Stranger Than Fiction A Great Flick, And A Philosophical Debate Waiting To Happen
 

So I just re watched Stranger Than Fiction - which is pretty much all I'm going to talk about here, so here's your spoiler warning if you haven't seen it - and it's pretty neat.

The main point of the plot is that Will Ferrel, as Harold Crick, is hearing the voice of authoress Karen Eiffel narrating his life. He enlists the help of Professor Jules Hilbert, and the two try to figure out what's going on before Harold's "imminent death." In the climax of the film, Harold introduces himself to Eiffel, emphasizes his existence and asks her not to kill him.

Eiffel then looks at her career, and realizes that she's killed - in what the audience can only assume is narrating their lives into a death that she creates for them, thinking that they're purely fictional - eight people. As such, she feels remorseful for this and stops writing her latest novel, the story of Harold Crick.

She has, however, given the quasi-complete version of the book to Harold and Hilbert, who both read it and understand that Harold has to die. As Hilbert says:

So here's a weird situation - Harold, who is sort of the everyman, in this fantastical situation, has the option of knowingly going to his death. As a regular guy, he has no idea what's after death, but he's got the knowledge and pretty much time of his death, and the power to stop it by appealing to the woman "killing" him - and he goes to it.

Eiffel ends up leaving Harold alive, her conscience not allowing her to actually kill Harold;

But the fact remains that this sort of hapless everyman chose to willingly face his death. But the idea remains that if he knew that he was going to die in some way that wasn't as favorable, would he still go to his death? If he didn't know how he'd die, would he still do it?

What are the ramifications of knowing the exact circumstances related to your death before you die?

The most important circumstance to knowing one's own death I think spurs from the fact that we don't know how our own death is going to effect other events or other people's lives. Not even coming from a religious perspective. But, another thing is, if you knew the exact time and means of your own death, that would presuppose predestination because some all-knowing figure would have had to reveal to you the details, meaning it was all set in motion to happen this way to begin with.

I have to see this movie now.

Well, as Bob said, it brings the question of predestination I guess? Which means we'd all just be following our strings. Which is simultaneously comforting and pointless. Kind of like death!

I'm so happy I'm not the only one who loves this movie. The ideas it presented took me, a guy who just wanted a comedy, by surprise and forced my to reavaluate who I am and the position I hold in life.

The events that followed Harold discovering his feet were, in my opinion, some of the most beautiful scenes I have ever seen in a movie and gave me greater respect for Will Ferrel and his acting.

I don't know how I would react to knowing how I would die, but I would probably break down emotionally.

Uh, you prevent it?

I absolutely loathe the idea of predestination in the mystical, incomprehensible universal plot sense where if I can predict that I'll choke on some food and decide not to eat that food, a bridge promptly falls on me because the very fabric of creation wants me to die. If you can predict the future and see your own death, you can take measures to prevent it (unless it's completely out of your power to prevent, like an uncruable disease or old age). The concept of not being able to prevent a predicted death through disease, or old age, or overwhelming power isn't exactly new territory within philosophy, nor are its ramifications.

Personally, if struck with an uncurable disease, I would go into a mild denial where I never think about it and keep living my life as normal, but in a more depressed fashion. Most people would probably do that, or try to fight it, or start on one of those "things I have to do before I die"-lists that I don't understand the point of. Or go totally insane. Hilariously, I think I'd kill myself in a fashion of my own choosing before my ailment claimed me, just to show it who's in charge. That'd teach it a lesson.

You may be the most depressing individual I've ever met. :eek:

I thought the point of those "bucket lists" was to have experiences you've always wanted to have before you die, because once you're dead...you're dead. If anything, if I were to come down with a terminal illness I'd start by getting completely blackout wasted at clubs every night (something I haven't had the pleasure of doing yet), hitting on every girl that came my way, go on every vomit-inducing theme park ride I could think of, travel the world..essentially all of my inhibitions would be thrown out the window. I know there are people out there who will say "what's the point of any of that?" But, what would you rather do, have some amazing experiences follow you to your deathbed, or just wallow in your deathbed until you die?

And honestly, we are all inflicted with a terminal illness. It's called aging.

One of the things I really love about this movie is at the end, when Harold comes to Eiffel after having read the ending of the book and tells her to write it. Accepting the death she has chosen for him. Accepting his fate that is all but certain, and in that single moment.. saves his live and gets to live.

And not only that, but the knowledge that he may very well die inspired him to get out of living his mundane life and try to at least do something.

The writing for this movie was absolutely brilliant.

I can't help but think you guys are missing the point - Harold sacraficed himself becuase someone else would have died if he hadn't, not simply becuase he went willingly into oblivion.

I do love this movie. "I brought you flours".

Yeah, I thought bit that was fairly obvious.

Great movie, too. I can't help but think I would have preferred the ending if he had died, though. Not that I'm huge into downer endings, I just think one would have worked better in this one.

You know, it would sort of make sense if Harold said 'Ok so don't let the kid die either' but at that point it's like accept the reality of the situation or force godhood on this poor woman?