[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/tv/ - Television & Film


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: IMG_8283.jpg (85 KB, 1585x891)
85 KB JPG
Despite the director insisting it wasn't a possession, the movie really hints at it with him begging her over and over again to just act like Nicki, and Alt Nicki keeps on promising that she can “be Nicki”
Then you have the makeup trick where she has a completely different face in the shadow of the bedroom, and real Nicki saying “She’s asleep”.
I don't think the Willow wish itself is a cursed object, due to many other people including the store owner using them. But the three things you traditionally can't do with wishes is kill someone, create true love, and raise the dead. He broke a standard wish rule and the willow fulfilled it in a way that didn't truly work
>>
>>220825447
How is it NOT a possession? The scene where the real Nicki begs him to kill her when the "demon" Nicki is asleep is basically confirmation of it (also the most disturbing scene of the movie).
If the director didn't include that scene, as well as the bit where the guy on the phone asks "do you wnat to talk to her?", I'd be inclined to agree. But these two scenes very heavily imply some sort of possession. What else does he have in mind as an alternative?



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.