<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: A Deconstructive Explanation of the Movie You Were Never Really Here	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/</link>
	<description>Movies, Books &#38; TV for people who like to think..</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2025 20:27:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Rufus		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1166383</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rufus]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2022 06:01:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=16535#comment-1166383</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It’s ridiculous to believe the little girl killed all of those guards at the compound. The director simply didn’t deem it necessary to show Joe killing them due to time constraints. The only person the little girl killed was the Governor.

Joe removed his tooth because of his injury, not because it had a tracking system in it.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It’s ridiculous to believe the little girl killed all of those guards at the compound. The director simply didn’t deem it necessary to show Joe killing them due to time constraints. The only person the little girl killed was the Governor.</p>
<p>Joe removed his tooth because of his injury, not because it had a tracking system in it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Taylor Holmes		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1160736</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taylor Holmes]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Apr 2022 13:12:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=16535#comment-1160736</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1160727&quot;&gt;Robin Holbrook&lt;/a&gt;.

Yeah it was really really good. I’m with you there.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1160727">Robin Holbrook</a>.</p>
<p>Yeah it was really really good. I’m with you there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Robin Holbrook		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1160727</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robin Holbrook]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Apr 2022 07:15:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=16535#comment-1160727</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[All I know is I LOVED this movie and will be watching it again. I also want to read the book which seldom happens after seeing a movie! Outstanding film!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All I know is I LOVED this movie and will be watching it again. I also want to read the book which seldom happens after seeing a movie! Outstanding film!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jeff Brooks		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1120420</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Brooks]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2021 03:23:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=16535#comment-1120420</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I really enjoyed this film. It leaves alot to question that is for sure. I thought I heard him say in the message to his boss or handler I&#039;ve been shot in the face I think maybe the bullet passed thru the hotel clerks head and lodged in his jaw or Cheek and he was pulling a slug out but again just food for thought. And I was kinda on the track of other people that it wasn&#039;t his daughter maybe he traded her and decided he wanted her back for himself. Creepy either way but one of the best movies I&#039;ve seen in a long time. I think there were alot of things secretly inserted into the movie about real things going on under our noses here in our country. Basically saying here&#039;s the issues do your own research and find out for yourself. Anyway your comments explained alot of things I was unsure of thanks .]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really enjoyed this film. It leaves alot to question that is for sure. I thought I heard him say in the message to his boss or handler I&#8217;ve been shot in the face I think maybe the bullet passed thru the hotel clerks head and lodged in his jaw or Cheek and he was pulling a slug out but again just food for thought. And I was kinda on the track of other people that it wasn&#8217;t his daughter maybe he traded her and decided he wanted her back for himself. Creepy either way but one of the best movies I&#8217;ve seen in a long time. I think there were alot of things secretly inserted into the movie about real things going on under our noses here in our country. Basically saying here&#8217;s the issues do your own research and find out for yourself. Anyway your comments explained alot of things I was unsure of thanks .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Damian		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1120418</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Damian]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2021 02:38:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=16535#comment-1120418</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[JMO. I think the mom found out about what the dad was doing, or may have been involved, and committed suicide. Thing in the mouth was from the gunshot, It was all real, but he was on the edge of psychosis and having delusions. He wanted to die too, but then found a reason to live in the end. Many good points above, a lot left to your own imagination and investigation.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>JMO. I think the mom found out about what the dad was doing, or may have been involved, and committed suicide. Thing in the mouth was from the gunshot, It was all real, but he was on the edge of psychosis and having delusions. He wanted to die too, but then found a reason to live in the end. Many good points above, a lot left to your own imagination and investigation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jordan		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1118087</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jordan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2021 16:29:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=16535#comment-1118087</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hello, was just perusing through and noticed it said he was found through a tracking beacon in his tooth. I have not read the book so I am unsure to that medium, however I do know he was shot in the face by one of the &quot;police&quot; which is why he pulls his tooth. They find him at the hotel because that is the address he gives to Votto, whom is then killed which is how I believe they found Nina. And then of course they find his home when they kill McCleary and find out he never discarded the information. 

If you can elaborate on the &quot;beacon&quot; theory that would be fantastic.

- J]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello, was just perusing through and noticed it said he was found through a tracking beacon in his tooth. I have not read the book so I am unsure to that medium, however I do know he was shot in the face by one of the &#8220;police&#8221; which is why he pulls his tooth. They find him at the hotel because that is the address he gives to Votto, whom is then killed which is how I believe they found Nina. And then of course they find his home when they kill McCleary and find out he never discarded the information. </p>
<p>If you can elaborate on the &#8220;beacon&#8221; theory that would be fantastic.</p>
<p>&#8211; J</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Taylor Holmes		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1111979</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taylor Holmes]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Mar 2021 20:34:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=16535#comment-1111979</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1111965&quot;&gt;Jaime&lt;/a&gt;.

Dude. 
This comment was like a fullon emotional journey in and of itself. Starts out strong - declaratively. And then really grapples with the inner workings of the film - the chaos of the subject and then circles back to the question all over again. 


It’s a statement! ... or maybe it’s a question.  Yeah. That’s exactly how I feel about this movie as well. 100%. 

Well done.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1111965">Jaime</a>.</p>
<p>Dude.<br />
This comment was like a fullon emotional journey in and of itself. Starts out strong &#8211; declaratively. And then really grapples with the inner workings of the film &#8211; the chaos of the subject and then circles back to the question all over again. </p>
<p>It’s a statement! &#8230; or maybe it’s a question.  Yeah. That’s exactly how I feel about this movie as well. 100%. </p>
<p>Well done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jaime		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1111965</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jaime]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Mar 2021 18:45:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=16535#comment-1111965</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;You Were Never Really Here&quot;.. People have assumed the title was Joe&#039;s question of his own existence, purpose and reality.. but read it again and see that it is not a question but a statement. It is a deep theme be I don&#039;t think as conspiratory or fantasical as people have commented. (I know I&#039;m late to this discussion but I just watched this movie as it took a while to prepare myself what I knew would be a dark film. This is speculation and may be an already proposed interpretation was my personal take away from the message of this film).

A good director&#039;s and script writer&#039;s choices are never arbitrary, sometimes blantant but often subtle. There are a multitude of references but the most essential being christian iconography and the ideology of sin, guilt and resurrection.  

I think it was Nina who was the &quot;you&quot; in the title. The diner scene shows 3 milkshakes, only two were empty, the third was placed where Nina was sitting and was untouched. Did Joe drink both vanilla and strawberry and ordered the chocolate for a hallucinatory Nina? Or did Nina drink one of the 3 them and was in fact real. And does it really matter?

I think she was real but Joe probably found her dead at the mansion and killed the governor himself, his final act of vengeance for the people he was powerless to or was too late save. He may have come to the realization that she was lost even before finding her as shown in his vision of her sinking in the lake-funeral of his mother but continued his almost hopeless search regardless of the odds of finding her.

The rest of the film portrayed his search for salvation. The only grace-saving resolution as to why all the people in his life were killed or harmed had to be in finding Nina alive. If he hadn&#039;t found her alive, death and suffering meant nothing.. like the girls found dead in the van/truck, like the validity of the war, like his father&#039;s abuse .. the tragedies would be all for nothing.

If he hadn&#039;t found Nina alive it would be impossible for him to overcome his PSTD and end his obsession with suicidality, perhaps related to the psychology of survivor&#039;s guilt. Note that he never followed through with these attempts. There may have been an attachment to a tiny hope that he held to through all the incomprehensible experiences, leading to his senseless life and the survival of senseless deaths. 

Nina represented his desperation for salvation. When he arrived at the mansion, the windows shone unrealistically bright white forming crosses, validating his righteous mission. Her symbolically martyred death would be the chance to forgive himself in his failed attempts to save others.

He finally succeeded suicide when he &quot;shot&quot; himself in the diner (not coincidentally, suicide is the only one unforgivable Christian sin) when Nina left/abandoned him to use the bathroom. Only once she returned did he come to the revelation that it &quot;was a beautiful day&quot;. She (or he) saved him/himself, providing the faith to let it all go and the possible  resurrection of a new life.

To take this notion further, Nina may have been Joe&#039;s own self-protective alter ego. Nina was the victim of child/sexual abuse, possibly by her own father. Nina counted backwards to escape her reality. Nina was an innocent, needing to be saved. Nina offered comfort and rescue to Joe in the midst of her own pain. Nina suffered in silence, traumatized by her experiences. Nina was invisible to others at the diner. Nina killed in vengeance. 

The diner/Nina scene was the manifestation of his salvation. The possible hope, albeit tentative, in the possibility of what could be and probably would be a long and difficult journey that lay ahead in his return to humanity. 

The true question in this film was not if Joe, or even Nina, was ever really here. The true query was &quot;Where do we go?&quot; and very grounded, very human response of &quot;I don&#039;t know&quot;..

In retrospect, the title may actually have be a question and not a statement, one of the attainability of forgiveness, redemption and salvation - the holy trinity, the pagan belief of 3 as a magic number, the three milkshakes.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;You Were Never Really Here&#8221;.. People have assumed the title was Joe&#8217;s question of his own existence, purpose and reality.. but read it again and see that it is not a question but a statement. It is a deep theme be I don&#8217;t think as conspiratory or fantasical as people have commented. (I know I&#8217;m late to this discussion but I just watched this movie as it took a while to prepare myself what I knew would be a dark film. This is speculation and may be an already proposed interpretation was my personal take away from the message of this film).</p>
<p>A good director&#8217;s and script writer&#8217;s choices are never arbitrary, sometimes blantant but often subtle. There are a multitude of references but the most essential being christian iconography and the ideology of sin, guilt and resurrection.  </p>
<p>I think it was Nina who was the &#8220;you&#8221; in the title. The diner scene shows 3 milkshakes, only two were empty, the third was placed where Nina was sitting and was untouched. Did Joe drink both vanilla and strawberry and ordered the chocolate for a hallucinatory Nina? Or did Nina drink one of the 3 them and was in fact real. And does it really matter?</p>
<p>I think she was real but Joe probably found her dead at the mansion and killed the governor himself, his final act of vengeance for the people he was powerless to or was too late save. He may have come to the realization that she was lost even before finding her as shown in his vision of her sinking in the lake-funeral of his mother but continued his almost hopeless search regardless of the odds of finding her.</p>
<p>The rest of the film portrayed his search for salvation. The only grace-saving resolution as to why all the people in his life were killed or harmed had to be in finding Nina alive. If he hadn&#8217;t found her alive, death and suffering meant nothing.. like the girls found dead in the van/truck, like the validity of the war, like his father&#8217;s abuse .. the tragedies would be all for nothing.</p>
<p>If he hadn&#8217;t found Nina alive it would be impossible for him to overcome his PSTD and end his obsession with suicidality, perhaps related to the psychology of survivor&#8217;s guilt. Note that he never followed through with these attempts. There may have been an attachment to a tiny hope that he held to through all the incomprehensible experiences, leading to his senseless life and the survival of senseless deaths. </p>
<p>Nina represented his desperation for salvation. When he arrived at the mansion, the windows shone unrealistically bright white forming crosses, validating his righteous mission. Her symbolically martyred death would be the chance to forgive himself in his failed attempts to save others.</p>
<p>He finally succeeded suicide when he &#8220;shot&#8221; himself in the diner (not coincidentally, suicide is the only one unforgivable Christian sin) when Nina left/abandoned him to use the bathroom. Only once she returned did he come to the revelation that it &#8220;was a beautiful day&#8221;. She (or he) saved him/himself, providing the faith to let it all go and the possible  resurrection of a new life.</p>
<p>To take this notion further, Nina may have been Joe&#8217;s own self-protective alter ego. Nina was the victim of child/sexual abuse, possibly by her own father. Nina counted backwards to escape her reality. Nina was an innocent, needing to be saved. Nina offered comfort and rescue to Joe in the midst of her own pain. Nina suffered in silence, traumatized by her experiences. Nina was invisible to others at the diner. Nina killed in vengeance. </p>
<p>The diner/Nina scene was the manifestation of his salvation. The possible hope, albeit tentative, in the possibility of what could be and probably would be a long and difficult journey that lay ahead in his return to humanity. </p>
<p>The true question in this film was not if Joe, or even Nina, was ever really here. The true query was &#8220;Where do we go?&#8221; and very grounded, very human response of &#8220;I don&#8217;t know&#8221;..</p>
<p>In retrospect, the title may actually have be a question and not a statement, one of the attainability of forgiveness, redemption and salvation &#8211; the holy trinity, the pagan belief of 3 as a magic number, the three milkshakes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Taylor Holmes		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1104835</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taylor Holmes]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2021 01:13:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=16535#comment-1104835</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1104237&quot;&gt;Steve&lt;/a&gt;.

probably not.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://taylorholmes.com/2018/07/27/a-deconstructive-explanation-of-the-movie-you-were-never-really-here/#comment-1104237">Steve</a>.</p>
<p>probably not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
