Talk:The Machinist

Influences
Kafka. There's original research and there is calling a pipe a pipe. 71.121.59.213 (talk) 21:30, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Weight Loss
Didn't Bale set some sort of actor record for the amount of weight he lost for this film? Thought I remembered reading that somewhere... -LTC

Trent Reznor
Is Trevor Reznik a reference to Trent Reznor, or is that name just coincidence? (clem 22:22, 13 May 2005 (UTC)) (I thought I posted that already here?)
 * That thought crosssed my mind too. Cnwb 23:57, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

I got this movie from my local library and that too was my first thought between Christian Bale and of Trent Reznor from Nine Inch Nails http&#58;//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Berniethomas68 03:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


 * If someone has a direct source for this, please cite it. Deleting the "item" until then. - DynSkeet * Talk 16:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, in Czech 'řezník' means butcher, is that a coincidence? Plch 22:46, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * IMDB says "The Machinist's writer, Scott Kossar, loves "Nine Inch Nails" and his original script had a quote from their lyrics on the first page. He always wanted the soundtrack to be written by NIN, but the director didn't want the movie to go in that direction. Nine Inch Nails' only official member is Trent Reznor, thus the name of Christian Bale's Character, Trevor Reznik." But of course, this might not be true. I just thought I'd throw it out there. 71.219.228.204 00:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * YES YES YES OF COURSE ITS RELATED 24.13.39.188 (talk) 23:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Contradictory
Added self-contradictory tag. The first paragraph says it was all filmed in Spain, but the category is Films shot in Mexico. --Quasipalm 03:40, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I have changed the category based on this. 68.39.174.238 15:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

It is not actually filmed "in its entirety in Barcelona" (see various interviews available with director Brad Andersen). Several scenes are shot in Andorra.85.119.232.200 10:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Schizophrenia?
It seems to me that Trevor is suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, rather than Primary Insomnia. Does anyones else think this?

No it is not paranoid schizophrenia in the clinical sense. He does not have a split personality. Subconsciously, it is the guilt of the dead boy that has induced this condition of primary insomnia which in turn reflects in his disparaging weight loss. The screenwriter uses the psychological device of the doppelgganger to reflect the chasm between the real and the unreal as perceived by the protagonist Trevor. Creativemultimediaartist (talk) 07:54, 8 May 2008 (UTC)La-Tonia Denise Willis

Schizophrenic DO NOT have split personality disorders (per se)! Don't get confused mate. Schizophrenia = DELUSIONS and HALLUCINATIONS (amongst a roster of other symptoms) - so my bet would be that he had developed a type of schizophrenia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.208.31 (talk) 12:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Paranoid Schizophrenia and Multiple Personality Disorder are not the same thing. On Thermonuclear War (talk) 04:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd say that he does not suffer from paranoid schizophrenia since that syndrome is not linked with the visual hallucinations that he is experiencing. I am at the moment looking into if he does not suffer from some kind of depressive psychosis that he developed after the crash and with his PTSD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.231.140.215 (talk) 16:16, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

car cigarette lighter
The page says that Trevor is "almost afraid to touch" it. I think this is false, e.g. in the scene where Trevor first meets Ivan, there is no hesitation - the popping out of the lighter is just a dramatic effect. The same holds for the scene just after the meeting in which Trevor and the supervisors discuss the first incident at the mill (The guy loosing his left arm). I propose removing the sentance about the lighter, and just create a new paragraph with the following. Any objections ? (If not, I'll do so soon.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bzthib (talk • contribs) 01:24, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Unexplained parts
Was suprised to see that nothing had been written about the seemingly unexplained parts in the movie. The specific one is when Reznik is looking at his photo album and there is a picture of him and his mother at the carnival almost exactly like the marie and nicholas picture. What does this have to do with the story? And what's with the ending, where's he's driving into the light or whatever? Just wondering. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RuckZuck72 (talk • contribs) 04:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC).


 * Trevor may have run with his car into a lorry and lost his memory. – 87.166.199.23 (talk) 20:24, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay, just posted a paragraph about this, if any of you have a problem with it tell me. --RuckZuck72 01:02, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Not sure there's any point in the unexplained scenes section, an analysis of the themes behind the film would be better?

As for your specfic points:

The photo of Trevor his mother looking so much like the one he takes of Marie & Nicholas: the whole scene in the fairground is obviously fantasy in his mind, the fact that the two photos look alike is meant to suggest that Trevor is subconsciously relating to Marie (the real on he has never met) and her grief at losing her son by remembering his mother - and therefore bringing up his feelings of grief at losing his mother.

When he drives into the light - it's just the director's way of marking the moment after the accident when he blocks out the memory of killing Nicholas and becomes the Trevor we see in the film.

When the landlady sees the items in Trevor's flat which he says were his mothers - we saw them in Marie's home because again, Trevor's visit to her flat is a delusional fantasy. He is most likely in his own flat, or dreaming. Either way he constructs a version of Marie's flat from parts of his own flat/his own possessions. That's presumably why he pauses in the corridor before going through to get more wine from her kitchen; he's actually in his own flat and almost becomes aware of it at that moment, but lapses back into fantasy.

comment was added by counterlanguage 10 March 2007

Counterlanguage you are brilliant! I'm an aspiring screenwriter with my first low-budget indie film being written and directed this year and I love to meet people who can dissect a script like that and truly understand the subtext. Some folks have a hard time understanding the surrealistic or magical realism or any type of fantastical elements that are embedded within a story but your comprehension is on the spot! Your intelligence shines and The Machinist is one of the best movies I have ever had the pleasure of seeing. I love psychological thrillers that don't conform to traditional linear narrative in the telling of the story but that still do retain the three act story telling arc when you look back in retrospect.71.217.39.136 19:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)La-Tonia Denise Willis

ok, thanks for explaining this, go ahead and remove the section or create a new one if you like.

Duplicity?
Duplicity: every scene has one object of red in it.--amybedow-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.14.206.236 (talk) 03:28, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay i'm just a regular guy, but the duplicity article in this wiki makes absolutely no sense. I quote "Ivan has two cowboy boots, two cops chase Trevor, two subways going in opposite directions." Honestly, there is no duplicity in that at all. Obviously people have 2 shoes, Subways ALWAYS go in opposite directions (usually 2) and how many cops should pursue him? i'm sure there was more then 2 at one point.

Someone should either get rid of or revise the duplicity section because, yes the theme was in there, for instance "Trevor gets to a fork in the sewers, "A" and "B", that's probably the only one that makes sense. The rest are obvious reasons, not hinting to anything really. Perhaps even the bumper cars makes slight sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.42.87.68 (talk) 09:17, 18 September 2011 (UTC) I would surmise that the duplicity would stem from his moral conflict, doing the right thing and turn himself in or continue to run and be tormented.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2EA3:8790:90EC:2D62:CD0D:AB4C (talk) 07:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Surely the fork in the sewer is an obvious reference to the two paths in the 666 ride?

Also, the first time he speaks to Ivan is after he uses his cigarette lighter in his car. Given the importance of the lighter a year ago, surely this is significant? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.175.200.65 (talk) 08:27, 27 August 2017 (UTC)