I just figured he was trying to figure out a way to get her to talk more and open up a bit. At some point (and after several loops), he must’ve figured out she was just making some things up to appease him. But he still digs around and gets an occasional nugget of truth and keeps trying to get more

A lot of their back and forth feels like an effort to distract us from the actors’ age difference.

(Imagine a version of this film where Cruise’s character sees Blunt’s character as a surrogate for his own child instead of a sex object. It could have worked)

If he wanted to get her to open up more, I'm not sure how lying to her about stuff she would definitely know, is the right way to do that.

She does say in that scene "maybe I just made it all up just to keep you quiet" - which is something we'll never know for sure. In the scene, it certainly comes across as though he is the one making things up to see her reaction.

He is just probing and showing her that she has, in fact, already told him some of her past.

The three sugars thing is just an honest mistake, I think.

She was 31 at the time of filming and he was 52 - that's not an incredible age gap when you're over 30. I've no doubt that in the film, Cage's age was probably around 40 to mid 40s, making the age gap even less of an issue.

When you look younger than your age, as Cruise does in his 50s and 60s - he can get away with playing younger characters in their mid 40s without it seeming too far fetched.

I also don't see the fascination with age gap relationships, if they're 2 consenting adults in a loving and non-abusive or manipulative relationship, then that's all that matters.

I don't see how this has any relevance to the scene in question.

>He is just probing and showing her that she has, in fact, already told him some of her past.

Then why not tell her her actual past and then she'll know that she trusted him enough to open up - then she can just carry on in conversation, knowing she trusted him enough in another loop.

>The three sugars thing is just an honest mistake, I think.

Agreed - but it makes the previous scene a bit redundant.

You're looking for a correct answer like A must lead to be.

All that matters is he thinks this information may reveal truth.
He's trying to get her to talk and express herself. Maybe it's all lies whatever she says but it says plenty if that's what she makes up. Maybe just maybe, she may see it as pointless to keep lying.

​

Again it doesn't matter if that will be the case, as long as he thinks it could be.

Additionally it clues us in to the idea that while this is the first time we are seeing this scene, who knows how many times he's done this portion of the loop. This man may have spent months or years on this same trip.

> fascination

It isn’t fascinating.

It’s predictable, fawning, and a little gross.

>I don’t see

I know.

I guess I can go with the whole small talk business to get her to open up more, but why not use some actual information he's obtained from previous loops? He mentions Hendrix and she immediately starts asking how does he know that - why not use more of those snippets to show her she opened up to him in previous loops? That's an even better way to show he's done this all before.

The scene feels a bit like filler to me (a cardinal sin in screenwriting), and it stands out in what was otherwise a very tightly written script - everything else said and done has a purpose and a reason, but this scene feels slightly out of place. If the scene's purpose is to show how many loops he's done or how he's fishing for information, I think it could have been done in a better way, without the made up middle name and lost brother story.

I can only suggest you go and preach elsewhere.

I have no interest in someone's opinion who cannot understand that people of all (consenting) ages fall in love and have relationships. I'm not suggesting every age-gap relationship is the best in the world, but to immediately jump to the conclusion that every relationship of this type is predatory, abusive, and manipulative, it really shows your own character, more than it does the people in the relationship.

If it's a little gross to you, then that's fine, but to other people it's not an issue - they see the person, their personality, their humour, their passions, their individuality - they don't check their driver's licence for their age and then decide if it's appropriate to speak to the person.

Cunningham's Law states "the best way to get the right answer on the internet is not to ask a question; it's to post the wrong answer."

He is getting information using Cunningham's law. Asking is not as good at getting information as telling a lie and having her correct it.

Since he is in a time loop it doesn't matter if it makes her mad at him in that time loop. He just needs the information for future time loops.

Ah, that's a very good point and something I hadn't considered. What you've said actually does make sense within the scene - throw out enough wrong answers and eventually she'll correct him.

Many thanks for the input, I will try to keep this in mind on my next re-watch!

> I have no interest

I know.

😂

I think the arcade thing was real but the Peyton thing was just him being playful, because they both know it isn't true.

The sugar scene is just to push forward the plot point where she realizes he's been stalling in that barn or whatever it is.

>I think the arcade thing was real but the Peyton thing was just him being playful, because they both know it isn't true.

Yeah, I can see that. I guess I've always viewed it from a slightly different angle, where misdirection is his motivation.

>The sugar scene is just to push forward the plot point where she realizes he's been stalling in that barn or whatever it is

I have no problem with it on its own, it was more to do with it immediately following the whole misdirection scene with the middle name conversation. I can now see there's a different intention in that dialogue, so the following scenes flow better.

If you really stop and think about it, the whole idea of her being so reticent to share her past or get to know Cage is kind of nonsensical. I get that she is trying to spare him pain, but it's not like she is going to remember and he can't help but feel something for her no matter how little she chooses to share.

Yes, that's a tough one. I think it's more empathy from her side, given that she once fell in love with Hendrix (or at least that's implied). I guess she wants to save him from that pain, especially as she'll be the one experiencing a stranger falling in love with her. She can only ever know him for a matter of hours or days, whereas Cage has known her (or at least been around her) for many possible lifetimes.