Fantasy Magazine

Subscribe to our RSS Feed or Weekly Newsletter

37 Responses

1. 1 • eli said:
   October 29th, 2008 at 10:00 pm, permalink

   “Nathan in particular seems a victim of the plot — he works for Rotti for no discernible reason and suffers under the guilt of killing his wife to save his daughter, even though the movie overtly states he could have chosen to save his wife and just shut up.”

   I think it’s painfully clear that you didn’t even watch the movie, because, this? Is not even close to what actually happens. Rotti gets revenge on Marni for leaving him and frames Nathan for it. He then blackmails Nathan (who really does believe that he is guilty) into working for him. Since this is all explained, oh, about fifteen minutes into the movie, I’m guessing you didn’t even actually watch it.

2. 2 • yield for nothing said:
   October 29th, 2008 at 10:06 pm, permalink

   One: did you actually watch the movie?

   Two: MoleskinE.

   Three: The only reason it’s being compared to RHPS is that they’re both dark and have singing. There is absolutely no connection otherwise.

   Four: It’s more than implied that Nathan has some serious mental stability issues.

   Five (connected to four): Nathan’s not the one who killed Marni. Although, lest I forget, you didn’t actually watch the movie, so you wouldn’t know that.

   Six: It doesn’t take place over one day. Oh, wait, right. (Hint: next time you have to review a movie in a genre you don’t particularly care for, try to pass it on to someone who might actually pay attention.)

3. 3 • K. Tempest Bradford said:
   October 29th, 2008 at 10:21 pm, permalink

   Eli,

   I watched the movie and I can assure you that Genevieve did as well. I don’t see anything in the quoted passage that did not happen in the movie. Nathan does suffer under the guilt of killing his wife, because that’s what he thinks he did. yes, Rotti actually killed her, but nathan never finds that out, does he?

   The “explanation” of how Rotti got Nathan working for him was convoluted and handwavy at best. And despite the comic booky backstories, it was never real clear what the actual deal was. A lot of it was lost in fumbling their way through silly lyrics.

   Additionally, this exposition doesn’t come until about 40 minutes into the movie or so. the first fifteen were mainly concerned with Shiloh, the graveyard, and clumsy backstory. I know, I was there, and I was taking notes.

   yield:

   Thanks for the spelling correction.

   Actually, the PR people have been comparing the movie to Rocky Horror, not just random movie reviewers. If you don’t like it, take it up with them.

   Genevieve did not actually say that Nathan killed Marni, what she said, as I pointed out above, that he suffered from the guilt of doing so. He feels guilty for killing her =/= he actually did it.

   It was a little unclear how much time passed in the movie. I felt that it might have taken place over two days, but since not much is clear in terms of plot and timing (and characterization…) I see that as a valid confusion IF Genevieve is confused on that point. She may not be.

4. 4 • eli said:
   October 29th, 2008 at 10:33 pm, permalink

   Really? Because from what I remember, the comic scenes explaining the back story went something like this:

   Rotti: Since Marni’s sick and Nathan’s trying to find a cure, I’m going to use this opportunity to take revenge on Marni for leaving me. Here, switch this vial of poison with Nathan’s actual cure so that Marni will die and it will look like it was all Nathan’s fault.

   (And most of that right there is exactly word-for-word, so, good job.)

   And on a side note, the PR never compared it to RHPS. They’ve said that it’s popular with the RHPS crowds and that they find it nice that people consider it the next RHPS, but they’ve never explicitly stated that it was supposed to be similar to it.

5. 5 • K. Tempest Bradford said:
   October 29th, 2008 at 10:43 pm, permalink

   Eli,

   The comics explaining why Marni died were clear, yes. I was actually referring to the explanation of how Rotti forced/coerced/blackmailed Nathan into being a Repo Man. Nothing in this review contradicts the fact that Rotti killed Marni.

   Also, I don’t know what press kit you got, but the very first one I got compared it to Rocky Horror. So again, you have a problem with that, take it up with up with them. We just report the news.

6. 6 • yield for nothing said:
   October 29th, 2008 at 10:49 pm, permalink

   -I was actually referring to the explanation of how Rotti forced/coerced/blackmailed Nathan into being a Repo Man. -

   As far as I remember, that part of the backstory basically went: “Oh, crap, Marni’s dying! AND SO IS SHILO WHAT WILL NATHAN DO. Oh, okay, he’ll call Rotti. But Rotti is going to charge for it, obviously, because that’s what Rotti does, so in exchange for saving Shilo Nathan has to be a repo man for the rest of his natural life.”

   Additionally — I’m pretty sure it was in Rotti’s backstory — it was stated that Rotti was cold and bitter and that killing Marni was his revenge on _her_, while making Nathan into a repo man was revenge on _him_.

7. 7 • eli said:
   October 29th, 2008 at 10:52 pm, permalink

   Well, shortly after that, there was a scene between Nathan and Rotti (which was actually one of the few lines that were spoken) that went: “You needed a cover up and I needed someone to repossess my property.” (Paraphrasing here, of course, because I don’t know the exact line off the top of my head.) I think that’s pretty self-explainable, to be quite honest.

   And actually, yeah, there is still something wrong with your review, because it never says in the movie that Nathan could have just saved his wife and that would have been that. In fact, the point is that he WAS trying to save her, and his plan just went to hell because of Rotti’s meddling. And Nathan doesn’t just work for Rotti no reason whatsoever — he works for Rotti because Rotti is blackmailing him for Marni’s death. And since, hey, Nathan actually thinks it’s his fault that Marni died, the blackmail works.

   I still disagree with you on your point about comparing it to RPHS, but since I don’t actually have the press kits myself, I’ll just let it go.

   As a final point, I sincerely doubt that Sarah Brightman would have bothered to have her theatrical debut in Repo! if she was painfully embarrassed to be in it. No one forced her to be in it — she WANTED to be in it, she’s mentioned it before.

8. 8 • K. Tempest Bradford said:
   October 29th, 2008 at 11:04 pm, permalink

   I guess what I’m trying to get across to you is that, when experiencing the movie for the first (and only) time, without having watched any of the videos or heard the soundtrack, the exact nature of the blackmail was not clear to me. My logical mind kept thinking – but what is he blackmailing him FOR? Giving his wife medicine? Deciding to save the baby at her expense? I mean, these things do happen, and he was an actual doctor, and it’s not as if doctors have never lost patients before, and to Nathan’s mind he hadn’t done anything criminal, as far as I could tell. So what’s the cover up for? Fear that he’d lose Shiloh? Go to jail? I might buy that, but the point here is this: the movie’s not well written, therefore these emotional cadences are blunted or missed by those not obsessed with the film.

   And actually, Nathan could have saved his wife. I also remember that there was a choice — save the baby, save the mother. I even think Marni begged Nathan to save the baby. But I’m not certain about the last bit. But the first bit stuck with me for much the same reason it stuck with Genevieve — it makes his whining about losing her less effective He could have saved her. Or, at least, he believed he could. He didn’t to save Shiloh.

9. 9 • yield for nothing said:
   October 29th, 2008 at 11:11 pm, permalink

   Because you’re listening to nothing else I’m saying, and you seemed to receive it well the last time I did so:

   Her name is Shilo, not Shiloh.

10. 10 • eli said:
    October 29th, 2008 at 11:17 pm, permalink

    Even if that’s your point, it’s still a weak one. That’s like suggesting that it would be impossible to understand a Broadway musical (or, gasp, even an actual pop/rock opera on Broadway) without hearing the soundtrack or being obsessed with it. Sorry, but, you’re doing it very wrong. Obviously he’s blackmailing Nathan FOR KILLING MARNI. I really don’t know how much clearer the movie could have gotten about that. Maybe they should have included a footnote, even though it’s pretty much the easier plot point in the movie to get. Obviously if the police had done an autopsy and discovered actual poison in her blood, and figured out that it was the cause of death, don’t you think they would have assumed Nathan was trying to kill Marni? Besides that, Rotti obviously has the law wrapped around his finger, so really, that’s not even an issue — it would have been so easy for Rotti to just have Nathan convicted of murder. And yeah, aside from all that, his fear is that he’d lose Shilo. I think it’s pretty obvious that he loves her A LOT. She’s his entire world; he thinks he killed his wife to save her. I can’t see him being able to just part with her just like that.

    And no, Marni didn’t beg Nathan to save the baby. Marni was losing blood so fast that Nathan just made a split second decision and decided to save Shilo. (And anyway, since he didn’t know what was wrong with what he thought was the antidote that he gave her, he probably wouldn’t have been able to save her and just let Shilo die.) He’s not upset about Marni dying and saving Shilo instead of her, he’s upset that Marni died in the first place. He thinks it was his antidote that killed her. He THOUGHT his antidote would CURE her initial illness, but instead it just killed her. Yeah, I see your point; that’s really no big deal at all. God, get over it, seriously.

11. 11 • K. Tempest Bradford said:
    October 29th, 2008 at 11:30 pm, permalink

    eli,

    actually, music theatre fails when you have to have heard the soundtrack beforehand. this is what I’m saying about Repo: it failed. At least in this area. Not that for all musicals one needs to hear the soundtrack first, but that if these major plot points are missed by first time watchers, that’s a failure by the creators.

    But let me see if understand your logic correctly. Nathan, a doctor, gives Marni medicine he’s developed to cure her disease. She reacts badly to the medicine and immediately begins dying. She’s fading fast, and he can only save his wife or the unborn child. He chooses to save the child. Rotti comes in and says, OH NO, you KILLED her! And Nathan worries that, if there’s an autopsy, poison will be discovered, even though he did not know poison was involved. He also knows that he did not actually kill Marni, but followed the patient’s wishes to save the baby even if it meant her own death. A thing that happens, sadly, all the time. And without doctors going to jail.

    In a better written movie, I might have bought some of that. Some. But I’m still hung up on why Nathan was convinced that there was no other way but to become a Repo Man. All of the explanations you gave might be true, but really, none of that was in the movie. not that I caught. You’ve obviously had a lot of time to think deeply on these issues, and there’s nothing wrong with that. But these are my impressions after having watched the movie once. take them or leave them.

12. 12 • yield for nothing said:
    October 29th, 2008 at 11:33 pm, permalink

    -He also knows that he did not actually kill Marni, but followed the patient’s wishes to save the baby even if it meant her own death.-

    She never said that.

13. 13 • K. Tempest Bradford said:
    October 29th, 2008 at 11:40 pm, permalink

    yield,

    I’ll have to take your word on that. It’s something movie women often do/say, so it’s not out of the question that I just grafted it on.

    Still, having to make that choice and choosing the baby? perfectly valid. And again, not something doctors generally go to jail for. Which brings us back to: nothing in the review is untrue.

14. 14 • eli said:
    October 29th, 2008 at 11:43 pm, permalink

    Please stop putting words in Marni’s mouth. PLEASE. She never said that she wanted Nathan to kill her and save the baby. I don’t know where you got this from, but it’s wrong.

    Also, you claim that major plot points will be missed by people who have not heard the soundtrack. Well, I figure you probably haven’t listened to the soundtrack, because, all of this? Is NOT on the soundtrack. The only thing the soundtrack tells us is that Marni died (we don’t know how, we just know Rotti did it out of revenge) and that Nathan feels responsible. That’s all. I saw the movie once and was able to figure out everything else on my own. I really don’t see the difficulty in it. On the other hand, maybe you were too busy taking notes to actually pay attention.

    Marni doesn’t react badly to the antidote, because it’s NOT an antidote, it’s just plain old poison. The actual antidote would have cured her, but since Rotti switched it with poison, she died. Marni never said, Oh by the by, since I’m dying, you should probably save our baby. Nathan made this decision entirely on his own. Also, I think you’re missing a big plot point here, in which Marni didn’t die because of Nathan trying to save Shilo — she died because he INJECTED POISON INTO HER BLOODSTREAM.

    These aren’t things that need to be thought upon deeply at ALL. These are very clear cut plot points that anyone paying even an ounce of attention would have been able to figure out. And it’s obvious you have a bias against this movie because it’s an opera. I’m sure if it was an entirely spoken movie you’d have been perfectly fine with it.

15. 15 • K. Tempest Bradford said:
    October 29th, 2008 at 11:52 pm, permalink

    Eli,

    I get that the cure was actually poison. I’ve said so several times. What I’m saying is, from Nathan’s point of view, he has not given her poison. He doesn’t know that there is poison. So why does he need a cover up? You seem to be confusing his character motivations with what we, the audience knows. If HE knew there was poison, then yeah, I could see the need for a cover up. But as he thought he was just giving her medicine… whatever, I’ve made this point many times. you insist on not getting it.

    Also, I’m biased because it’s opera? That’s actually funny. No, I quite like opera. Am, in fact, trained in classical voice. I like musicals, too. Actual operas generally make me very happy. I have a fine appreciation for good recitative, which this movie doesn’t do well, which I feel disqualifies it from being a true opera. But that is a bias of mine — I consider opera to be good, and this movie isn’t, in my opinion. I need to remember that not all opera is good.

16. 16 • eli said:
    October 30th, 2008 at 12:04 am, permalink

    No, I don’t think YOU get it, because you insist on saying that it was Nathan saving Shilo that killed Marni. OBVIOUSLY Nathan doesn’t know it’s poison planted there by Rotti. But he DOES know that he injected something into Marni that ultimately killed her. How exactly would he go about proving that he was actually trying to give her an antidote and not murdering her when he NO LONGER HAS THE ANTIDOTE? He wouldn’t be able to, and therefore, there is need for a cover up.

    Sorry if Repo!’s not in the same league as La Boheme for your tastes. Repo!’s not attempting to be a classical opera at all, it’s merely a rock opera. It’s no different than say, the pop opera Bare. It’s not CLASSICAL opera, but it is still an opera.

    Also, while I’m at it, I may as well point out another part of your “review” I have an issue with:

    “. . . does not excuse the gory misogyny rampant throughout; scantily-clad nurses are disemboweled as punch lines, and even the female corpses can’t seem to keep their tops on.Repo! is one of those dystopias in which women are either fishnet-clad bodyguards, fishnet-clad whores, or doomed to die as a victim of circumstances beyond their control.”

    Okay, wow, there was one pair of cartoon boobs and another two whole seconds of a girl flashing the camera. *rolls eyes* Maybe you didn’t notice, but all the male characters in this movie look like complete losers next to the female characters: Shilo is the heroine (whose name literally means “the messiah” — yeah, that’s so degrading and misogynistic); Blind Mag is revered around the world and is a martyr; Amber is the one who inherits GeneCo, not her two brothers. Hell, even Marni, who’s dead, is idolized. Nathan and Rotti are dead by the end of the movie and Luigi and Pavi are made to look like absolute fools. Also, more men die in this movie than women. To add to that, it was a man who was brutally tortured in the movie; the woman victim’s death at the beginning death was quick and glossed over. Blind Mag stabs out her eyes, yes, but she does so as a Fuck You to Rotti and Rotti kills her because he doesn’t like not getting his way — it has nothing to do with the fact that she’s a woman and everything to do with the fact that Rotti’s just a dick.

17. 17 • Rachel said:
    October 30th, 2008 at 12:13 am, permalink

    Did you SERIOUSLY see this film, or just rip off someone’s bad review?

    I mean the staggering amount of false “facts” is enough to discredit anything you say.

18. 18 • somebody who has seen it said:
    October 30th, 2008 at 12:17 am, permalink

    What say you about all the positive reviews? there has been no less than 30 glowing reviews of the movie from credible sources?

19. 19 • icymike said:
    October 30th, 2008 at 2:41 am, permalink

    Why is someone else replying to comments and not the one who wrote the review? Obviously the “critic” here was intent on not liking the film as evident in their many mistakes regarding the films plot and premise. The most heinous offense was the comment about Sarah Brightman being embarrassed to be in the film. Had she not wanted to take the role she would have simply refused. From all accounts including her own she recognized the film as the daring fresh avante garde piece it was and jumped at the chance to be involved. Get your facts straight so your erroneous assumptions dont make you look like the inept wannabe reviewer you are.

20. 20 • truffles said:
    October 30th, 2008 at 5:06 pm, permalink

    ~~~I guess what I’m trying to get across to you is that, when experiencing the movie for the first (and only) time, without having watched any of the videos or heard the soundtrack, the exact nature of the blackmail was not clear to me.~~~

    the only videos i watched before seeing the movie were zydrate anatomy and mark it up, and the only songs i listened to were those two and chase the morning. and i refused to let anyone spoil me.

    and yet i seemed to understand it perfectly fine! as did, i am hoping i can assume, the other people who commented here. have you considered that maybe there’s something wrong with ~you~?

21. 21 • K. Tempest Bradford said:
    October 30th, 2008 at 6:02 pm, permalink

    Actually, I’m just a bit surprised that so many bought into that weak conceit. I was mainly confused because, as presented, the premise doesn’t make a lot of logical sense. I had assumed there must have been something more going on, but apparently not. In the end, it’s still weak.

    The only thing wrong with me, as concerns this discussion, is that I expect movies to be good. This kind of expectation often gets me in trouble.

22. 22 • truffles said:
    October 31st, 2008 at 6:10 pm, permalink

    you know what?

    it’s not an epic.

    it’s not the next great american film.

    but you know what else?

    a _lot_ of people like it. this kind of bitching — blah blah, plot hole only i can see, blah blah, everyone else seemed to enjoy this more than i did — is the kind that only comes from the kind of person who goes into every movie they see expecting it to be great cinema.

    one of my favorite movies of all time is _clue_, the one in 1985 with tim curry and everyone else ever. it’s not going to win any awards, this i admit; it’s also an amazing movie that never fails to make me smile, and i am perfectly willing to overlook any shortcomings i happen to see (which i haven’t, _for_ the record) in light of that.

    your attitude reeks of someone who cannot enjoy herself unless she is a) experiencing some great literary life-changing event, or b) poking holes in other people’s fun balloons. that coupled with your increasingly condescending attitude (doubly shocking, especially given that you DID NOT WRITE THE REVIEW) promises that you’re going to have a very disappointing life.

    but have fun with that.

23. 23 • Jill aka The Nerdy Bird said:
    November 19th, 2008 at 7:16 pm, permalink

    I also reviewed this movie on my site:
    http://www.thenerdybird.com/2008/11/genetic-opera-screams-off-key.html

    I have to say, I was one of the people really anticipating Repo for a long time and I was definitely let down. Things that seemed prominent in the trailer were not so in the actual film. I thought the world itself would be shown more but I guess budgetary concerns prevented that.

    What bugged me the most was, like this reviewer said, a lot was left unsaid. I think that’s a result of the creators having worked on this material for years and knowing everything there is to know and forgetting that the public doesn’t share their knowledge. And, one of the sillier quirks, why did Pavi speak with an Italian accent and the other two siblings did not?

    And the biggest mistake of them all is Nathan does not ever find out Rotti was responsible for Marni’s death and not him. That’s Screenwriting 101 and a wasted opportunity at some more drama.

    If you don’t look too deeply this can be a fun film but those kinds of things were just too obvious for me to ignore. The music however was excellent for the most part and I am still enjoying the soundtrack in my car.

    And yes, I also have the press material which says, “By fusing Rocky Horror Picture Show with Blade Runner, this unique production will modernize the “rock opera” genre with the original music and rich, dark production design.” I haven’t personally read a review that compared Repo to Rocky plot-wise. The correlation is that they are both rock musicals with gothic-type style. I’d also assume the fan base for both is the other comparison.

24. 24 • Linda said:
    November 23rd, 2008 at 4:36 pm, permalink

    Okay so I’ll be honest that I’ve only skimmed through the review and comments. But since I’ve been commenting on Repo! I’d just like to say

    1) Some people are just not going to like Repo, because they don’t get it

    2) Not everyone knows as much as the fans do, because they have not seen and read everything (as was mentioned before)

    3) I’ve been noticing in a lot of reviews like this one, the reviewer complains about the missing story lines. This has been an 8 year processes, with a very little budget and time restraints for the finished film. So yes there are story lines missing. The creators admit to this, and will be releasing a longer version for the DVD.

    I love this film, it’s fun, its original, it’s a morbid futuristic hot entertaining “event”, and I hope that Genevieve Valentine’s negative review catches more attention for this neglected film.

25. 25 • cameron said:
    January 14th, 2009 at 5:37 pm, permalink

    I have seen REPO and i think it’s the best thing i have seen in years let alone the best musical ever it is even better than ROCKY !!!!

26. 26 • cameron said:
    January 14th, 2009 at 5:39 pm, permalink

    for the people that don’t know by ROCKY i mean THE ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW!

27. 27 • Kuromisa said:
    January 30th, 2009 at 10:25 am, permalink

    Before seeing the movie, the only related thing I’d experienced was one trailer; no soundtrack, no Internet reviews, nothing. I’d heard vaguely that Paris Hilton was nominated for a Razzie for her performance, but I was expecting something like that since it’s Paris Hilton. But you know what? I loved it. Call me gauche, but I thought it was amazing. Even Paris did better than I thought she would, which I guess makes sense since she was all but playing herself. The voice talent was amazing, and Terrance Zdunich’s voice in particular gave me chills. With all due respect, I think this critic is full of it.

28. 28 • Earthsprite said:
    February 17th, 2009 at 6:59 pm, permalink

    Obviously, spoilers below~
    _______________________

    You know, I wasn’t confused about the Marni/Rotti poison backstory or the still-charged Chekov’s Gun. I’m wondering about the revelation at the end. Did I miss something?

    Did Nathan lie about Marni’s (and thus Shilo’s) blood disease? He admits he drugged her, correct? Was it with Zydrate? So really, Shilo’s just addicted?

29. 29 • Kuromisa said:
    February 18th, 2009 at 11:58 am, permalink

    He lied about the blood disease and drugged her instead, yes, but it’s never quite stated what with. Marni really was sick, but Nathan just wanted to keep Shilo in the house. Bousman says in the audio commentary that they were pressured to take out that bit, but they wouldn’t because it’s one of the main points of the story.

30. 30 • Earthsprite said:
    February 18th, 2009 at 1:10 pm, permalink

    Thanks, Kuromisa. That revelation, however, leads me to muse on why she’s bald! Poor girl, does her father shave it every night? Heheh. No, I can only assume the drug/poison makes her hair fall out (?). Pointless to seriously consider when there are other ‘holes’ in the movie, of course.

31. 31 • hannah said:
    June 17th, 2009 at 1:39 am, permalink

    I wonder if the writer of this realizes that the original version of the movie (the one that bousman and zdunich(sp?) wanted to release) was originally over 4 hours long. So of course there are going to be holes in the story when they create a film and then are forced to take out chunks of it for time restraints. There are plenty of side stories that were meant to be told but couldn’t. Hence the director’s cut of the movie. Not to mention the fact that this film was created on a little over 8 million says quite a lot. Most of the props and prosthetics were left over’s from his SAW films.

    I will admit, the first time I watched REPO! I was not completely sure of what I had just watched. However, I began to find myself singing the songs constantly. I do think that this movie is one that you either love…or you hate. And its obvious that this reviewer fell under the hate category.

32. 32 • Annoyed said:
    October 19th, 2009 at 5:31 am, permalink

    Wow what an internet bitch fight over a shitty review.

33. 33 • Ellen said:
    January 18th, 2010 at 11:43 am, permalink

    The soundtrack’s not terrible. A little kitch perhaps, but really not so bad.
    For anyone who has wastched such films as Troy, whcih has aeroplanes flying through the backdrop of a Grecian era, will appreciate how seeminly tacky Repo! may seem – come on, at least it doesn’t take itself seriously.
    It’s deliciously gory, and Anthony Steward Head has never, to my knowledge, carried out a watertight role. Look at him in Buffy!
    When’s the DVD extended version coming out, by the by?

34. 34 • balam said:
    February 26th, 2010 at 2:05 am, permalink

    i saw the film with little to nothing known about it. i loved it.
    i hear there will be a sequel and prequel. maybe your little “holes” will be explained in those.

35. 35 • Zaddict said:
    February 26th, 2010 at 2:53 am, permalink

    ya know truffles… your right… its not epic… ITS FUCKING BIBLICAL!

36. 36 • chris said:
    March 25th, 2010 at 4:19 am, permalink

    I haven’t read all the comments but the first ten or so seemed really stupid jsut three people arguing semantics. Perhaps if you don’t like the genre you wouldn’t pay as close attention therefore you might not pick up the subtle hints that fill in the blanks in the back story. Though in the song nathan sings right after he rescues shilo in the graveyard does he does state that he might have been able to save marni instead of shilo and you may think the lyrics are “silly” but some of us in the “RHPS group” do find this a very good movie and if you don’t like the movie don’t watch it and just because a critic says the movie sucks doesn’t mean it does so if your friends see it and say that you might like it watch it once and see for yourself don’t rely on just other people to tell you what to enjoy.

37. 37 • james said:
    July 3rd, 2010 at 2:41 am, permalink

    ok I am an avid Shakespeare fan, hated RHPS and discovered Repo! through my friend giving my a DVDRW and saying “you gotta see this”

    so i did, and i loved it. I got every major plot point the first time, unlike many reviewers (this one included) I can accept that budget got in the way of the full story. I think that the makers did an excellent job of abridging what they couldn’t fully develop.

    as for the war that existed for the first half of this comment section: it is explained in the movie, (from both Rotti’s Story and Nathan’s Story comics and the “I remember” song that nathan lost his sanity when Marni died, this was also expressed in the his back and forth musical monologues, where the focus of his emotions constantly shift and conflict. Rotti showed up when he was mentally weak and capitalized on it. it is assumed that Rotti regularly reminds Nathan of his sin, thus keeping his sanity off balance.

    nathan does not fear legal persecution, he fears losing his daughter, and is wracked with the guilt of his wife’s death, with Rotti constantly reminding him that it was his fault.

Leave a Comment