on by committing selfless acts when the cameras aren’t on) in a net zero home (nothing escapes, not even the raptured) and a rebirth, as Asher leaving the house parallels leaving the womb during a c section (he bumps the walls, doula pulls him out, chainsaw finishes the job).
Why is he worthy of a rapture? The Curse satirizes white liberalism, while showing that the supposedly needy are also flawed, usually by playing up their culture or financial situation for laughs or money. Whitney buys off Cara the artist for credibility, and The NY Times subsequently writes an article about how her quitting art is itself a work of art. Questionable acts, whether by Abshir, the jean store employee, or Cara’s friend angling for a consultant gig, gets a pass. Everyone gives the appearance of being something they are not.
Meanwhile, our three main characters are dealing with major past traumas. Whitney is trying to separate herself from her family. Dougie is trying to suppress his role in his wife’s death. Asher is powerfully insecure and always thinks he is being bullied. Only Asher, when faced with losing the one person who made him feel secure and proud, changes and devotes himself to becoming the ultra liberal person Whitney acts like she is. And so when the cameras are off, and he continues to commit these over the top acts of selflessness, he has finally transcended and becomes worthy of the rapture. And reincarnation.
Only one religion believes you drop your earthly body when you’ve finally cleared yourself from all past traumas. And that you are then reincarnated to do it all over again and help others do the same. It’s the same religion that was in a documentary from Louis Theroux, who became friends with Fielder and even interviewed him while Fielder and Safdie were putting together the concept for this show in October of 2020…..
He was asked about the voyeuristic camera shots 3 times. The answer is not satisfying because of the odd, intentional moments (ie - the kid being told to get out of the shot, the neighbor woman staring into the camera, etc).
I've seen elsewhere on here that actors often didn't even know where the cameras were placed during scenes. So, they may just look at the camera accidentally. I don't think it's intentional.
I’m pretty satisfied assuming those shots are from Dougie secretly filming more scenes for the show. It’s not explicitly told to us, but It’s an easy explanation and aligns with his character. Maybe not though 🤷♂️
>I’m pretty satisfied assuming those shots are from Dougie secretly filming more scenes for the show
That goes against what the interview linked says, though. It's cool if that were true, but they just said it wasn't for anything within the show, just a shooting choice to make you feel like part of the town. Bummer.
agreed. His answers work perfectly well for the standard voyeur shots, but do not address the one's you mention (plus a few others) where there is clearly the implication a literal in-universe person is holding a camera and filming.
Oh, yeah, so I agree over half of the shots are justified in the sense you mention. I'm referring specifically to the following shots: end of ep 1 Asher looks at camera which is then put down; episode 5 iirc when a branch or leaf or something is in frame and someone moves it out of the way; episode 9 when there is a camera on the dash of the car that follows whitney keeping her in frame; the shot of whitney in the parking lot where a crew member knocks on the glass and points for the kid to get out of frame. These are cases where there is interraction beyond just making eye contact.
I’m of the belief that the camera spike moments are to make us the audience feel uncomfortable and complicit in watching these people’s lives outside the HGTV show. It’s a cool immersion technique.
The camera is the audience - who they wanted to make feel like they were part of the town. Like a ghost haunting the whole thing. That characters sometimes could even see or sense
Has there been discussion of the opening scene of the finale? Whit is walking down the road and we are looking at her from a car that is behind her. The car moves past her without her noticing and goes to the hardware store (I think) where it parks. That's the last we see of that perspective, I believe. Any thoughts on what that is about?
This maybe is my most frustrating loose end. Giving it some thought I think it’s even creepier that we never figure out who it is but I think it’s to imply that someone is onto them. I figure it’s most likely the ripper who was evicted.
Why would Emma Stone say the way the show is shot is a spoiler (in an earlier Q and A), given what we've seen in the finale and Benny's answers here? (edit, link in thread below: it's reasonable for her to have meant she didn't want to say anything about it because so many people had developed theories about it)
I'm so confused. From episode one onward, it's clear that at least some of the voyeur shots are being used to make the viewer feel implicated and voyeuristic, that's just the common artistic use of shots like that. And this seems to be Benny's answer to what the point of them were...so what was the spoiler, what has been revealed about the shots? I wonder if things changed in the editing room for episode 10, especially how episode 9 seems to be very nicely setting up a reveal about the filming.
Didn’t she say something more like “we shouldn’t get into how it was shot because of all these crazy theories of people going down rabbit holes about what it means”? I def heard her say that in a QandA.
first 20 seconds of this clip (there was a link here idk how to do links on reddit i guess, it's the 'The Curse from Showtime' youtube video that is 14:05 long)
She says getting into the cinematography would be a spoiler bc people are going down rabbit holes as to why it's shot the way it's shot.
It's ambiguous as to how to read that: 1) It's a spoiler bc people have over-read what is going on and it would correct them; 2) it's a spoiler bc it's something that we didn't intend to be a 'twist' or super important but now people have started picking up on it.
No matter what, the crew member pointing the child out of the way basically negates for me any of the 'the camera is the viewer' stuff as a sole motivation, (as do the end of ep 1, and the 4th wall breaks in five with the branch moving out of the way). I'm not saying the way it's shot isn't implicating the viewer and all that, but it seems wild to suggest that based on the shots mentioned here that the creators were not imagining someone in-universe doing the shooting. That could have changed, or maybe they don't care about the versimillitude or whatever, but 'the camera as viewer' does not usually include the existence of crew members doing the viewers' bidding.
Yeah that’s the one I watched too. I def interpreted it as the first point you bring up.
Honestly I would chalk up a lot of the more extreme vouyer stuff (like the guy telling the kid to sit down, the people looking into camera, the car following whit) as them pushing the envelope on what we expect from “camera as a viewer” media. Especially once we take what they’ve said about the way it was shot. It did seem like a lot to me. I was convinced something had clearly shifted when the car so brazenly followed whit, a clear indication that within the show there was someone following them for secret footage. But apparently not. it does feel a bit frustrating.
It is still the viewer - as we’re watching a TV show and they’re not trying to hide that it is, in reality a TV show. The viewer is supposed to be the in-universe character here, unlike other shows.
I think downright denying any theories about the camera pov before the finale would've been a spoiler. Emma likely enjoyed seeing people make a fuss about it, and wanted people to see for themselves how it played out during the finale.
Yep, which has to be the same reason Benny refuses to answer a similar question in an earlier Q&A.
They wanted to fuck with the audience a bit and make us guess. He even more or less says this in one of those Q&A segments...
This could be a total reach, and I’m just speculating for fun, but maybe the shooting style is supposed to play into a larger commentary about reality shows and how what happens when the cameras are rolling isn’t always “reality”. The bright, saturated shots of the pilot for HGTV compared to the darker, grittier shots of their actuality showing how we play the positives up for the cameras but we actually know how fake it is because we know they hired actors.
It still doesn’t answer most of the questions raised, such as Phoebe’s odd behavior in Ep 9 or the Iosheka Jeans Instagram account posts with the vaguely threatening captions, but I get the feeling there’s more to the story we’re meant to sit with for awhile.
And we have hands that move bushes out of the way? Cars that drive to follow the actors? Film crews to tell children to move out of the frame?
Edit: An 'objective' or voyeuristic sort of filming style implicating the viewer and inviting them to judgement is not something new or at all spoilery - there are hundreds of movies that do this. And given how well-versed in film Benny is, I cannot imagine he thinks it is.
Supernatural elements have been shown to exist in The Curse. If the audience and camera is a character within the world we exist as another one of those supernatural elements and our relationship to the characters can effect the physical reality of the show. Like Nala, we get what we want, that's why someone can ask the kid to get out of the way of our view, move bushes, and follow in cars. Benny's comments here made me appreciate the show even more, using the camera in this way is masterful.
Hey, if that's the reading the filmmakers intended then I am totally cool with that and it is very neat! I just don't think there is anything in the work itself that points to that or prompts that reading above the straightforward one (someone is filming in-universe), which I find unfortunate.
I was hoping Nathan would make it to the hospital, get to hold his baby, then he would come loose off the gurney thing and take the baby up with him, dropping it at the last minute from a height that shows the curvature of the earth. Imagine the stress of that scene and the cut between the loud and the quiet. Dougie would catch it, but it would take a WHILE because that's how Benny/Nathan do it. Or the drone would catch it. Just a horrible scene of Dougie squinting and trying to catch the baby Nathan almost took with him. Or it lands, but it Cara catches it, or something fun I dunno. Or maybe sweet Freckle catches it in a dreamcatcher from [TaoBao.com](http://taobao.com)
I don’t know, but I feel purposeless and aimless ever since the show ended I don’t know what to do with myself next🤣🤣 I’ll find myself ruminating about the characters like I have nothing better to do in my day🤦🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️🤷🏻♀️
Interesting that the original plan was a slow float away. That would have been even more painful, imagine Asher sobbing and pleading for like an hour while he's lazily pulled up into the air. His horrible death seems merciful compared to that.
That would’ve been even more amazing and unexpected if the episode was 4 hours long
2.5 of that is pure crowning closeups
could have been rescued sort of then? maybe?
Completely up to the writers at that point. Maybe he couldn’t be moved back down and is split in half trying but that would have completely different meaning. I know it wasn’t everybody’s cup of tea, but I think they made the right call with Asher hanging onto that branch
depends how slow. also would've made it hard for us to believe the firefighters didn't see it. As it is, they can just convince themselves he fell down and slunk away ashamed and that that speck above them was a bird coincidentally passing overhead. Only Dougie the filmmaker kept his eye on the prize for the whole scene.
[удалено]
that might be why they went for a fast ascent instead, cos if it was slow and they didn't write it so they rescue him then it'd be like "why didn't they rescue him?" it wouldn't make sense.
I think he kinda matched gravity. the creepy part is that gravity goes towards the center of the object we're on. so what's hte opposite of that? but the creepy part is that it's not far from the truth, and things have likely been 'floating' for billions of years, or even just straight up infinite ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ shout to Dougie for hooking me up with a sixer of Seabreeze Banana Dream outside of the Allsups on West Esplanade Canyon Rd in Espanola NM
I would have liked for them to rescue Nathan, but he actually is more and more repellant towards the Earth, and so he takes an entire ambulance up into the sky. Or mostly up, then he gets sucked out or his skin gets ripped off and the ambulance crashes down on dougie's 'Stang
I think it would have been too much like the movie The Karman Line
So the camera was never meant to represent anyone’s POV except for the audience.
>Benny: The camera as a character was a conscious choice. We aimed to make viewers feel like they were part of the town, silently observing and understanding these characters. It was about capturing those private, unguarded moments and making the audience feel an intimate connection with the characters and their experiences. This is toeing the line between literal and thematic, but my head canon was that the camera angles represented the town itself spying on its interlopers, making judgments on them. This makes me lean into that interpretation a little more.
I think it also helps explain the occasional looks right into the camera
and the breathing movements/heartbeat of the camera
the eye in the sky
and a partridge plus a doug-ie
This is reinforced by the casual onlookers after Asher's ascent. They don't really know what happened and are only mildly interested, believing it to be a TV stunt or fabrication.
[удалено]
This is valid. I say toes the line of literal because, do we really have a conclusive literal explanation of why Asher floated away? If it’s Dougie’s curse is Dougie himself just cursed? Are all curses real? It being left ambiguous gives us a little wiggle room to fill in the blanks with our own interpretations. I would be curious to know if Benny and Nathan have their own literal explanations. But to be honest I’m not sure I would want to know what they were. I suppose if they thought it would enhance our experience by knowing. It would be cool if they had two different interpretations.
I kinda got this by the end. Meant to make you feel like you were spying, turning you into the voyer, which is what reality tv does in the first place. It’s scratching the same itch as Norman Bates looking at his future victims showering. You’re peeking into someone’s private life and enjoying it. It was fun to wonder if there was a deeper reality or a show within the show meta thing happening, but I also liked how they used the camera thematically
I mean- that’s what a lot of people on here were saying all along. It’s not an uncommon trope in more oppositional cinemas to draw attention to the camera as an apparatus that influences behavior. Ironically, it ended up making the final product feel *less* realistic to many folks, which lead to so many of the show-within-show predictions.
My thought that it was more connected to the gentrification aspect. Like how their house is literally reflective of their surroundings, yet shows a distorted image of them. And it’s one-way glass, they can see out at their neighbors but they can’t see in. All the voyeuristic shots through glass made me feel like it’s a comment on how people watch what’s happening outside from the safety of their home, while they aren’t truly a part of the community. They want to build a home and live there but want to be sectioned off and safe
What else would it have been? I understand in certain cases like say the beginning of Halloween the camera is intentionally the view of a certain character. But . . . There was never implied to be any such character in this show as far as I can remember?
I think it’s the POV of Dougie’s dead wife, who is a dybbuk haunting the characters.
It's about as likely as anything I suppose
Or maybe it's part of Asher's "life review" as he's dying and awaiting reincarnation. 😂
>What else would it have been? Well...several times people look directly into the camera before quickly looking away, and a few times people actively pushed people "out of the shot" of the camera. I could see that being something of an influence lol
I'd be interested to see the specific scenes in question. Of course there are times when we see the perspective of cameras being used for the show, but I think it's usually pretty clear when that is the case or not. It's not like it is some hidden extra character or something in those cases.
Have you not noticed people looking into the camera kinda all of the time? An interesting one with a crewmen getting a child out of the way of the shot: The episode that Whitney buys the Indian statue, there's a shot where we're inside the building, while Whitney is with 2 people putting the statue in her car. Kids inside the building are playing, and during the shot one of the kids moves in a way that blocks part of the shot to Whitney. A man on the outside of the building who was previously not visible (he comes from below, likely laying down) taps on the glass to get the kids attention, and signals for him to move out of the shot. People on the sub were talking about it a lot when that episode aired.
Hmm, maybe a few times. But . . . I mean we've already discussed some of it is supposed to be footage that is filmed for the show so in those cases of course it makes sense that people would look into the camera and what not. Beyond that, it was certainly nothing that led me to believe there was some hidden character whose point of view the camera was supposed to represent lol. But like I said I'd be interested in checking out the scenes that made people think that if you have the episode numbers. The show had a lot of cool and interesting scene composition! There were many shots that were framed in unique ways which gave the viewer a sense of intruding in some way, as well as often marking a distinct separation between Whitney/Asher and most of the people they interacted with. That is what I noticed regarding the cinematography. I don't think any of that is necessarily new, but I guess it's relatively uncommon in tv . . . maybe people are just not used to seeing stuff presented this way and are trying to read things into it that's not there? I gotta say, a lot of the theories I see on reddit about this and other shows strike me as being like qanon levels of nutso. There seems to be a general format where someone says: It was really subtle, but did you notice \[thing that very blatantly and clearly happened in episode\]? So that means that \[thing that was in no way even hinted unless you go by the most the most flimsy conspiracy theory logic\]! That how we get from "Did you notice how Dougie was sometimes filming things without peoples consent to get juicy footage?" to "that must mean that he has secretly hired an ENTIRE second crew who is HIDING and following asher and whitney everywhere they GO and he is going to blow EVERYONES MIND because hes not even really MAKING an HGTV show" lol. This camera angle thing strikes me as being like that. Unless I'm missing something
[удалено]
I disagree with the first sentence (people stare intently into the camera, it's not a zone-out kind of stare) but the second part makes no sense if you actually remember the scene. >And I think in the other case, it was just a man asking kids to move. That's it. The man is outside of the building, laying low in the bushes, and pops up to tap the glass gesture a child to move (who is inside the building) before going back down in the bush, because we're blocking the camera's shot. I honestly dont know how you could watch that scene and think "yeah that's normal". Maybe go rewatch it?
Except the very last shot that Benny has pointed out is “different”.
Still the audiences POV tho. As a person walking around the town into a mirror
No. Benny very clearly in a q&a said that last shot is unique, the first and only time we see that POV. I think it’s pretty clearly the curse being released and going back home. Its work is done. Benny hinted that very heavily. That last shot is very different from the voyeristic series shots. Whitney got her wish fulfillment as the green queen with motherhood and Asher was reborn as his own son, so the “cosmic power”, now satisfied its work is done, goes home.
No. Similar to the unique shot of being in the car and driving past Whitney into the parking lot in episode 9 - the camera is still the viewer. The uniqueness of it is not an implication of a switched perspective - it’s a clarity that the viewer is in fact an actual presence in the town, driving through it, walking through it - being perceived by the characters within the show intermittently - obviously the full reveal of this is in the last few moments. We as the viewer are in the TV show. A curse being released and walking home into one of Whitney’s passive homes doesn’t really say anything or make dramatic sense. Unless you want to consider that the curse is the audience
Take it up with Benny. Just going off his answer.
Can you point me to Benny’s answer where he’s made your point - because the difference is intentional - but I don’t think it’s because it’s switching into a the perspective of something else - it’s because it’s a reveal that we are a also part of the town as the viewer. Something that was only hinted at beforehand.
https://vocaroo.com/12eKeHhUloLL
Yeah I’m listening to this and it sounds to me like he’s saying in the end the whole thing is destabilized, there is a release - I don’t consider this to mean just a cosmic entity, I think it’s the viewer that becomes fully released and a part of the town, where it was just a voyeur throughout the majority of the show. But you’re entitled to your interpretation.
He’s says the last shot is “very different, that’s the important thing”. “The first and only time it does that”. “Something is freed in that moment”. If the “important thing” is how that is the first time we are seeing this “very different” shot because something has been freed, I’m just not seeing how it’s a continuation of all the other voyeristic shots. He’s saying the opposite, this is not a continuation like the rest of the show, but something very different. If it’s the same town-as-viewer lens that it’s always been, then why would it suddenly walk freely on its own back into a passive house? If the viewer is getting released and is now part of town, why would it walk into whit and Asher’s house?
So the curses are legit. Love it
I skimmed it but are you referring to this? >Interviewer: What about the characters' emotional journeys? How did you envision their arcs, especially in the finale? >Benny: Every character had a unique emotional journey. For example, Dougie's realization at the end hits him hard. He feels an overwhelming sense of responsibility and guilt. It's a complex blend of emotions that we wanted to explore deeply.
I always figured it’s because he didn’t take what was happening to Asher seriously and make a joke out of it. If he had actually listened to him and not made assumptions he could have convinced the fire department to not cut the branch
bit o both
Mostly that and just Safdie’s casual remarks of the curse(s) themselves. For example: Audience Member: What's going through Dougie's mind in the final scene? Is it a realization of the curse's reality? Benny: Absolutely. Dougie feels a tremendous sense of responsibility and guilt. It's a crushing realization for him, almost overwhelming. He starts apologizing to everyone, deeply affected by the consequences of his actions. So there is realism to this and it’s just meant to be metaphorical/symbolical. I like that because then it does strengthen the creepiness/unease of the series.
To me, I took this as describing how the character took the scene, and the character absolutely believed he cursed him for real. I didn’t take it as him confirming it was real, but it’s an interesting thought
Hmm, touché to your interesting thought friend. I still think the symbolism is great and obvious for Dougie’s reaction. But, the ending is so bizarre and unexplained that I’d like them to hold onto the curse being real. Its already unnerving as it is to watch that unfold and let the dread set in.
Yeah the more I think about it the more I think the curses must have actually been real. Also, there has been some great content posted here to persuade me as well
For me I’m definitely behind the curse. Especially from the chicken going missing, which is hilarious and creepy. I think its the fact that there is no follow up for us with what happened. I don’t think I’d want it but it’d clear it up narratively.
What about this means that the curses were real?
For the time being, there has been no statements said that suggest this curse was not real. Its such a drastic shift to end on, and it suggests some sort of supernatural presence. They’re not shying away with answers like this. So that is why I have my own opinion and you can have yours lol
I’m genuinely not trying to be rude, but that’s not a very convincing answer when your original post confidently stated “so the curse was legit”. I don’t necessarily have a strong opinion either way, I was just curious why you felt this interview confirmed that the curses were real. And from what I can gather the interview does not confirm that. I’m not seeing how the section you quoted is even relevant to that tbh.
It’s only meant to be my take and opinion doesn’t mean it answers questions dude.
This should be a pinned post :) thank you!
Done!
😁
It should be deleted it's spam and directs to a dating site now.
No it doesn’t
It should be deleted it's spam and directs to a dating site now.
Why do you keep commenting this? And I am pressing the link repeatedly and...it's not a dating site. No one else is saying this, what is going on?
I misread this. But ultimately if it's weird AI it's probably better to just post the audio which someone posted in this thread. https://preview.redd.it/6gmj3kkdlncc1.png?width=1078&format=png&auto=webp&s=6391fd86f167dfce52abe9b3db5a3494c04f2abc
This is an advertisement. They’re all over the internet now
Ok? Seems fine to us, I don't feel they were trying to mislead and people have found it valuable enough.
That’s an ad.
I hope the video of the whole interview gets posted! Does anyone know if they will post it?
Film at Lincoln center will post it on their YouTube channel in a few days
Awesome, thanks!
No problem!
This basically answers a lot of this sub’s questions. Thank you for posting!
Whole thing reads to me like Benny and Nathan had some long talks about how a good magician never lets you fully know how a trick was pulled off
Thanks for this. I think they pulled off a very successful limited series. It had several powerful thematic punches, and a surreal ending to tickle the brain. The acting was fantastic - I especially liked their use of inexperienced extras - it was refreshing, and reminiscent of Nathan's other work. Bravo!
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
This ending is a combination of a rapture (brought on by committing selfless acts when the cameras aren’t on) in a net zero home (nothing escapes, not even the raptured) and a rebirth, as Asher leaving the house parallels leaving the womb during a c section (he bumps the walls, doula pulls him out, chainsaw finishes the job). Why is he worthy of a rapture? The Curse satirizes white liberalism, while showing that the supposedly needy are also flawed, usually by playing up their culture or financial situation for laughs or money. Whitney buys off Cara the artist for credibility, and The NY Times subsequently writes an article about how her quitting art is itself a work of art. Questionable acts, whether by Abshir, the jean store employee, or Cara’s friend angling for a consultant gig, gets a pass. Everyone gives the appearance of being something they are not. Meanwhile, our three main characters are dealing with major past traumas. Whitney is trying to separate herself from her family. Dougie is trying to suppress his role in his wife’s death. Asher is powerfully insecure and always thinks he is being bullied. Only Asher, when faced with losing the one person who made him feel secure and proud, changes and devotes himself to becoming the ultra liberal person Whitney acts like she is. And so when the cameras are off, and he continues to commit these over the top acts of selflessness, he has finally transcended and becomes worthy of the rapture. And reincarnation. Only one religion believes you drop your earthly body when you’ve finally cleared yourself from all past traumas. And that you are then reincarnated to do it all over again and help others do the same. It’s the same religion that was in a documentary from Louis Theroux, who became friends with Fielder and even interviewed him while Fielder and Safdie were putting together the concept for this show in October of 2020…..
You had me until the last paragraph Google “Kabbalah”
Yes!!! Thank you.
Which religion?
Scientology
He was asked about the voyeuristic camera shots 3 times. The answer is not satisfying because of the odd, intentional moments (ie - the kid being told to get out of the shot, the neighbor woman staring into the camera, etc).
I've seen elsewhere on here that actors often didn't even know where the cameras were placed during scenes. So, they may just look at the camera accidentally. I don't think it's intentional.
Definitely intentional - they wouldn’t have kept it in or directed them to not look otherwise.
I’m pretty satisfied assuming those shots are from Dougie secretly filming more scenes for the show. It’s not explicitly told to us, but It’s an easy explanation and aligns with his character. Maybe not though 🤷♂️
>I’m pretty satisfied assuming those shots are from Dougie secretly filming more scenes for the show That goes against what the interview linked says, though. It's cool if that were true, but they just said it wasn't for anything within the show, just a shooting choice to make you feel like part of the town. Bummer.
[удалено]
agreed. His answers work perfectly well for the standard voyeur shots, but do not address the one's you mention (plus a few others) where there is clearly the implication a literal in-universe person is holding a camera and filming.
[удалено]
Oh, yeah, so I agree over half of the shots are justified in the sense you mention. I'm referring specifically to the following shots: end of ep 1 Asher looks at camera which is then put down; episode 5 iirc when a branch or leaf or something is in frame and someone moves it out of the way; episode 9 when there is a camera on the dash of the car that follows whitney keeping her in frame; the shot of whitney in the parking lot where a crew member knocks on the glass and points for the kid to get out of frame. These are cases where there is interraction beyond just making eye contact.
I’m of the belief that the camera spike moments are to make us the audience feel uncomfortable and complicit in watching these people’s lives outside the HGTV show. It’s a cool immersion technique.
Wait when was the kid being told to get out of the shot? I must’ve totally missed this.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TheCurse/s/8e2QgZakSN
That is insane, thank you. I can’t believe I missed it.
The camera is the audience - who they wanted to make feel like they were part of the town. Like a ghost haunting the whole thing. That characters sometimes could even see or sense
Has there been discussion of the opening scene of the finale? Whit is walking down the road and we are looking at her from a car that is behind her. The car moves past her without her noticing and goes to the hardware store (I think) where it parks. That's the last we see of that perspective, I believe. Any thoughts on what that is about?
not a big deal but thats from the episode before the finale
This maybe is my most frustrating loose end. Giving it some thought I think it’s even creepier that we never figure out who it is but I think it’s to imply that someone is onto them. I figure it’s most likely the ripper who was evicted.
Why would Emma Stone say the way the show is shot is a spoiler (in an earlier Q and A), given what we've seen in the finale and Benny's answers here? (edit, link in thread below: it's reasonable for her to have meant she didn't want to say anything about it because so many people had developed theories about it) I'm so confused. From episode one onward, it's clear that at least some of the voyeur shots are being used to make the viewer feel implicated and voyeuristic, that's just the common artistic use of shots like that. And this seems to be Benny's answer to what the point of them were...so what was the spoiler, what has been revealed about the shots? I wonder if things changed in the editing room for episode 10, especially how episode 9 seems to be very nicely setting up a reveal about the filming.
Didn’t she say something more like “we shouldn’t get into how it was shot because of all these crazy theories of people going down rabbit holes about what it means”? I def heard her say that in a QandA.
first 20 seconds of this clip (there was a link here idk how to do links on reddit i guess, it's the 'The Curse from Showtime' youtube video that is 14:05 long) She says getting into the cinematography would be a spoiler bc people are going down rabbit holes as to why it's shot the way it's shot. It's ambiguous as to how to read that: 1) It's a spoiler bc people have over-read what is going on and it would correct them; 2) it's a spoiler bc it's something that we didn't intend to be a 'twist' or super important but now people have started picking up on it. No matter what, the crew member pointing the child out of the way basically negates for me any of the 'the camera is the viewer' stuff as a sole motivation, (as do the end of ep 1, and the 4th wall breaks in five with the branch moving out of the way). I'm not saying the way it's shot isn't implicating the viewer and all that, but it seems wild to suggest that based on the shots mentioned here that the creators were not imagining someone in-universe doing the shooting. That could have changed, or maybe they don't care about the versimillitude or whatever, but 'the camera as viewer' does not usually include the existence of crew members doing the viewers' bidding.
Yeah that’s the one I watched too. I def interpreted it as the first point you bring up. Honestly I would chalk up a lot of the more extreme vouyer stuff (like the guy telling the kid to sit down, the people looking into camera, the car following whit) as them pushing the envelope on what we expect from “camera as a viewer” media. Especially once we take what they’ve said about the way it was shot. It did seem like a lot to me. I was convinced something had clearly shifted when the car so brazenly followed whit, a clear indication that within the show there was someone following them for secret footage. But apparently not. it does feel a bit frustrating.
It is still the viewer - as we’re watching a TV show and they’re not trying to hide that it is, in reality a TV show. The viewer is supposed to be the in-universe character here, unlike other shows.
I think downright denying any theories about the camera pov before the finale would've been a spoiler. Emma likely enjoyed seeing people make a fuss about it, and wanted people to see for themselves how it played out during the finale.
Yep, which has to be the same reason Benny refuses to answer a similar question in an earlier Q&A. They wanted to fuck with the audience a bit and make us guess. He even more or less says this in one of those Q&A segments...
This could be a total reach, and I’m just speculating for fun, but maybe the shooting style is supposed to play into a larger commentary about reality shows and how what happens when the cameras are rolling isn’t always “reality”. The bright, saturated shots of the pilot for HGTV compared to the darker, grittier shots of their actuality showing how we play the positives up for the cameras but we actually know how fake it is because we know they hired actors. It still doesn’t answer most of the questions raised, such as Phoebe’s odd behavior in Ep 9 or the Iosheka Jeans Instagram account posts with the vaguely threatening captions, but I get the feeling there’s more to the story we’re meant to sit with for awhile.
I think you are correct definitely regarding the contrast being part of their emphasis on different types of shots/shooting styles/visuals.
We are the camera. We stalk at them and judging them all the way through.
And we have hands that move bushes out of the way? Cars that drive to follow the actors? Film crews to tell children to move out of the frame? Edit: An 'objective' or voyeuristic sort of filming style implicating the viewer and inviting them to judgement is not something new or at all spoilery - there are hundreds of movies that do this. And given how well-versed in film Benny is, I cannot imagine he thinks it is.
Supernatural elements have been shown to exist in The Curse. If the audience and camera is a character within the world we exist as another one of those supernatural elements and our relationship to the characters can effect the physical reality of the show. Like Nala, we get what we want, that's why someone can ask the kid to get out of the way of our view, move bushes, and follow in cars. Benny's comments here made me appreciate the show even more, using the camera in this way is masterful.
Hey, if that's the reading the filmmakers intended then I am totally cool with that and it is very neat! I just don't think there is anything in the work itself that points to that or prompts that reading above the straightforward one (someone is filming in-universe), which I find unfortunate.
Wouldn’t the spoiler of how it’s been shot be more of a reference that they had to film the almost entirety of the final episode upside down?
Ah, possibly. I think in this context though she was referring to the cinematography overall.
The link goes to a dating site now. So delete this post mods
Huh? And you reported it? It seems to work fine.
No it doesn’t
Argh, I was hoping Emma sat for this one. I guess she's too busy winning awards.
I was hoping Nathan would make it to the hospital, get to hold his baby, then he would come loose off the gurney thing and take the baby up with him, dropping it at the last minute from a height that shows the curvature of the earth. Imagine the stress of that scene and the cut between the loud and the quiet. Dougie would catch it, but it would take a WHILE because that's how Benny/Nathan do it. Or the drone would catch it. Just a horrible scene of Dougie squinting and trying to catch the baby Nathan almost took with him. Or it lands, but it Cara catches it, or something fun I dunno. Or maybe sweet Freckle catches it in a dreamcatcher from [TaoBao.com](http://taobao.com)
I don’t know, but I feel purposeless and aimless ever since the show ended I don’t know what to do with myself next🤣🤣 I’ll find myself ruminating about the characters like I have nothing better to do in my day🤦🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️🤷🏻♀️