@@GeorgMayer I find it funny how people find themselves intellectually challenged, and instead of owning up to it and growing as people, they blame the movie for being "pretentious". News flash: Just because you didn't understand a movie, does not make it pretentious at all. Wanna see pretentious? Go watch "A Quiet Place".
@@flameprincess7313 Hello, thanks for your reply. I thiink you might have a hard time arguing that I didn't understand the movie - how could you judge that? Such attacks on each other are not necessary. You might like the movie and that is great - there are for sure a lot of different points it can be looked at. For me the main message of the movie was lame and a big disappointment so that in the end, everything that seemed "smart" was just a facade, some loud noise in order to distract from the rather empty message of the movie. But as said, that is my view and I think there is really no need to insist you would have understood anything better or more than me. At least for people who watch (pseudo) intellectual films this is a rather unmasking way of arguing, i.e. not at all intellectual.
He's not the Dog Killer. A dude in the first scene in the restaurant is is. Before the opening shot, we see a unicorn, a tiger, a snake, and a Lion. The first letters of each of those are UTSL, or "Under the Silver Lake." When the camera pans around on the first first shot of the film, there's a dude in line wearing a shirt with a bunch of photos of animals on it. The animals are, in order, a Bear, Walrus, Alligator, Raccoon, Dog, Ostrich, Giraffe, Koala, Iguana, Lion, and another Raccoon. If you take the first letters it's BWAR DOG KILR. They show us the dog killer in the first shot and tell us to our faces who it is. So sneaky and clever. Thomas Pynchon would be proud.
@@Manmade023 It's all up on screen. Go back and watch the first 5 minutes of the movie! Since it's a film that's all about clues and signs if you look closely there are coded messages all over the place. Really fun to try to dig in, even if some of them are probably there just to misdirect you as a viewer.
I think the movie is just laying a bunch of clues to drive people nuts. Isn't that kind of what the film is about...how most conspiracy theories people have are actually just meaningless patterns, and the conspiracies that are actually true have way less meaning and portent than we thought they had. It's like how oftentimes the mystery surrounding a secret is way more interesting than knowing the secret itself.
It's never grasping the full picture, however this whole movie is tongue-in-cheek representation of real events that take place under our noses. If you start looking for the 'what and why' then you'll forever be looking for the truth. I think its fun how mysteries regarding the occult practiced by political, social, and government elites is taboo. It's an effective weapon that they have placed in our minds. We associate: looking for the what and why with these things as being crazy, but any real progress made on it is thwarted by: Social Ostracization. So they can continue to operate their human trafficking and murder cults right under our noses, and PEOPLE WILL DEFEND THEM FOR FREE WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING THEY ARE DOING IT. I get a good laugh out of it at the least.
Interesting theory byt Sam (Andrew Garfield) is NOT the Dog Killer, its made pretty clear that he isn't by the end scene. We actually see the Dog Killer chase Sam on the pathway leading to his apartment. The dead dogs represent his own psyche of feeling dead inside since his model girlfriend broke up with him and its not an implication that he is killing dogs. Also the Dog Killer just like the Owl killer are mean't to be unexplained urban legends that are never explained or identified. The comment he makes about the Homeless man is just his self loathing as by the end of the movie, he himself is now homeless. His feelings about women are just artificial and surface which is represented by his attraction for viewing women as sexual objects and seeing them fit his misogynist viewpoint. He is always spying and stalking women from afar represented to the extreme with the women he's been searching for being buried underground and too obtainable for him. His artificial view on life is further represented by The Writer, representing that his whole life is artificial from the music he listens to, the video games he plays (mario) the food he eats (crackers and milk). His whole life is copying this artificial culture and interpreting it in a confusing muddled way without any originality. This is represented by the Parot at the end of the movie.
Really good analysis. This movie is a character study of Sam - he's the manifestation of Hollywood culture. He's not so much a "bad" or "damaged" person as he is a Hollywood person. As the movie's title describes, it's about the cultural foundations of Hollywood - what exists beneath the "silver screen" of the surface that Hollywood presents to the world. Sam resents dogs and the homeless because they are outside the Bright White future that Hollywood seeks to create and maintain. Hollywood sought to "make the desert bloom", to create an oasis of hopes and dreams amid the arid barren landscape of the American Southwest. Las Vegas with all of it's faux gold is the sister city of Hollywood to the east. The Hollywood person is someone who believes that the world has become ruins, that everything of value has been destroyed, and instead of rebuilding we should paper over those ruins, put up the "silver screen" and display wondrous visions, immaculately detailed worlds, the Bright White future while underneath those same ruins constantly threaten to peek through the meticulously maintained screen. The Hollywood person isn't so much "shallow" or "narcissistic" as he believes that there no longer is such a thing as "deep". Reality is gone - depth no longer exists. The purpose of life, then, is to maintain hopes and dreams, to live in a perpetual state of hope, to portray a Bright White vision. The Hollywood salesman's job is to sell that vision, to get the entire world to buy into the ideology of ruins and the papering over of those ruins and calling it a home.
Sam probably killed his dog. The dead dog in the park is a decayed carcass, which indicates that the killing happened at an earlier time. Also, the snacks in his pocket match the snacks on the track. The story about his ex-girlfriend keeping the dog is probably a lie too. When he meets her at the party, he doesn't ask about the dog.
Dogs represent unconditional love, as Sarah says on the video phone. Sarah left him, she stopped loving him and the movie is a sort of his spiritual journey to cope with the loss of love. He stops working, he questions and resents, even kills (songwriter) all parts of culture that he so far held dear. Everything becomes useless, even hostile. He sees the unconditional love he had and still has for her and which he needs to get rid of. He is the dog and the dog killer. The movie can be understood as a meditation about suicide after lost love.
Him saying "there is more than one?" Is a totally legit and natural response when his friend assumes there are buncha dog killers out there. If squirrels in my neighborhood were getting murdered. I am going to assume there is squirrel killing psycho out there killing them. If a cop or my neighbor asks if I heard about THESE squirrel killerS! I will be at the very least surprised that there is more than one of them. So, in conclusion. Him asking "There is more than one?!" Is a totally non-issue, natural repsonse.
You missed that when the daughts of Jeffrey sevence says anyone who would kill a dog wouldn't think twice about killing a person and sam says I'm not so sure about that with a degree of certainty that only the actual dog killer would have
I just watched the movie and that weird dream with a body being eaten by a barking dog woman (and the fact that he was quite distressingly quick to commit violence) made it pretty obvious to me that he was the dog killer. In fact, this movie only works better if he IS.
soooooooooo much of this seems like confirmation bias. I also got the impression that the film wanted you to at least consider if he was the dog killer by the hobo king scene at the end but a lot of these are the kind of leaps of logic this very film pokes fun at and ultimately dismisses. clearly there is a lot of use of symbols in the movie and many comparisons are made between women and dogs, but I interpret it more as the idea that he views dogs and women in a very similar way as sort of infinite dispensers of unconditional love that are also fickle, self-destructive and animalistic, and he seems to think he is trying to be a savior (both to women being used and to dogs being killed) by unearthing all this secretive shit and potentially exposing it to the world. the Dog Killer signs and posters being shown with him centered in the frame near or overlapping them could just as easily be representative of the constant oppressiveness and paranoia he feels about the people around him and how fear of the shady secretive underground world is consuming all his life and interests. that's exactly what happens at the end of the film when he uses his final day to pay his rent or be kicked out in order to fuck the bird lady, trying to chase some hidden meaning in the random squawks of her parrot that turn out to be totally meaningless. I would even find it more believable that he's an unreliable narrator and imagined much of the film; both the owl lady and the dog killer are urban myths that seemingly have been around for ages, but they also have personal connections to his life in the form of the topless bird lady neighbor and the fact that both his own dog and his ex-girlfriend's dogs died in a way that was distressing mentally to him. you could argue he still is the dog killer and that the story of those dogs in the past is a fabrication made up to cover up the fact that he killed them out of his own frustration, but saying stuff like the gum still being on his hand is evidence that he himself kills dogs makes about as much sense as saying he wants to fuck dogs just because he sees women as them and does it with his girlfriend "doggystyle" at the beginning of the movie. again the Hobo King scene is the one scene that feels like it actually even slightly suggests this but I totally disagree that many of these were overt clues to the killer's real identity.
@@FF-ch9nr You're exactly the kind of person that those kind of 'societies' want to rule over. Docile, complacent, ignorant. This movie is tongue in cheek, because the 'real' societies define evil. They don't do this whacky hippy hollywood style stuff, it has to deal more with human trafficking, specifically child trafficking. If you look, you'll find it. But I think people like you are relegated to being subservient worms. It's like the 'caste' systems, you're slightly above bottom. You're the 'willful, yet ignorant defender of evil.' Or like what people attribute soldiers to doing: 'I didn't know that JDAM would kill civilians, I just got the order to drop it!'
the film compares women and dogs because it is from the naïve perspective of the protagonist. Therefore looking for validity in this comparison is a step down the wrong path. the media landscape he lives in has left him unable to deal with condemnation from women, so he dehumanizes them instead, hence the barking, like the term "bitch" the film shows us the people who created this media and inspired this misogyny at the end - they want to entomb women as property. they made all the media that shaped the protagonist. The protagonist is tricked into being a sexist by idolizing men, through media, that he did not realize viewed women as property in a literal way. men he would not have idolized if he had seen what monsters they are from the start. The director made a lot of money for Harvey Weinstein with his film "it follows", without realizing what a monster Weinstein was. In my opinion he is exposing and attacking how hollywood and the media trick men into supporting misogyny, because he is angry he was tricked in a more direct way into enriching a monster.
I always thought of the dog killer as an interesting side note. Just enough bread crumbs left for the viewer to consider Sam to be the Dog Killer. Getting distracted by these small clues is kind of the point of the movie.
Sam also pulls the pirate dude off the toilet only to show dog like turds in the toilet bowl. The dog treats in his pocket are to lure the dogs, and all the girls who bark at him are girls who are afraid or threatened by him.
So is it reaching to think that the Homeless King just assumed that Sam was the dog killer, which is why hes so enraged when he sees that Sam has dog biscuits in his pocket?
@@mephistophelesghost6712 I disagree, I think the point of the scene was the opposite in fact. The hobo king clearly suspects Sam to be the dog killer, thus initially affirming the audiences suspicions, but then Sam breaks down and reveals the true intention behind the dog biscuits were as a coping mechanism and just in case he ever stumbles upon his ex with her dog ever again, he could treat her dog like when they were together. And the hobo king seems relived and satisfied at this revelation and clears his suspicion by letting Sam go, ceasing any further questions. So I think that scene pretty much debunks the theory. The various bread crumb trail clues throughout the movie were just red herrings and a wild goose chase to purposely nudge our suspicions on Sam to make us feel like solving our own little mystery as the movie goes a long. The hobo king scene at the end was a 180, and gives us the true incite to his paranoia around dogs and women.
I don't think he's the dog killer, although we are meant to suspect it. The sentence has the same gematria as "Beware the God killer", and that is sort of what he does in this film. Not killing God, but small g, gods, like Jesus, the pop star, false gods, and the song writer - false gods of materialistic society. He also reveals the billionaires in the Egyptian death cult, who are portrayed as sort of popular culture idols, as overgrown teenagers, false idols. Look again at the sign he walks past at the end of your video. At the beginning of the film too, we see it from the inside of the window, backwards. You were watching the shaking breasts, weren't you, drawing your attention to the word "GOD", but you missed it. Even in the credits, there is a sign, "Missing DOG", seen from behind , backwards, again emphasizing "GOD". "beware the god killer" = jesus laughs, what is going on, wrath of the lamb, and more in the gematrix database. Prophets were killers of false gods.
By the way, the number of his room is 23, which is famed in conspiracy literature, but it is also the gematria equivalent of "I am", the name God gave Moses to kill the gods of Egypt, the original and ultimate god killer. It's the ultimate fear of an idolatrous society. The ultimate fear of Hollywood - they disliked this film on a visceral level.
I feel the same way, that he’s not the dog killer, but God killer. In the opening scene the woman is on the right side cleaning the graffiti so we focus on the backwards “dog” lettering(I’ll return to this later). It focus on that side and also see the word “web”. I believe this movie is a metaphor for how we spend our time on the internet these days. We become overstimulated with conspiracy theories, urban legends, pornography, Voyeurism, and violence. Out of nowhere, focal points seem to come and go with this film. As well as all of the characters emotional reactions to these topics. There is a lot of detachment in this movie. Also the overriding theme of being not being a responsible adult, while pursuing your own personal interests. It’s like a sci-fi movie, but the technology has been turned outward into reality. I do believe in the layered themes of Hollywood mistreating women and consumerism, but am pretty sure all of these themes go together. There’s a great part in the middle when Topher grace is flying the drone ABOVE Silver Lake; explaining how our lives have changed with the internet. I strongly suggest to watch the scene again. It coincides perfectly with my internet metaphor theory. The deeper theme is “ Now that we have control to do as we please, are we living a more fulfilling life?” It’s a real life version of our own underbelly in this technological revolution. Back to the God Killer. He hunts down Jesus only to find out that the hidden messages come from a songwriter. I’m pretty sure this man is supposed to represent God, or a man-made God. A creator, but ultimately a greedy nihilist. He kills him. So many themes, characters, symbolism. I could go on for days with this movie. What a fine piece of work!
@@natalisalexander9617 Nice. I like your insights. I wrote comments on a couple of other reviews of the film as well. As I said in the first of them, there is so much going on in this movie that I couldn't cover everything. It is a movie of ideas, with dense layers of symbolism. It provokes a response not unlike the quest of the protagonist. A Nintendo Game here, a cereal box there, etc. But overall, Hollywood didn't like it because of the clear iconoclasm.
Timothy Kuring - also the main character is 33 years old, Sam in the English ordinal cypher of Gematria is 33. Sam lives in room 23 and drives a mustang, mustang equals 23 in the full reduction of Gematria. “Under the silver lake”=83, 83 is the 23rd prime number. And “Silver Lake” and “Kurt Cobain”(poster in his room) both equal to the same numbers in all four main cyphers of Gematria: English ordinal, full reduction, reverse ordinal, and reverse full reduction.
Think I'm the only the who recognized this, but the song that played on his phone when it rang is from the game The Last Ninja on the commodore 64. It's a puzzle-action type of game and it's crazy hard.
I think Sam was the son of the failed actor. It never mentions his dad, alive or dead in the movie. Seeing the women bark is a subconscious clue. Maybe he has a sibling he doesn't know about is the real dog killer. Or siblings as in the more than one? Reference. The Writer of the movie has a thing for the number Three as well. Sam = Three letters, Sam = 33 in Numerology, Three brides for each King, the Three poem at Purgatory, Even Jesus Shit has 3 satellite turds floating around one in a quasi crown in the toilet. Even when Sam walks into the middle of Beware the Dog Killer on the street there's three women there with him.
@@timgreenglassI was thinking his mom was the actress who made it big and that’s how she knew all those old Hollywood film stars. That’s why she sends him money and he doesn’t have to work.
totally believe the main character is the Dog Killer because he had the dog treats in his pockets the whole time ... he would lure the dogs with dog treats to kill them because he is resentful that his ex girlfriend dumped him yet still kept her dog who he is probably super jelous of ... he had such anymosity when he was explaining the reasons why to the Homeless King... The homeless king asked him chastisingly why he carried around the dog treats because the homeless king was onto him being the dog killer.... also he told one of the girls of the father who was missing that he didn't know how he felt about being a dog person because he got bitten as a child by his parents dog/pet ... so yeah .. imo
Girls barking at him! Reminds me of this scene from another cool movie: ruclips.net/video/ZnYSkI2Jcvc/видео.html An homage? Take a long line - I never existed, you've been wasting your time.
Sounds like he's channeling Peter Weller in that Naked Lunch monologue about the man who taught his asshole to talk. ruclips.net/video/b8Hwq4V2dm0/видео.html
If sam was the dog killer, we would have see him killing dogs wouldn´t we? check out this music clip I´ve made from the movie! ruclips.net/video/qEyyrMyPz98/видео.html
Is the movie talking about women/the feminine being murdered? Not actually dogs The movie portrays "the feminine"; with the virginal cult at the end, showing the casting couch side of Hollywood, the Night Owl seducing/killing people which is on the dollar. He sees the women barking; Bitches=female dogs. The guy in the film killed himself because women were taking the film roles maybe because of diversity demands ect.
the dudes at the end of the film make all the media that shapes the world and the protagonist. the dudes at the end view women as literal property. dudes like the protagonist inherit their views, idolize them, without realizing how monstrous they are. the problem for the protagonist and for the dog killer is that they have been taught by the media of the modern pharaohs that they are superior to women, but unlike the modern pharaohs they do not actually have the resources to posses women. When they fail and they see women or dogs succeeding, they cannot comprehend the incongruity with what they have been taught about their superiority, so they lash out. In the case of the dog killer by killing dogs. In the case of the protagonist by hearing the condemnation of women as barking bitches, as you pointed out. So I think it is mostly a metaphor, and that the main character is similar to the dog killer in his resentment, but that the main killer is not supposed to be the dog killer. we are meant to ask if he could be the dog killer, or in the code of the metaphor, could his misogyny drive him to domestic murder? What is important is that the warped view put forth in media, without the consumers even realizing it, drives a sort of resentment in men who fail that leads to them killing their wives.
@@mephistophelesghost6712 My first thought was the smell represents just straight disregard of personal hygiene, which is common with serious mental disorders
@@Blashmack Not saying he's mentally stable, but he smells bad before, and after bathing in tomato sauce and a chlorine pool. I think it's supposed to be a permanent stench, reflecting something rotten about him. The only people who don't seem to care are parrot lady and comic book man. I think it's interesting that he's surprised to see a skunk right after he made up the skunk excuse. And he gets sprayed in that area where a ton of coincidences/weird things happen.
the "dog killer" is a metaphor for misogyny. He blames "dogs" for all his failures. When the protagonist is confronted by women we get POV shots with their righteous anger replaced by barking. As if the film is telling us that the protagonist cannot handle women in authority, so he dehumanizes them rather than listen - like the slur "bitch" does. The protagonist is also a casual misogynist through the film - not in a sinister way, but in ways that society tacitly or explicitly approves. In the conclusion of the film we see the purveyors of this misogyny - eg. through media- who would have inspired the protagonist's misogyny and the society that fails to condemn it- take it to an extreme by entombing themselves with young women, the way the way pharaohs entombed themselves with their property. The main character aspires to be like these media moguls, without realizing how monstrous they actually are, without realizing how they have tainted his view of women. the dog killer is the resentment of incel types, who fail to achieve the success to posses women, and so lash out at them.
The Movie is about liberating ourselves from this Dog run realm. God in reverse is DOG most people pray and worship(whore ship) in a God or higher being over them. This realm is a trap for Spirits where the only liberation comes from true knowledge of being trapped and who the trappers are. God is the trapper. So we need to kill God=Dog like the main character tried to do unknowingly though when he killed the Piano player who was the God of this realm and the trapper... he literally stated it to the main character. You see, we are all great Master Creator beings and don't know it. We must bust all the lies of this Dog eat Dog run realm so, when we physically die we never get tricked into reincarnating back here or under anyone's authority again. The true meaning of 666 mark of the beast is nothing more than Carbon based Organic organism. Carbon atom has 6 neutrons, 6 electron and protons which is the mark of the beast. Anything that feeds off of Organic material is considered an ANIMAL(look it up in the dictionary) thus, YOU MUST KILL THE DOG=GOD mentality and NEVER get tricked into reincarnating into HELL again. We are all trapped in BEAST BODIES and BRAINS and live(live back words equals evil)off of other Organic Material, which in most cases is/was for our sustenance. Very CANNIBALISTIC in nature. This is HELL that is why we greet each other by saying "HELLO." We must all become true DOG=GOD killers metaphorically speaking to liberate ourselves from further suffering after physical death.
The cheeky "spider-man" reference put a smile on my face.
Yes me too dude!
Where?
@@DoingNothingRN when the magazine is glued to his hand at 2:43
@@Minocas14 From the gum stuck on his hand after he beat the shit out of those kid car vandals lol.
@@koslisted9458 yea but its glued to a spider man comic
This movie is smarter than anyone gives it credit for.
It is smart. But it's problem is that it does everything to look smart and mysterious, which unfortunately makes it pretentious.
Georg Mayer I get what you’re saying... it’s definitely not subtle but it’s definitely not pretentious
Why don't you give it credit for being smart?
@@GeorgMayer I find it funny how people find themselves intellectually challenged, and instead of owning up to it and growing as people, they blame the movie for being "pretentious".
News flash: Just because you didn't understand a movie, does not make it pretentious at all. Wanna see pretentious? Go watch "A Quiet Place".
@@flameprincess7313 Hello, thanks for your reply. I thiink you might have a hard time arguing that I didn't understand the movie - how could you judge that? Such attacks on each other are not necessary. You might like the movie and that is great - there are for sure a lot of different points it can be looked at. For me the main message of the movie was lame and a big disappointment so that in the end, everything that seemed "smart" was just a facade, some loud noise in order to distract from the rather empty message of the movie. But as said, that is my view and I think there is really no need to insist you would have understood anything better or more than me. At least for people who watch (pseudo) intellectual films this is a rather unmasking way of arguing, i.e. not at all intellectual.
He's not the Dog Killer. A dude in the first scene in the restaurant is is. Before the opening shot, we see a unicorn, a tiger, a snake, and a Lion. The first letters of each of those are UTSL, or "Under the Silver Lake." When the camera pans around on the first first shot of the film, there's a dude in line wearing a shirt with a bunch of photos of animals on it. The animals are, in order, a Bear, Walrus, Alligator, Raccoon, Dog, Ostrich, Giraffe, Koala, Iguana, Lion, and another Raccoon. If you take the first letters it's BWAR DOG KILR. They show us the dog killer in the first shot and tell us to our faces who it is. So sneaky and clever. Thomas Pynchon would be proud.
Jeremy Fink wow you are a clever dude!!! This is amazing
How do u know that?
@@Manmade023 It's all up on screen. Go back and watch the first 5 minutes of the movie! Since it's a film that's all about clues and signs if you look closely there are coded messages all over the place. Really fun to try to dig in, even if some of them are probably there just to misdirect you as a viewer.
actually. they are two others guys wearing this same shirt at the party when the pink balloon girl is performing. so dog killerS ?
actually they are more than two.
I think the movie is just laying a bunch of clues to drive people nuts. Isn't that kind of what the film is about...how most conspiracy theories people have are actually just meaningless patterns, and the conspiracies that are actually true have way less meaning and portent than we thought they had. It's like how oftentimes the mystery surrounding a secret is way more interesting than knowing the secret itself.
i hate when a movie has a message about something meaningless , feels like i wasted my time
@@kingvon2181 And that’s the point
It's never grasping the full picture, however this whole movie is tongue-in-cheek representation of real events that take place under our noses. If you start looking for the 'what and why' then you'll forever be looking for the truth.
I think its fun how mysteries regarding the occult practiced by political, social, and government elites is taboo. It's an effective weapon that they have placed in our minds.
We associate: looking for the what and why with these things as being crazy, but any real progress made on it is thwarted by:
Social Ostracization.
So they can continue to operate their human trafficking and murder cults right under our noses, and PEOPLE WILL DEFEND THEM FOR FREE WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING THEY ARE DOING IT.
I get a good laugh out of it at the least.
Exactly and why the Homeless King interrogated him about it
For sure
Interesting theory byt Sam (Andrew Garfield) is NOT the Dog Killer, its made pretty clear that he isn't by the end scene. We actually see the Dog Killer chase Sam on the pathway leading to his apartment. The dead dogs represent his own psyche of feeling dead inside since his model girlfriend broke up with him and its not an implication that he is killing dogs. Also the Dog Killer just like the Owl killer are mean't to be unexplained urban legends that are never explained or identified.
The comment he makes about the Homeless man is just his self loathing as by the end of the movie, he himself is now homeless. His feelings about women are just artificial and surface which is represented by his attraction for viewing women as sexual objects and seeing them fit his misogynist viewpoint. He is always spying and stalking women from afar represented to the extreme with the women he's been searching for being buried underground and too obtainable for him. His artificial view on life is further represented by The Writer, representing that his whole life is artificial from the music he listens to, the video games he plays (mario) the food he eats (crackers and milk).
His whole life is copying this artificial culture and interpreting it in a confusing muddled way without any originality. This is represented by the Parot at the end of the movie.
Really good analysis. This movie is a character study of Sam - he's the manifestation of Hollywood culture. He's not so much a "bad" or "damaged" person as he is a Hollywood person. As the movie's title describes, it's about the cultural foundations of Hollywood - what exists beneath the "silver screen" of the surface that Hollywood presents to the world.
Sam resents dogs and the homeless because they are outside the Bright White future that Hollywood seeks to create and maintain. Hollywood sought to "make the desert bloom", to create an oasis of hopes and dreams amid the arid barren landscape of the American Southwest. Las Vegas with all of it's faux gold is the sister city of Hollywood to the east.
The Hollywood person is someone who believes that the world has become ruins, that everything of value has been destroyed, and instead of rebuilding we should paper over those ruins, put up the "silver screen" and display wondrous visions, immaculately detailed worlds, the Bright White future while underneath those same ruins constantly threaten to peek through the meticulously maintained screen.
The Hollywood person isn't so much "shallow" or "narcissistic" as he believes that there no longer is such a thing as "deep". Reality is gone - depth no longer exists. The purpose of life, then, is to maintain hopes and dreams, to live in a perpetual state of hope, to portray a Bright White vision.
The Hollywood salesman's job is to sell that vision, to get the entire world to buy into the ideology of ruins and the papering over of those ruins and calling it a home.
@David Reuter You're an idiot.
we never see the dog killer chase sam. we see sam sees someone following him...IF REAL...but this is never put out as the DK
Loved your interpretation. Really interesting!
@SlyiLaMusic
The captions say "Hollywood".
You forgot the moment where he straight up said he hated dogs
It is weird that he says his dog recently died, but then claims his girlfriend had a dog.
As far as whats killing the dogs, could be the coyotes.
Sam probably killed his dog. The dead dog in the park is a decayed carcass, which indicates that the killing happened at an earlier time. Also, the snacks in his pocket match the snacks on the track. The story about his ex-girlfriend keeping the dog is probably a lie too. When he meets her at the party, he doesn't ask about the dog.
He didnt want to say "my ex had a dog" to a new girl, he instead says its dead which it kinda is to him now
LA is full of coyotes , and no he isnt the dog killer
Dogs represent unconditional love, as Sarah says on the video phone. Sarah left him, she stopped loving him and the movie is a sort of his spiritual journey to cope with the loss of love. He stops working, he questions and resents, even kills (songwriter) all parts of culture that he so far held dear. Everything becomes useless, even hostile. He sees the unconditional love he had and still has for her and which he needs to get rid of. He is the dog and the dog killer. The movie can be understood as a meditation about suicide after lost love.
whoa, not bad;
Meditation about suicide after lost love? Can you elaborate
FoUND the through line
Him saying "there is more than one?" Is a totally legit and natural response when his friend assumes there are buncha dog killers out there. If squirrels in my neighborhood were getting murdered. I am going to assume there is squirrel killing psycho out there killing them. If a cop or my neighbor asks if I heard about THESE squirrel killerS! I will be at the very least surprised that there is more than one of them. So, in conclusion. Him asking "There is more than one?!" Is a totally non-issue, natural repsonse.
You missed that when the daughts of Jeffrey sevence says anyone who would kill a dog wouldn't think twice about killing a person and sam says I'm not so sure about that with a degree of certainty that only the actual dog killer would have
I just watched the movie and that weird dream with a body being eaten by a barking dog woman (and the fact that he was quite distressingly quick to commit violence) made it pretty obvious to me that he was the dog killer. In fact, this movie only works better if he IS.
soooooooooo much of this seems like confirmation bias. I also got the impression that the film wanted you to at least consider if he was the dog killer by the hobo king scene at the end but a lot of these are the kind of leaps of logic this very film pokes fun at and ultimately dismisses. clearly there is a lot of use of symbols in the movie and many comparisons are made between women and dogs, but I interpret it more as the idea that he views dogs and women in a very similar way as sort of infinite dispensers of unconditional love that are also fickle, self-destructive and animalistic, and he seems to think he is trying to be a savior (both to women being used and to dogs being killed) by unearthing all this secretive shit and potentially exposing it to the world.
the Dog Killer signs and posters being shown with him centered in the frame near or overlapping them could just as easily be representative of the constant oppressiveness and paranoia he feels about the people around him and how fear of the shady secretive underground world is consuming all his life and interests. that's exactly what happens at the end of the film when he uses his final day to pay his rent or be kicked out in order to fuck the bird lady, trying to chase some hidden meaning in the random squawks of her parrot that turn out to be totally meaningless.
I would even find it more believable that he's an unreliable narrator and imagined much of the film; both the owl lady and the dog killer are urban myths that seemingly have been around for ages, but they also have personal connections to his life in the form of the topless bird lady neighbor and the fact that both his own dog and his ex-girlfriend's dogs died in a way that was distressing mentally to him. you could argue he still is the dog killer and that the story of those dogs in the past is a fabrication made up to cover up the fact that he killed them out of his own frustration, but saying stuff like the gum still being on his hand is evidence that he himself kills dogs makes about as much sense as saying he wants to fuck dogs just because he sees women as them and does it with his girlfriend "doggystyle" at the beginning of the movie. again the Hobo King scene is the one scene that feels like it actually even slightly suggests this but I totally disagree that many of these were overt clues to the killer's real identity.
You're the last person i'd expect to see here...
@San Patricio's Space Dolphin Brigada you are exactly the kind of person the movie is addressing to not be like
@@FF-ch9nr You're exactly the kind of person that those kind of 'societies' want to rule over.
Docile, complacent, ignorant. This movie is tongue in cheek, because the 'real' societies define evil. They don't do this whacky hippy hollywood style stuff, it has to deal more with human trafficking, specifically child trafficking. If you look, you'll find it.
But I think people like you are relegated to being subservient worms.
It's like the 'caste' systems, you're slightly above bottom. You're the 'willful, yet ignorant defender of evil.'
Or like what people attribute soldiers to doing: 'I didn't know that JDAM would kill civilians, I just got the order to drop it!'
the film compares women and dogs because it is from the naïve perspective of the protagonist. Therefore looking for validity in this comparison is a step down the wrong path.
the media landscape he lives in has left him unable to deal with condemnation from women, so he dehumanizes them instead, hence the barking, like the term "bitch"
the film shows us the people who created this media and inspired this misogyny at the end - they want to entomb women as property. they made all the media that shaped the protagonist.
The protagonist is tricked into being a sexist by idolizing men, through media, that he did not realize viewed women as property in a literal way. men he would not have idolized if he had seen what monsters they are from the start.
The director made a lot of money for Harvey Weinstein with his film "it follows", without realizing what a monster Weinstein was. In my opinion he is exposing and attacking how hollywood and the media trick men into supporting misogyny, because he is angry he was tricked in a more direct way into enriching a monster.
This movie is so underrated
He appeared to have a rather evil look on his face as he watched the Deputy and landlord talking about the sign painted on the wall of his apartment.
I always thought of the dog killer as an interesting side note. Just enough bread crumbs left for the viewer to consider Sam to be the Dog Killer. Getting distracted by these small clues is kind of the point of the movie.
Sam also pulls the pirate dude off the toilet only to show dog like turds in the toilet bowl. The dog treats in his pocket are to lure the dogs, and all the girls who bark at him are girls who are afraid or threatened by him.
What about the fucking OWL LADY???
I already thought Sam was the Dog Killer because of the end credits
The way animated Sam was looking at the hanged dogs already gave it away
So is it reaching to think that the Homeless King just assumed that Sam was the dog killer, which is why hes so enraged when he sees that Sam has dog biscuits in his pocket?
There are plenty of clues pointing to his guilt beforehand. This scene was the director practically beating us over the head.
@@mephistophelesghost6712 I disagree, I think the point of the scene was the opposite in fact. The hobo king clearly suspects Sam to be the dog killer, thus initially affirming the audiences suspicions, but then Sam breaks down and reveals the true intention behind the dog biscuits were as a coping mechanism and just in case he ever stumbles upon his ex with her dog ever again, he could treat her dog like when they were together. And the hobo king seems relived and satisfied at this revelation and clears his suspicion by letting Sam go, ceasing any further questions. So I think that scene pretty much debunks the theory. The various bread crumb trail clues throughout the movie were just red herrings and a wild goose chase to purposely nudge our suspicions on Sam to make us feel like solving our own little mystery as the movie goes a long. The hobo king scene at the end was a 180, and gives us the true incite to his paranoia around dogs and women.
I don't think he's the dog killer, although we are meant to suspect it. The sentence has the same gematria as "Beware the God killer", and that is sort of what he does in this film. Not killing God, but small g, gods, like Jesus, the pop star, false gods, and the song writer - false gods of materialistic society. He also reveals the billionaires in the Egyptian death cult, who are portrayed as sort of popular culture idols, as overgrown teenagers, false idols.
Look again at the sign he walks past at the end of your video. At the beginning of the film too, we see it from the inside of the window, backwards. You were watching the shaking breasts, weren't you, drawing your attention to the word "GOD", but you missed it.
Even in the credits, there is a sign, "Missing DOG", seen from behind , backwards, again emphasizing "GOD".
"beware the god killer" = jesus laughs, what is going on, wrath of the lamb, and more in the gematrix database.
Prophets were killers of false gods.
By the way, the number of his room is 23, which is famed in conspiracy literature, but it is also the gematria equivalent of "I am", the name God gave Moses to kill the gods of Egypt, the original and ultimate god killer.
It's the ultimate fear of an idolatrous society.
The ultimate fear of Hollywood - they disliked this film on a visceral level.
I feel the same way, that he’s not the dog killer, but God killer. In the opening scene the woman is on the right side cleaning the graffiti so we focus on the backwards “dog” lettering(I’ll return to this later). It focus on that side and also see the word “web”. I believe this movie is a metaphor for how we spend our time on the internet these days. We become overstimulated with conspiracy theories, urban legends, pornography, Voyeurism, and violence. Out of nowhere, focal points seem to come and go with this film. As well as all of the characters emotional reactions to these topics. There is a lot of detachment in this movie. Also the overriding theme of being not being a responsible adult, while pursuing your own personal interests. It’s like a sci-fi movie, but the technology has been turned outward into reality.
I do believe in the layered themes of Hollywood mistreating women and consumerism, but am pretty sure all of these themes go together. There’s a great part in the middle when Topher grace is flying the drone ABOVE Silver Lake; explaining how our lives have changed with the internet. I strongly suggest to watch the scene again. It coincides perfectly with my internet metaphor theory. The deeper theme is “ Now that we have control to do as we please, are we living a more fulfilling life?” It’s a real life version of our own underbelly in this technological revolution.
Back to the God Killer. He hunts down Jesus only to find out that the hidden messages come from a songwriter. I’m pretty sure this man is supposed to represent God, or a man-made God. A creator, but ultimately a greedy nihilist.
He kills him.
So many themes, characters, symbolism. I could go on for days with this movie. What a fine piece of work!
@@natalisalexander9617 Nice. I like your insights. I wrote comments on a couple of other reviews of the film as well. As I said in the first of them, there is so much going on in this movie that I couldn't cover everything. It is a movie of ideas, with dense layers of symbolism. It provokes a response not unlike the quest of the protagonist. A Nintendo Game here, a cereal box there, etc. But overall, Hollywood didn't like it because of the clear iconoclasm.
Timothy Kuring - also the main character is 33 years old, Sam in the English ordinal cypher of Gematria is 33. Sam lives in room 23 and drives a mustang, mustang equals 23 in the full reduction of Gematria. “Under the silver lake”=83, 83 is the 23rd prime number. And “Silver Lake” and “Kurt Cobain”(poster in his room) both equal to the same numbers in all four main cyphers of Gematria: English ordinal, full reduction, reverse ordinal, and reverse full reduction.
@@finxoner Interesting. I didn't look that deeply into it, but I could tell they were using gematria.
Think I'm the only the who recognized this, but the song that played on his phone when it rang is from the game The Last Ninja on the commodore 64. It's a puzzle-action type of game and it's crazy hard.
Clearly he isnt. The Homless King is never wrong. Its why he let him go…he told the truth about why he carries him. Thus he was let go.
The guy in the cartoon looks a lot like the hobo king
I think Sam was the son of the failed actor. It never mentions his dad, alive or dead in the movie. Seeing the women bark is a subconscious clue. Maybe he has a sibling he doesn't know about is the real dog killer. Or siblings as in the more than one? Reference. The Writer of the movie has a thing for the number Three as well. Sam = Three letters, Sam = 33 in Numerology, Three brides for each King, the Three poem at Purgatory, Even Jesus Shit has 3 satellite turds floating around one in a quasi crown in the toilet. Even when Sam walks into the middle of Beware the Dog Killer on the street there's three women there with him.
And this could explain Sam's mother sending him old movies.
@@timgreenglassI was thinking his mom was the actress who made it big and that’s how she knew all those old Hollywood film stars. That’s why she sends him money and he doesn’t have to work.
In GTA 5/Los Santos (LA) there are also 'lost dog' posters with phone numbers on it, and if you call them you here some strange things...
totally believe the main character is the Dog Killer because he had the dog treats in his pockets the whole time ... he would lure the dogs with dog treats to kill them because he is resentful that his ex girlfriend dumped him yet still kept her dog who he is probably super jelous of ... he had such anymosity when he was explaining the reasons why to the Homeless King... The homeless king asked him chastisingly why he carried around the dog treats because the homeless king was onto him being the dog killer.... also he told one of the girls of the father who was missing that he didn't know how he felt about being a dog person because he got bitten as a child by his parents dog/pet ... so yeah .. imo
The eggs form the hobo code for "Beware of dog"
You commented on the wrong video. I searched the hobo codes, but couldn;t find a beware of dog that matches the eggs.
so the women in the movie represent the dog? that's why they bark at him out of nowhere?
I think so, maybe that's the symbol !!!
Anyone else pissed off you cant find the first damn scene of the movie?
Which scene and why can't you find it?
1:48 venom and spiderman
Girls barking at him! Reminds me of this scene from another cool movie: ruclips.net/video/ZnYSkI2Jcvc/видео.html
An homage?
Take a long line - I never existed, you've been wasting your time.
I fucking knew it!!
Not to mention he said that a dog bit him in the past when he was walking with that girl: a motive.
This is all circumstantial. But good inferencing. Anyhow. I know who the Owl Woman is.
Who yoo
That could be guts...or gum...on his hands. Guess that's left nebulous.
@Edward M yeah...the commentator considered it Gore...uh yeah agreed it was clearly gum
Then..the jokes still on you.
2:43 the Amazing Spiderman issue is 144
Sounds like he's channeling Peter Weller in that Naked Lunch monologue about the man who taught his asshole to talk. ruclips.net/video/b8Hwq4V2dm0/видео.html
Love the movie. I think you're spot on.. about the "D mystery". But what about the A, B and C mysteries? ;) ..... and E...... and F....... ;)
There really is so much going on. My main theory is that Sam is dead and the whole story is his soul passing through purgatory.
@@mephistophelesghost6712 Could be. He could be the squirrel that appears to commit suicide at the beginning. Or was it pushed? ;)
@@martoto77 That is precisely my thought. The dead "squirrel" was actually Sam, or at least symbolically.
Dog, spelled backwards, is....
If sam was the dog killer, we would have see him killing dogs wouldn´t we? check out this music clip I´ve made from the movie! ruclips.net/video/qEyyrMyPz98/видео.html
How is the owl kiss 😐
He's obviously the killer, all of you arguing that he isn't aren't just trying to sound smarter than you are.
Is the movie talking about women/the feminine being murdered? Not actually dogs
The movie portrays "the feminine"; with the virginal cult at the end, showing the casting couch side of Hollywood, the Night Owl seducing/killing people which is on the dollar. He sees the women barking; Bitches=female dogs.
The guy in the film killed himself because women were taking the film roles maybe because of diversity demands ect.
the dudes at the end of the film make all the media that shapes the world and the protagonist.
the dudes at the end view women as literal property.
dudes like the protagonist inherit their views, idolize them, without realizing how monstrous they are.
the problem for the protagonist and for the dog killer is that they have been taught by the media of the modern pharaohs that they are superior to women, but unlike the modern pharaohs they do not actually have the resources to posses women.
When they fail and they see women or dogs succeeding, they cannot comprehend the incongruity with what they have been taught about their superiority, so they lash out. In the case of the dog killer by killing dogs. In the case of the protagonist by hearing the condemnation of women as barking bitches, as you pointed out.
So I think it is mostly a metaphor, and that the main character is similar to the dog killer in his resentment, but that the main killer is not supposed to be the dog killer. we are meant to ask if he could be the dog killer, or in the code of the metaphor, could his misogyny drive him to domestic murder?
What is important is that the warped view put forth in media, without the consumers even realizing it, drives a sort of resentment in men who fail that leads to them killing their wives.
very good stuff. i thought the dogs were barking cause he smelled like skunk
Sam "smells" bad before and after the skunk.It is the stench of sin/guilt.
@@mephistophelesghost6712 yeah or maybe dead
@@mephistophelesghost6712 My first thought was the smell represents just straight disregard of personal hygiene, which is common with serious mental disorders
@@Blashmack Not saying he's mentally stable, but he smells bad before, and after bathing in tomato sauce and a chlorine pool. I think it's supposed to be a permanent stench, reflecting something rotten about him. The only people who don't seem to care are parrot lady and comic book man.
I think it's interesting that he's surprised to see a skunk right after he made up the skunk excuse. And he gets sprayed in that area where a ton of coincidences/weird things happen.
the "dog killer" is a metaphor for misogyny. He blames "dogs" for all his failures. When the protagonist is confronted by women we get POV shots with their righteous anger replaced by barking. As if the film is telling us that the protagonist cannot handle women in authority, so he dehumanizes them rather than listen - like the slur "bitch" does.
The protagonist is also a casual misogynist through the film - not in a sinister way, but in ways that society tacitly or explicitly approves.
In the conclusion of the film we see the purveyors of this misogyny - eg. through media- who would have inspired the protagonist's misogyny and the society that fails to condemn it- take it to an extreme by entombing themselves with young women, the way the way pharaohs entombed themselves with their property.
The main character aspires to be like these media moguls, without realizing how monstrous they actually are, without realizing how they have tainted his view of women. the dog killer is the resentment of incel types, who fail to achieve the success to posses women, and so lash out at them.
Sam = Chamuel aka Samuel Archangel? Just thinking ...
I recommend to keep thinking
guys there was no dog killer dog is god backward.
DELET
Who cares who the dog killer is? That's not even remotely the point of the film. This is the kind of conspirancy chasing it makes fun of.
The Movie is about liberating ourselves from this Dog run realm. God in reverse is DOG most people pray and worship(whore ship) in a God or higher being over them. This realm is a trap for Spirits where the only liberation comes from true knowledge of being trapped and who the trappers are. God is the trapper. So we need to kill God=Dog like the main character tried to do unknowingly though when he killed the Piano player who was the God of this realm and the trapper... he literally stated it to the main character. You see, we are all great Master Creator beings and don't know it. We must bust all the lies of this Dog eat Dog run realm so, when we physically die we never get tricked into reincarnating back here or under anyone's authority again. The true meaning of 666 mark of the beast is nothing more than Carbon based Organic organism. Carbon atom has 6 neutrons, 6 electron and protons which is the mark of the beast. Anything that feeds off of Organic material is considered an ANIMAL(look it up in the dictionary) thus, YOU MUST KILL THE DOG=GOD mentality and NEVER get tricked into reincarnating into HELL again. We are all trapped in BEAST BODIES and BRAINS and live(live back words equals evil)off of other Organic Material, which in most cases is/was for our sustenance. Very CANNIBALISTIC in nature. This is HELL that is why we greet each other by saying "HELLO." We must all become true DOG=GOD killers metaphorically speaking to liberate ourselves from further suffering after physical death.
Do you write elsewhere because that was a pretty interesting read.
Saturn as the false god of our fake reality? The theory of David Icke?
Uhm... NO. Lack of evidence is no evidence...
Completely wrong I'm afraid...
quite possibly the worst take on this movie