Concept
Final Thought is principally the story of a person striking back at a society which has alienated them, though there are some other issues which it also brings up. Perhaps the dominant theme of the film could be said to be a glimpse into the deranged mind of a murderer. But, in saying so, a judgement is passed onto the protagonist. Labeling them as ‘deranged’ and possibly even ‘murderer’ simply enforces society’s view that what they are doing is wrong. Simply because one shares the dominant viewpoint does not make it the correct one.The protagonist, in this case, believes that what he is doing is correct, and indeed moral. He believes that the largely America-driven society we have chosen is fueled by a quest for greed. He believes that people are generally unaware of what is truly important in life. That they are unhappy because of this, although they don’t know it yet, having never experienced anything else. He believes that the only way to make people happy is to tear them forcibly from their existence; to carry them through death and into a kind of awareness.
Of course, in all this the irony is present that just as society has judged our protagonist, he himself is judging society. One cannot aim to correct the actions of another without doing this. Correcting something, by its very definition, implies the perception that it is ‘wrong’. But who is to decide what is right and wrong? Perhaps the towering sprawl of office buildings and corporations does provide happiness to some. Perhaps some are genuinely content in their pursuit of money. Perhaps some don’t even work in this way.
In the director’s mind, the protagonist has the most correct viewpoint (not to condone his actions in any way). It is left up to the viewer to decide for themselves whether they agree with it or not. You are free to believe whatever you want to believe. Nobody’s opinion has any more or less merit than anybody else’s.
The film is a story written from the protagonist’s marginalized viewpoint. It does not aim to glamourise murder, but instead perhaps generate some awareness as to where we are all headed in life. It aims to encourage us to look at ourselves and ask ‘Am I really happy? Is this what I really want for myself?’.
Inspiration for Final Thought comes from an online forum dedicated to individualistic discussion. This forum is frequented by less extreme likenesses of the protagonist. People who have been shunned by society and either wish for no part in it or wish for some retribution. It is a place where they can be free to speak their minds and not be judged for it. This forum is their ‘society’, in a way. Where they can go when the everyday world makes them feel lousy, and feel accepted. An excerpt from a discussion on this forum (with names removed, of course) is attached.
If we believe they're in power, they are in power. An old addage, power perceived is power achieved. It's true. If they believe they can't, at any time destroy your rule, tolerable or not, then they can't. Suppose we were to go to the middle ages. The vikings killed the villagers they were pillaging without judging them as good or evil, but merely having what they wanted. Judgement would have compromised the resolve of those invading. To do what is necessarily evil, action must be without judgement. To do what is necessarily good, one must judge, and clarify all things against morality. The impracticalities of such a thing in times of war or strife leave us with either the course of action which has us weak, and regretful of ourselves afterwards, or strong, and with or without justification, still, and unequivically, logical. Look at Vietnam. The Viet-Cong were capable of the necessary evil, more so than we, and they won. They could bare the brunt of fighting, brutality, eliminate higher moral judgements, and do, without passion or obsession, the thing that must be done. None would call such men monsters. They're called heroes.
Let's not forget, when one kills a murderer, in self defense, it is not two wrongs making a right. At that moment, the person, if truly human, at least instinctually, kills without judgement, but pure reasoning. Judgement is illogical. The person did only right. There was one wrong, one right. The defender did right.
If we eliminate them, the liars and hypocrites in power, however we do it (murder and violence are, in this world gone soft, often unnecessary) even if by simply shaming them in public, hopefully driving them to suicide, we have done the public service, in good practice. If only because we have prevented possible deaths, and enhanced the potential welfare index by small margins. Who is to say killing is wrong? Killing has been around since the beginning. Man is a murderous creature. Man killed to get to the top, and has had to continue killing to stay where it is. If we justly kill men who kill unjustly, we are not below them.
When someone is killed in self defense it is a conflict of evils. One would be the act of killing, and the other would be the intent, and attempt to kill a person. These things cancel each other out, and render both void of good or evil.
Like all things sence before the reckoning of history man has killed to live, but just because a person belongs to man, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are human.
To be a human one must have humanity, and the essence of humanity is compassion.
You talk about "If we justly kill men who kill unjustly, we are not below them." Who do you think you are that you can judge someone to death? What kind of person or thing makes you think that you are above everyone else?
Consider the Israelis, and the Palestinians. They have been killing each other for ages in a never ending cycle of death and violence because they both view the other side as unjust.
However you are right about part of that line. If we kill those who we view as unjust, we would not be below them. We would be on the same level as them. We would BE them.
Revenge, and Righteousness are circles only broken by those who would wield them.
There is true evil even in something as potentially varied as the moral universe of humanity. If one shot Adolf Hitler in the back of the head most brutally, in 1942, he would not be on or below Hitler. Killing men who kill, unjustly, with judgement, as the Nazis did, would not be in any way sinking to their level. One can repel violence with armed force. Often amoral governments and evil men will only listen to a gun shot. To me, there is no such thing as a totally relative moral universe. At some point, good and evil get defined. It is obviously evil to sexually abuse a small child. Any person committing such acts would deserve a slow, torturous death. There is no recourse for such sick behavior. One becomes inhuman at that point. People who kill unjustly are inhuman, inhumane. Do you shoot a rabid dog? Given the opportunity, and this would be the only way, would you have killed Stalin to stop him, so that a better man such as Trotsky could have taken power? Any wise, logical human being would indeed do so. You can justify the deaths of evil men on principle. I don't view myself as superior. I am another human being. Subject to the same imperfections. I would impose absolutes on a system pretending to be varied, or dynamic, and prove that those so-called subjectivities were indeed illusions. Times change, technologically, chronologically. Times never change where humans are concerned. We're still, perhaps more so than ever before, capable of murder for unjust, amoral reasons. Men who kill in the name of mob bosses or their cocaine operations, are far below those who killed to eat 10,000 years ago. Just because you did a thing, doesn't make you as other things that did it. There is just killing, there is unjust killing. A number of executions in the United State of Texas, for example, were based off such flimsy, weak evidence (one was killed solely on eye-witness testimony, and shaky testimony at that) that those were unjust. The brutal 'smashing' of men, women and children at Section 12 in Phnom Penh was unjust. Killing those who gleefully did the killing would not have been unjust. Consider that if there are no moral absolutes, that there are no absolute reasonings about killing either. Socially, man is the most violent species on the planet, and has always been. No other species even compares in brutal, senseless, pointless violence.
but youre contradicting yourself..
Who is to say killing is wrong?
If we justly kill men who kill unjustly, we are not below them
you justify killing as a natural instinct... so its natural to kill those who kill? but with that reasoning, isnt it natural for the offender to kill? so if its human nature, why do we kill them back? ...it makes me confusled.
Because both are elements of human nature. There are many reasons why humans kill. The logical, rational ones such as out of greed (not exactly morally correct, but still we can come to the conclusions that hitmen or men who kill executives for their money do. We understand the process, but we don't embrace it) are a part of nature. Self-preservation and expansionism, whilst securing a foot-hold for the spread of ones genes. The self-defense motive ties into this, self preservation. We kill those who would kill us, to prevent them from killing us. Shooting someone who invades your home is not unjust. Yes, it's natural for both to kill. Nature is not green, fuzzy and nice, nature is blood red, and brutal. Just because it was natural for someone to attempt to kill us, does not mean our instincts wouldn't act to countermand their actions. Just because something is natural does not make it good, or right, or honest. Suns collapse, energy depletes, species go extinct.
The Who is to say killing is wrong statement was more of a rhetorical thing. If you would say that there is no justification for killing, how can you define such an unjustification.
its just that its a circular argument..
its natural for us to kill in retaliation, but its natural for the 'offenders' (and who can really say who is the offender when both kill anyway) to kill in the first instance, so its natural for us to kill them in retaliation, so its natural for them to kill again.. it becomes a never ending cycle of two parties killing each other. it becomes war. and it doesnt end until one side is completely destroyed.
maybe it IS natural, but that doesnt mean that it's humane or just. no other animal would kill those of its kind over and over until all that it percieves as evil had been destroyed. other animals kill only as necessary.
perhaps this is one of the dangers of cognition? of course, by that statement i assume that other species are not capable of cognitive thought. maybe they are. but the fact remains that our minds work differently, and that leads to excess bloodshed.
"Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds were all the same, to conquer was his goal. So he built this greater world, then he slaughtered his own kind, then he died a confused man. Killed himself with his own mind"
Our minds work differently, so our hands work differently... and the pain they inflict is different... back in the day, Emporors conquered lands by sending out armies to invade and destroy 'the enemy.' I'm not saying that's right, or correct, or justifiable. But there was a barbaric sense of poetry about that, but its different now. Yes, we still kill for our own gain. Yes, we still kill in retaliation for being wronged. But the empires for which humanity once fought have collapsed and been replaced with...well, to be honest, really not much. There's a lot more money and a lot less of anything else. Now we just kill. We know its evil, we know its wrong. We do it because we have always done it, and because we've always done it, we feel we're justified. Optimists can spruik about the benefits of change.
But me? I can really only seen its downfalls.
Treatment
The meaning of Final Thought is constructed principally through the use of video and audio interactions. Dialogue was originally planned to play a larger part, though in the end it was decided that it just didn’t work well. The dialogue is still included as an attachment, however, as a lot of the ideas are still represented through other means.The title image of the film introduces a recurring image- the American flag with swastikas replacing the stars. This image is present throughout the film as a badge on the protagonist’s hat- as if to suggest that he disagrees strongly with the American way of life, and in fact is fighting against it. Society, which he perceives in particular as Americanised society, has done himself and humanity some wrong, and as such he feels the need to strike out at it.
Final Thought then begins with the words ‘I woke up today and wished for tomorrow’, followed by footage of a pedestrian crossing sign in reverse, changing from ‘walk’ to ‘don’t walk’. These first few seconds set the mood and fundamental ideas for the rest of the film. The words tell of the protagonist’s hatred for the way things currently are, and how he yearns for things to change. The pedestrian crossing sign tells us more of his views- that humanity is at a standstill and that something must be done to fix it. The reversed audio here is important to set the scene of the rest of the film, as well as show that the protagonist believes humanity is regressing, not evolving.
Music then suddenly cuts in, along with opening scenes of a cityscape. The music is soft at this stage, and somewhat sad. A new day is beginning, it is somewhat overcast, and the world seems to be crushed beneath the weight of these leviathan corporate buildings. People are soon brought into the picture, moving in reverse. At this stage, the film is recorded as if through the eyes of the protagonist. It is his voice that introduces the film, and his outlook which is being represented.
There are some shots of people walking backwards in the overcast morning. They seem purposeless and inane. The point to be gleaned here is that the protagonist believes they are foolish, unaware of the drudgery of their everyday routine. They walk backwards because they are going nowhere. They are disappearing.
The protagonist now comes into shot as the music picks up pace slightly. Amidst backwards-traveling feet, his come into focus walking forwards. He believes his is the right view, that he is clearer and enlightened in some way which the rest of society is not. The fact of his forwards movement against the backwards movement of everyone else shows his resolve, his belief, his difference and his vision.
He is then shown emerging from a crowd, still walking upstream amidst the rest. His appearance is abnormal- he does not fit into society, and has never been accepted. He walks confidently, knowing what he plans is right. He wears dark clothing, which shows too that he brings a kind of darkness with him. Perhaps it hints also that what he is doing involves something a little bit sinister.
Further shots of the protagonist walking through crowds merely enforce these ideas. He is abnormal in some way, yet confident and happy with it. He remains dark, contrasting with the growing brightness of the world around him. A long, high up shot of him advancing up a path coincides with a choral humming in the music, as if to say that what he goes to do is ‘righteous’ in some way.
The music picks up pace again as the protagonist enters a building- something important is going to happen soon... a decision has been made. He waits politely as a backwards traveler pushes through the door in front of him. He is in no hurry. What he goes to do is inevitable. He is not above interacting with those he feels are inferior to him when he has to. Perhaps this also hints in a way that he is just as human as any other.
The scenery at this point becomes quite dark and dank. The protagonist is traveling somewhere were nobody else goes- no backwards traveling people disturb him now. There is very little light anymore, and the protagonist appears to draw the darkness into himself, again hinting that what he plans to do is sinister, or perhaps depressing, in some way.
He reaches some stairs, and climbs them. Ascending into the highness of the beliefs he holds. He still walks confidently, though there is now a slight hesitation with his hand on the handrail. He then reaches a rooftop, and is seen walking along it towards the camera. As he approaches, the sky seems to darken a little.
When on the rooftop, he begins to hesitate. He now seems afraid, perhaps even unsure that he is doing the right thing. His confidence almost evaporates, yet he regains it and continues walking. If they had not been raised already, questions now spring forth as to what he plans- suicide? Or something more?
He approaches the edge of the rooftop, facing the city (representational of society) that pains him so much, and leans into a handrail. As he does so, the sky brightens again. His moment of doubt is gone, and everything becomes almost heavenly. He has reassured himself that he is indeed taking what he believes to be the correct course of action.
Close-ups of his face generate some more tension, making viewers wonder if he is going to kill himself. He raises himself over the edge of the building. He looks down and sees more people walking backwards. His eye opens wide in wonder and enlightenment.
He pulls a gun from his pocket as the music fades, and aims it into the crowd below. The words ‘I dream of a better world’ filter softly through as the image fades to black. The protagonist has chosen his way, and is doing what he believes is the right thing to do. He is about to save those below him (note this implies again that he believes himself to be above everyone else) from the society which he thinks has wronged them all.
We don’t ask viewers to agree with him. Just to ask themselves what society has told them is important, where they think they are headed, and whether they truly believe it will make them happy.
Dialogue
I woke up today and wished for tomorrow.
Is this the world our fathers envisioned? Is this what they fought and bled for? Is this their solution to the hardship of their everyday lives?
We were offered a greater future. Offered freedom. A better tomorrow. Instead, we live in the mausoleum of history and blanket ourselves with dreams of happiness. Of freedom. Real freedom, we don't even know exists anymore. And so, as always, we trudge our dreary paths off to our soulless jobs. Slaves to the dollar. Dead to an uncaring world and a decaying society. Disappearing backwards into a void we ourselves create. We are the whores of the modern age. We sprawl, uncaring, filling the world with our excrement. Unaware of the way things can be if only we let them. Not knowing how to free ourselves from the shackles of commerce and money. Not knowing how to be free.
But I know.
When we were young, we would dream of the stars. We had love and hope. We had friendship and trust. We had each other. Now all we see and yearn for is the sweet caress of the chequebook, and all we dream of is money and power. We forget what real happiness is. We are oblivious to our plight. To the depression that is our lives. To our own personal, living hells. We forget how to be content with ourselves and those around us and instead fill our hollow selves with lies of importance. We measure ourselves by the size of our bank accounts. I suffer no such lies. I feel not the stigma of society. I am enlightened. And so, I now go over the stars.
Our youth was not a lie. It will not be forgotten. Not for me. As others around me grow old and decay, fall into their empty selves, as others forget the beauty of life, I grow stronger. I remain true to the clarity of my youth. I stay put and let the open mindedness of the young aid me in my vision. The helical thread that is my life spirals upwards and beyond.
I am not a nobody. A nothing. A corporate zombie. An expendable shit-smear on the underpants of the global marketplace. I am better. Better than society. Better than humanity. I will not suffer this world any longer. This fool's paradise. This tangle of mortgages, loans, cars, jobs and big screen TV's. Of competition, distrust, hate, envy, greed and selfishness. This... material world. There is more to life than money. More to life than power. The realization is painful. A burden. But I shoulder it gladly. I would rather that I knew the truth, than be as the rest. Than work in a hive. I am an identity and I stand as such. I stand for the possibility of change. The possibility of freedom.
The price of freedom is high. Many will not go willingly. But they will in time. They will share my insight. I shall drag them, kicking and screaming, over the edge and into the light. Into freedom and happiness. Freedom from their lives and happiness from within themselves. Drag them from the wrongs of the world. And in the end, they will thank me. Thank me for saving them from themselves. For reversing the singularity of their existence. For bringing them through death, through hardship and pain, through ignorance and apathy. For delivering them from evil. When the sun sets and the world is at an end, they will feel nothing but gratitude… for there will be so much left to look forward to.
..I dream of a better world.