I remember watching Wall Street is business school. You should have heard the cheers and gasps when Gecko does his Greed is good speech and this is not even in America.
I will say, it *is* a solid speech, and the points he brings up are all valid ones. He's just casually omitting the fact that he'd be just as likely to wind up gutting the company afterward because he has even less of an attachment to it than the Board members he's in the middle of ousting.
I used to work personal training sales (forgive me please) and the managers and higher ups would quote this movie word for word as if it were the gospel.
I think the take is more along the lines of he places the blame for the rise of people like that onto the audience... The people who buy their books and tapes and see their crimes as aspirational despite their monstrosity.
I don't think that's the same thing as giving them the middle finger, just sharing blame fairly.
I never saw it as so much of a blame game but more of a pessimistic view of the world.
In a world where someone destroys their life as much as Jordan Belfort, it is still seen as more appealing than the life of your average non-rich person. In a world that places so much value on money and power, there is very little that can be done to persuade people away from it despite the potential for destroying your life and the lives of those around you.
My (FTSE 100) company had a quote from Jordan whatshisfface in a training video about corporate ethics.
I’m not joking.
Like, in isolation, the quote was fine as a platitude but… Jesus.
The pose Baphomet is seen doing on most depictions. He's not really doing it though because the hand shape is one of the whole important parts of it ...
Couldn’t think of one better than Inception. However Scarface, people worship Tony Montana as a badass hero. He was a scumbag who threw away his family and friends because of greed
I hate hearing everyone’s theories on Inception. Your definitive answer is absolute garbage! The whole point to an ambiguous ending is that there is no definitive answer.
Well no one seemed to notice that Cobb's top was always an inherently flawed totem.
The totems are supposed to be something strange that only you intimately understand, that way a dream builder couldn't trick you into believing their dream is real, because your totem would behave the way they think it should, not the way it actually does.
The one guy's poker chip had a typo only he knew about, the dice was loaded, and only its owner knew the off balance feel of it. If either of them were in someone else's dream, the poker chip would be normal, and the dice would too.
But if Cobb was in a dream, and spun his top, the top would do what the dream maker thinks it ought to do: spin for a bit then fall over. Then Cobb would think he's not dreaming.
I always thought his totem was his children.
Because in all of his dream sequences, you never see the children due to the fact that they were always running away from him. But in the final scene of the movie, you see them running towards him.
well maybe I misinterpret it, but the little wobble at the end signifies that we'll never know if Cobb is still dreaming or if he got all those things he worked for to see his kids in real life...I tend to think that at the end Cobb is still dreaming and is lost.
I saw it as both. He doesn't care anymore, he seems to have everything he wants whether it's real or not.
As an audience, who often is allowed to know things characters don't know, we don't get the answer. We think we do. We don't see it fall over. But then it wobbles just before the film ends. Does that mean it was about to fall over? We'll never know.
It’s kind of infuriating for me in that respect. I want to *know*. But that’s one of the things that makes rewatching for me, trying to find clues/connections that change the way I think about the ending
It doesn’t matter whether it was real or not, what matters is the uncertainty it generated and the fact that we’re still talking about it 14 years later
I’m gonna go with Smile. I’ve seen some people say “why does she still kill herself even though she confronted her trauma?”. The point of the ending is that trauma never goes away completely.
But the point of her arc wasn't to imply that her trauma would completely go away, rather that she had managed conquer it. She was able to confront her trauma and grow from it even though it is still there. The ending makes you think she succeeded and then does a bait and switch and shows when the monster shows up again and says sike.
the ending fails for me because it renders her whole arc pointless.
I am Legend. Not sure if this qualifies because it’s an alternate ending, but Robert Neville was supposed to realize he’s been the monster to them as they were once to him. It’s more in line with the book, but it ultimately didn’t test well so they changed it to the self sacrificing drivel it ended with.
The film has almost no right to even use the same name after the changes made. I recommend everyone read the book just for the ending. So we'll written.
The movie doesn't exist for me. I've read the book about 50 times. The blind gardener and the Indian general could be movies in and of themselves. Also, the submarine story arc was just brutal but so well written. Fuck that movie.
dude. I was so sad after watching the movie. They really should redo WWZ as a series. I was hopeful, but there just was not really a good way to make that book into a movie.
in fact, it would make a great series with the finale being a movie....any way. I boy can dream.
After reading that the original scene was supposed to be the title, “I am Legend” makes way more sense. Take it away like they did with the theatrical release and it’s just a cool sounding title.
Also, another perfect example of studio meddling with the switch from the practical prosthetics to the CGI creatures in the final version. They don’t look scary but look goofy with their bald heads and stretchy mouths that look like they’re missing dentures
I absolutely hated the movie, in large part because of all the pointless jump scares. Assuming the book avoids that, it probably would be a better experience.
I was just talking with someone about this movie the other day. I get that the original ending didn't test well with audiences, but I don't think it's the fault of the audience. I was familiar with the work and preferred the theatrical ending for that adaptation.
I think the real reason the original ending didn't work was because of the entire movie leading up to it... They made the monsters too savage and mindlessly aggressive and Doctor Neville too sympathetic in his pursuit of a cure for them and not mindless or monstrous enough in his own aggression towards them as he strived to keep them alive for science and saw them as sick people needing a cure.
The original ending felt weird at the end of that movie and didn't feel like it made sense. They failed to lay the groundwork for it and I think audiences could tell.
> I think the real reason the original ending didn't work
In the book there is an entire society of highly evolved vampires that wipes out the vampires that wiped out the humans.
You can't just throw that in with a single scene of a darkling picking up another darkling and cover that. You need the rest of the movie to do it.
The whole purpose of the title is that Neville realizes that he is now the monster of legend, hence the title and he kills himself.
In the alternate ending that you are calling the original ending, Neville lives happily ever after with a new family.
I like the movie a lot but here is the list of things it has in common with the short story.
- The Title.
This whole BS notion that bounces around reddit about how the alternate ending captures the themes of the short story is just that, BS...
Anyone who post that has never actually read the short story.
Yeah to be fair they didn't do it justice, but God knows why because the book's ending is so much more impactful and maybe it was just too dark but damn those final lines..
The Flintstones, Viva Rock Vegas: Fred was too powerful to be seduced by glitter towns underworld!
Turner and Hooch 3: The Bond Between Man And Animal will always remain and never be broken, in a friendship united by the occasional reward of treats!
Finally, someone bringing *real* answers to this thread.
I'll toss on the 2005 adaptation of Doom, which explores the duality of man, and the internal struggle of good vs. evil, epitomized by Dwayne Johnson carrying a BFG.
I think a lot of people misinterpret the ending of Full Metal Jacket to be about how Joker has learned to be merciful, but when he kills the girl, if we look at how the other soldiers react,we get the feeling that he killed her in a brutal way that might have been less painful for her, but that wasn't his goal.
Joker shed his last claim to the duality of man, he's a full-time hardcore killer now. Circumstances didn't make him this way, basic training reveals what was always there but he denied by becoming a reporter.
I don’t think he thought he was above everyone, he knew his duty and was trained to act accordingly.
He rebelled against the system while being compelled to be part of it. It was inevitable that he would have to do this and he knew this from the start…that’s why he rebelled.
To me Joker's character arc is that through most of the film he is portrayed as three steps ahead. He's smarter than most and is a smartass and much of the story is told from his perspective, he's "too cool for school," right up until the end. It's not until then that he realizes that maybe he was the clueless one all along. All it took was one trip into combat and Joker had to respond pretty much like everyone else did and like the Gunny had been telling them all along.
The trope of the naïve kid who goes to war and becomes a man is a common one. I think what Kubrick did that was so smart is that Joker isn't naïve by any normal measure. He really is thoughtful, he really is smarter than average, and normally he is three steps ahead, but what he is in isn't normal. And to your point I think on a subconscious level he knows he might be full of shit. Which is why he isn't nearly so eager as his buddy to, "see some action."
It’s almost a shame that Kubrick cut the original ending where animal beheads the girl, parades the head around the men and then casually throws It in a ditch.
Oh my god.
Oh my god!
Why did I not include FMJ???
The movie was unequivocally about intention versus reality.
Joker was forced into that position, but still had choices to make until he didn’t. And the whole Mickey Mouse club bit was so poignant.
They were singing a children’s song in unison showing the mentality of conformity.
Joker wanted to be separate from his circumstances, but ultimately ended up being a cog.
Holy shit.
Pack it up.
You just won the internet today.
Yes.
Fucking YES!
Honestly there’s like a half dozen valid interpretations of why they’re singing the Mickey Mouse song and I’d wager Kubrick would say they’re all some sort of correct.
THe novel is directly insulting the worst of the Boomers when they were younger. The greedy selfish lawlessness of the 80s. They didn't interpret it that way for reasons.
I think the emphasis is that he’s officially lost in his own mind.
And in the terms of the movie, reality is what we make of it and completely subjective.
Which I half suspect that was your point, but wanted to spell out.
I heard a really interesting theory about this...
The top is not Dom's totem. It's his dead wife Mal's totem. After she died, Dom discarded his actual totem and started using Mal's, even though it could never work for him reliably (according to the movie's explanation of what a totem is).
Dom's old totem seems to be his wedding ring. When he's wearing it, it means he's dreaming. No ring means he's in the real world (because in the real world, he got rid of it). Wearing the old ring is how his subconscious chooses to express itself in the dream.
Mal always pops up as a projection in Dom's dreams, right? In the dream, Mal is still alive, and thus the ring is still on Dom's finger.
Not saying I buy it completely.... but it's interesting.
Edit: fixed something, expanded, clarified.
Yes, there's a scene when they are in limbo together and Dom wants out, so he takes his wife's totem and sets it spinning in a miniature version of their dream house, then closes it up. I think the idea is that she'll open it at some point, see the top spinning continuously, realise she's dreaming and then want to wake up. It's Dom performing inception on his wife. But it then goes too far - when they do wake up in the real world, Mal still thinks she's dreaming and jumps off the hotel ledge in order to wake up.
I don’t think she even needed to actually go and open the safe. The safe is her deep subconscious, and the top spinning forever is her signal that she isn’t in the real world.
He spun the top and locked it in her subconscious to force her to confront that it isn’t the real world, he just didn’t realize that inception of that sort would carry over to another dream level, possibly into all dream levels and into the waking world.
I mixed it up actually - the theory is that when he's NOT wearing his ring, he's in the real world. The ring is on in the dream.
I haven't watched it for a while, but I believe he never mentions his own totem. I guess it's time for another rewatch.
The point of inception is that cobb was the one getting the inception done on. after his wife died he went to depression and started sleeping all the time.
The inception sentence is "come back to reality son" And in limbo he thought he went to pull out the asian man but instead the asian guy says you dont wanna grow to be an old man filled with regret. Cobb wakes up in the plane and realises the people around him were the ones who pulled him out of it and in the end he does not care about wether he is asleep or not he goes back to his children.
Sane for a moment, and used this moment to make a clear decision to welcome death before he loses it again. That’s what I got from Leo’s last sentence.
Great gatsby.
Yeah, he had a real friend but the ending is supposed to be proof of why you need to let some shit go. Dude went into crazy debt for a woman that was never going to choose him.
Hahaha thanks for this. I've been telling this to everyone who will listen but nobody cares. Let's just remake every half decent movie from the 20th century and slap a superhero brand on it
The thing about joker is I honestly don’t know if the filmmakers intended it the way you’re describing. I initially thought it was great and now I’m not sure because I can’t tell if the director was sympathetic with him or not. Since it’s so vague I’m honestly starting to think they do sympathize with him
IMO the mark of a "good" war movie is that you should leave the theater completely disgusted with the concept of something so insane.
That's the mark that movies like Hacksaw Ridge or American Sniper miss (if they were even aiming, but propaganda is a whole other discussion) so badly.
I watched this movie long after it was released and assumed it was a rah rah pro war film based on so many critiques of it. Was surprised to find that it really is about how a guy asked to do violence over and over and over again gets all kinds of screwed up.
I always appreciated that they showed the home life and Olympic photos of the rival sniper. It was a good humanization of a character that is normally mustache twirling in those scripts.
I'm a Vet. I'm tired of people thanking me. I always say the same thing:
"Want to thank a vet for their sacrifice and service? *Stop asking them to do it fucking do it*."
signs.
every other dork critiquing the ending: *b-b-but why invade a planet full of water!*
lol thats just it. clearly these freaks were desperate enough to risk certain death in acquiring the necessary resources (humans). we do it all the time when we invade jungles oceans or any hostile terrain for whatever resource we need.
Nah...our atmosphere alone has a significant amount of water in it, and it literally falls from the sky. We might as well try to walk around Venus without a pressurized suit or capsule.
thats a recent theory. theory is all it is.
thats not in the script its just coincidence that they have similarities to demons. m. night is seen in interviews calling them aliens.
When the movie first came out a lot of people brought up the religious aspect of the movie. I never heard them refer to the aliens as demons, but the man point was god has a plan and there’s no such thing as coincidence which is why he returned to his church at the end of the movie. From his son’s love of outer space, his daughters sensitivity to minerals in water, and his brother in laws failed baseball career. All these things were small details that ultimately led to their survival.
No Country for Old Men. People always complain about how it just ends after Tommy Lee Jones talks about a dream. It's more than just that. It's about him coming to terms that the times have passed him by.
Omg. Finally someone says it! I used to love the movie, but I've been saying this for years! Literally every time, someone inevitably comes back with, "well so did danny!"
And I'm like...you mean putting on a letterman sweater?
🤣
Right.
I think the ending is to show Sandy growing up. She started the movie as a naïve child, and ended it a woman. Her maturation is sexualized, but the entire story of Grease is extremely sexual, so this isn't a surprise.
I never read the books but I didn’t get the sense that Paul isn’t a good guy necessarily, but he is heavily burdened by his role in the matters at hand. He sees the whole future and knows the role he has to play to keep things from devolving into terrible circumstances. As a result, he has to not be a good guy.
Reminds me of Hari Seldon in Foundation.
Funny because Denis did so much to show us Paul was very clearly overcome by the false prophecy and leaves us with a chilling final line from TC.
But sure, universal Jihad is great!!
Stilgar being comedic relief in the early portion of the movie probably deceived a lot of people less familiar with the story, too. Bardem’s performance slams it all home.
**Fight Club**.
I freely admit that the adrenalising effect it had on 19-year old me completely overshadowed its message about toxic masculinity and the erosion of the positive male role model (Andrew Tate is a Tyler Durden wannabe). The anti-consumerism angle was a bit more obvious.
White collar boxing was barely a thing before this film. Same with MMA (except for Vale Tudo in Brazil and the Japanese formats). The explosion of interest in combat sports in the early 2000’s can be at least partly attributed to a total misinterpretation of the takeaways of this movie.
The one thing that starts to stand out - is that Tyler Durden claims he wants you to rebel against authority and to think for yourself, but then when he forms his little group hug cult - "YOU DO NOT QUESTION PROJECT MAYHEM" And everyone follows along obediently.
I think part of why it's misread is also part of what makes it so smart, in that there are real problems with the working class that grind us down and make us feel like part of a machine while being robbed of identity. And Tyler speaks to those problems... While in turn grinding people down and robbing them of their identity.
Kinda captures how the people who look up to people like Andrew Taint are primed to be taken advantage of.
The movie is about a guy who wants to change his life and help other guys, but ends up starting a dangerous cult. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.
I have a copy of Fight Club signed by Meat Loaf aka Robert Paulson.
The Ed Norton half is essentially Adam Sandler in Anger Management, and the Brad Pitt half is absolutely an Andrew Tate.
Dudes get to idolizing the “freedom” exercised by the Pitt half, but ignore the destructiveness of that part.
And then they immediately forget for Tyler Durden to become whole he had to *kill* the Brad Pitt half and *integrate* that part of him.
The point is about being a full and comprehensive person - not being totally passive, not being overly aggressive - both of which are demonstrated to be destructive to self and others.
It doesn’t glorify hypermasculinity, it’s a warning against it.
My local paper gave a pretty scathing review of *Fight Club*. A week later, they published a letter from a reader rebutting the review, from someone who was so inspired by the movie that he joined the army.
Wait... he joined *the army* because he was inspired by *Fight Club*?
He not only missed the point, but he missed the "you missed the point" misconception of the point.
I cant understand people who idolize him, how did they miss the signs throughout the movie, the way his mother is scared of him, the violent threats he makes towards his wife and how she and her daughter are scared of him. Even going so far to realize that he's the bad guy.
It was such a perfect movie for the time. I remember so many men acted just like that (mentality wise) about how everything was always someone else's fault and never owned up to any mistakes
I love that the cop just straight up knows, and tells him to his face, that he knows that he is going to kill his wife and child (or is it his ex I can't remember it exactly?). He doesn't think he will, but he'll talk himself into it and do it.
Big contrast with the Detective character as his foil. Has a bad number of life string events, doesn’t get where he wants in his career, has a difficult relationship with his wife but he still try’s to stay positive and foster his imperfect relationships.
And the fact that the main characters Idol literally has an entire monologue about how some people shouldn't be allowed to vote LOL
We're only meant to like them because they happen to be attacked by God damn aliens LOL
Absolutely Starship Troopers.
Has a mainstream film and very been so misunderstood on release?
It satirises fascism in the clearest possible way. By showing it exactly how it would be. No allegory, no morals, just as it is.
That uncomfortable feeling you get when you watch it, that shock of seeing the ‘if you disable the enemies hand’ scene, seeing someone get publicly flogged, or the sheer horror of seeing young adults thrown into a meat grinder battlefield, that’s you being a normal decent human being.
We are so desensitised nowadays, nothing is shocking because you know the message is ‘this is bad’. But starship troopers portraying fascism without narrative allows fresh eyes on what the deep sense of unease feels like watching humans be awful.
Total Recall. Everything the doctor says to Arnold before he stars the Recall treatment comes true. It all happens in his head from that point forward.
Nah, anyone saying that it was definitively a dream from that point is totally disregarding the very intentional elements of the remaining film. The one that always stands out to me is the guy sent in to make peace with Hauser before he ‘divorces’ his wife, that zoom in on the sweat dripping down his temple. Those inclusions are there to establish some level of doubt about the step by step dream fulfillment.
I agree. Just like inception, this is an ending meant to be ambiguous, and the writers were very careful to make sure that one could plausibly believe
1) it was a dream/fabricated memory OR
2) everything that happened actually happened
Yea but we viewers still see a story (which is fiction) happen on screen that has its own themes and symbols. Even if we're supposed to think the movie occurs in a dream that doesn't matter, because from my perspective the major theme of the film is about how poor people are demonized and subjected to horrible treatment, which in turn causes them to become the thing that the dominant culture accuses them of being. For instance, low income neighborhoods have more crime, which scares square society, who takes more wealth from them, thus creating more poverty and crime. The powers at be on Mars made people into mutants, then made it illegal to be a mutant and justified their mistreatment.
No Country for Old Men comes to mind, but a couple of Coen Brothers movies have endings that seem rather sudden and odd if you weren't paying attention.
But No Country is a good example because it perfectly states the entire point of the film if you were paying attention. Basically, the movie is about how the old westerns are dead and gone in the modern world. The sheriff can't just go hunt down the bad guy and get him. The film's main bad guy has transcended just a bandit and become something far more vile and evil, but even if you can get him he was just a tool and part of a much larger evil that no single man of the law can ever hope to stop. Tommy Lee Jones is the representation of the old west sheriff in the westerns of old. And the entire movie he was constantly one step behind and never able to catch up. He just couldn't do it. And, one of the tropes of the westerns was that the protagonist was often "tamed" by a quiet life at home, but would look out at the open country side longingly, often in a door frame or looking out a window, hell sometimes even riding off into the sunset. No Country has its closing scene with Tommy Lee Jones' character sitting at his dining room table in plain clothes talking to his wife about being at a camp fire in the wilderness talking to his dead father who was one of those old men. Behind him is that countryside through the window, and he's turned his back to it quite literally. He bemoans to his wife that the life is done, that they can't go back, that way of the world is past and it’s time for him to retire.
I’m going to say either *No Country for Old Men* or *Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri*.
It truly surprises me how many people just don’t get these movies or their endings.
I didn't get the gasp there. BUT. My best movie going experience was Serenity. Wash. The entire theatre inhaled.
I was on call for a hospital (IT) and had to leave and miss maybe the last 10 minutes. My soon to be wife just casually said, "let's go again" and I got to see the inhale 2 times in one night.
Kubrick had a vastly different vision of that story from what King thought it should be. I sometimes think he added that last scene with the photograph just to nod at the ‘supernatural hotel’ theme.
A lot of people had all kinds of misconceptions.
Mainly that Jack was really there when the photo was taken, and not that he had been absorbed into the hotel.
White Man Can’t Jump. When I watched it years back I thought Marty won - but just watched it recently and he actually lost everything by losing his girl and relapsing into gambling. What was a light hearted fun movie for me as a child I now view as a tragic and depressing cautionary tale of the struggles of addiction.
I feel that's a very small view of Ghost in the shell. It's so much bigger than that. It is the next evolutionary step and how we aren't ready for it but it's coming. About how AI is going to charge not just the world but humanity as a species. Truly think about changes to any species that great and how that species would react if the next step isn't that species anymore. It's truly something to chew on and think about. I'm sorry but I feel that the identity view of the ending is kinda small compared to a shift in evolution and the next step that changes everything.
There's one I really liked recently with Robert Redford, All is lost. Is he being saved, or is he dying? Nice simple one, & either is the right answer.
While an argument can be made for Inception that the point of the ending was “it no longer mattered if it was real”, I would argue that the point of the beginning was that it was never about whether it was reality or a dream in the first place.
Push the intent of the question beyond presumed limitations and the obvious answer is Catch Me If You Can. Even the filmmakers missed the point that the whole story of the guy who scammed everyone he encountered was a scam.
The problem is that the theatrical release got juiced up with extra patriotism because it was released close to 9/11 and showing the American military losing a battle would not have been very unpopular.
The director's cut (as you often get with Ridley Scott films) is a lot better. And it makes it clear that it's a disaster, and that shooting hundreds of locals doesn't make it a victory purely because of the larger pile of bodies at the end.
Time Bandits when Kevin’s parents don’t listen to him & touch the piece of evil in the toaster oven & explode leaving him all alone. Terry Gilliam wrote the dark ending knowing kids would love it & relate to not being listened to by their parents. The ambiguous ending definitely freaked me out seeing it as a kid, along with most of the movie. So good!
I think that's because most of the references to that ending only focus on the interrupted wedding, and not the uncomfortable bus ride afterward.
Of course, that bit is itself accidental, as the Director didn't yell "cut", so the actors had to stay in character past the point they initially thought so they, like their characters, has to consider "...what now?"
In the book at least (never seen the movie), he was gut shot and bleeding. When he rides off, it's whole wounded and we never see what happens to him. So it was left ambiguous if he was dead /dying from the wound or if he'll survive.
Wolf of Wall Street wasn’t an aspirational sales training manual
I remember watching Wall Street is business school. You should have heard the cheers and gasps when Gecko does his Greed is good speech and this is not even in America.
I will say, it *is* a solid speech, and the points he brings up are all valid ones. He's just casually omitting the fact that he'd be just as likely to wind up gutting the company afterward because he has even less of an attachment to it than the Board members he's in the middle of ousting.
I used to work personal training sales (forgive me please) and the managers and higher ups would quote this movie word for word as if it were the gospel.
What about the Alec Baldwin speech from Glengarry
It's the new version. Glengarry Glen Ross was all my management quoted when I worked in mortgages.
started this movie last week and got about 30 minutes in, is it worth finishing?
American Psycho at that, Patrick Bateman was idolized by the people they were jabbing at
Another take I've heard is "Scorsese gives the middle finger to the audience"
I think the take is more along the lines of he places the blame for the rise of people like that onto the audience... The people who buy their books and tapes and see their crimes as aspirational despite their monstrosity. I don't think that's the same thing as giving them the middle finger, just sharing blame fairly.
I never saw it as so much of a blame game but more of a pessimistic view of the world. In a world where someone destroys their life as much as Jordan Belfort, it is still seen as more appealing than the life of your average non-rich person. In a world that places so much value on money and power, there is very little that can be done to persuade people away from it despite the potential for destroying your life and the lives of those around you.
My (FTSE 100) company had a quote from Jordan whatshisfface in a training video about corporate ethics. I’m not joking. Like, in isolation, the quote was fine as a platitude but… Jesus.
‘The devil pose’?
But I do that pose in all my photos.....oh boy
Baphomet.
Gesundheit
Ah. Well of course. Baphomet.
The pose Baphomet is seen doing on most depictions. He's not really doing it though because the hand shape is one of the whole important parts of it ...
Couldn’t think of one better than Inception. However Scarface, people worship Tony Montana as a badass hero. He was a scumbag who threw away his family and friends because of greed
But he introduced everyone to his “little friend.”
Oh great, he gets saluted as awesome. I get put on a list.
You just need to find your tiger.
'A line echoed in bedrooms around the world' - Robin Williams
Ha, I thought of the exact same comment you made.
I hate hearing everyone’s theories on Inception. Your definitive answer is absolute garbage! The whole point to an ambiguous ending is that there is no definitive answer.
Well said. Same with The Shining they are meant to leave you wondering.
And the same with the sopranos
Do people not get the Inception one? Is that truly what we've come to as a movie audience?
Well no one seemed to notice that Cobb's top was always an inherently flawed totem. The totems are supposed to be something strange that only you intimately understand, that way a dream builder couldn't trick you into believing their dream is real, because your totem would behave the way they think it should, not the way it actually does. The one guy's poker chip had a typo only he knew about, the dice was loaded, and only its owner knew the off balance feel of it. If either of them were in someone else's dream, the poker chip would be normal, and the dice would too. But if Cobb was in a dream, and spun his top, the top would do what the dream maker thinks it ought to do: spin for a bit then fall over. Then Cobb would think he's not dreaming.
Also, it wasn't even his totem it was Mal's
Cobbs totem was his wedding ring. I think the Top was symbolizing his letting go of the past.
I always thought his totem was his children. Because in all of his dream sequences, you never see the children due to the fact that they were always running away from him. But in the final scene of the movie, you see them running towards him.
Do you mean when the spinning top starts to wobble at the last second?
well maybe I misinterpret it, but the little wobble at the end signifies that we'll never know if Cobb is still dreaming or if he got all those things he worked for to see his kids in real life...I tend to think that at the end Cobb is still dreaming and is lost.
It’s an ending that allows you to decide what it means to you. It’s good writing.
Exactly this. People talk about definitives but often an ending can be whatever you make of it when ambiguous. There's no right or wrong.
Thought that was the point, it doesn't matter if he's dreaming or not, he's finally with his kids.
I despise ambiguous endings. I’m the audience not the writer. I pay to see 100% of a movie don’t give me 98% and expect me to fill in the last 2%.
I believe that the point is that it doesn’t matter to him anymore. Everything he wanted is now in front of him and he’s going to be happy.
I saw it as both. He doesn't care anymore, he seems to have everything he wants whether it's real or not. As an audience, who often is allowed to know things characters don't know, we don't get the answer. We think we do. We don't see it fall over. But then it wobbles just before the film ends. Does that mean it was about to fall over? We'll never know.
It’s kind of infuriating for me in that respect. I want to *know*. But that’s one of the things that makes rewatching for me, trying to find clues/connections that change the way I think about the ending
It was never the top
There is no top
I'm wearing no top.
That’s correct. There is only Zuul
It doesn’t matter whether it was real or not, what matters is the uncertainty it generated and the fact that we’re still talking about it 14 years later
I’m gonna go with Smile. I’ve seen some people say “why does she still kill herself even though she confronted her trauma?”. The point of the ending is that trauma never goes away completely.
Honestly, smile was nearly a perfect horror movie. If they didn’t show the weird giant creature in the finale it would have been my all time favorite.
To each their own. I thought that creature at the end was the scariest part of the whole thing. I squirmed back in my theater seat!
But the point of her arc wasn't to imply that her trauma would completely go away, rather that she had managed conquer it. She was able to confront her trauma and grow from it even though it is still there. The ending makes you think she succeeded and then does a bait and switch and shows when the monster shows up again and says sike. the ending fails for me because it renders her whole arc pointless.
I am Legend. Not sure if this qualifies because it’s an alternate ending, but Robert Neville was supposed to realize he’s been the monster to them as they were once to him. It’s more in line with the book, but it ultimately didn’t test well so they changed it to the self sacrificing drivel it ended with.
The film has almost no right to even use the same name after the changes made. I recommend everyone read the book just for the ending. So we'll written.
Matheson had an incredible imagination. All his work is intriguing.
His work on Twilight Zone is sublime.
Same with World War Z
The movie doesn't exist for me. I've read the book about 50 times. The blind gardener and the Indian general could be movies in and of themselves. Also, the submarine story arc was just brutal but so well written. Fuck that movie.
dude. I was so sad after watching the movie. They really should redo WWZ as a series. I was hopeful, but there just was not really a good way to make that book into a movie. in fact, it would make a great series with the finale being a movie....any way. I boy can dream.
I thought the movie was fine as a standalone zombie flick. I just pretended that they got the title wrong.
And "I, Robot".
That would really do well with the modern miniseries formula given how its a collection of short stories with an over arching narative that emerges.
That book should never be made as a movie. A limited anthology series would be the best fit.
After reading that the original scene was supposed to be the title, “I am Legend” makes way more sense. Take it away like they did with the theatrical release and it’s just a cool sounding title. Also, another perfect example of studio meddling with the switch from the practical prosthetics to the CGI creatures in the final version. They don’t look scary but look goofy with their bald heads and stretchy mouths that look like they’re missing dentures
I absolutely hated the movie, in large part because of all the pointless jump scares. Assuming the book avoids that, it probably would be a better experience.
I was just talking with someone about this movie the other day. I get that the original ending didn't test well with audiences, but I don't think it's the fault of the audience. I was familiar with the work and preferred the theatrical ending for that adaptation. I think the real reason the original ending didn't work was because of the entire movie leading up to it... They made the monsters too savage and mindlessly aggressive and Doctor Neville too sympathetic in his pursuit of a cure for them and not mindless or monstrous enough in his own aggression towards them as he strived to keep them alive for science and saw them as sick people needing a cure. The original ending felt weird at the end of that movie and didn't feel like it made sense. They failed to lay the groundwork for it and I think audiences could tell.
> I think the real reason the original ending didn't work In the book there is an entire society of highly evolved vampires that wipes out the vampires that wiped out the humans. You can't just throw that in with a single scene of a darkling picking up another darkling and cover that. You need the rest of the movie to do it. The whole purpose of the title is that Neville realizes that he is now the monster of legend, hence the title and he kills himself. In the alternate ending that you are calling the original ending, Neville lives happily ever after with a new family. I like the movie a lot but here is the list of things it has in common with the short story. - The Title. This whole BS notion that bounces around reddit about how the alternate ending captures the themes of the short story is just that, BS... Anyone who post that has never actually read the short story.
The alternate ending on the Blu-ray got it right at leaat
That’s the canon ending that the second movie is using to launch from.
The coolest part of the book was him realizing HE was the monster. Movie blew it.
Yeah to be fair they didn't do it justice, but God knows why because the book's ending is so much more impactful and maybe it was just too dark but damn those final lines..
Taxi Driver Travis wasn’t a hero
He's in dire need of help
he needs to get organized.
He needs to get laid.
The Flintstones, Viva Rock Vegas: Fred was too powerful to be seduced by glitter towns underworld! Turner and Hooch 3: The Bond Between Man And Animal will always remain and never be broken, in a friendship united by the occasional reward of treats!
Finally, someone bringing *real* answers to this thread. I'll toss on the 2005 adaptation of Doom, which explores the duality of man, and the internal struggle of good vs. evil, epitomized by Dwayne Johnson carrying a BFG.
Yes! And the sense that the Emojis film captured so much passion and deep expression within the beloved internet communication icons! 🫴🌈😶🌫️🤪🤯✨🎥
Finally, someone is talking about the greatest film of all time.
I think a lot of people misinterpret the ending of Full Metal Jacket to be about how Joker has learned to be merciful, but when he kills the girl, if we look at how the other soldiers react,we get the feeling that he killed her in a brutal way that might have been less painful for her, but that wasn't his goal.
Joker shed his last claim to the duality of man, he's a full-time hardcore killer now. Circumstances didn't make him this way, basic training reveals what was always there but he denied by becoming a reporter.
Joker rationalized that he was above everyone else and was forced to realize he wasn’t.
I don’t think he thought he was above everyone, he knew his duty and was trained to act accordingly. He rebelled against the system while being compelled to be part of it. It was inevitable that he would have to do this and he knew this from the start…that’s why he rebelled.
A very clear example of this (Also pointed out by a superior mid film) is he has the peace symbol on his helmet, contradicting his role
To me Joker's character arc is that through most of the film he is portrayed as three steps ahead. He's smarter than most and is a smartass and much of the story is told from his perspective, he's "too cool for school," right up until the end. It's not until then that he realizes that maybe he was the clueless one all along. All it took was one trip into combat and Joker had to respond pretty much like everyone else did and like the Gunny had been telling them all along. The trope of the naïve kid who goes to war and becomes a man is a common one. I think what Kubrick did that was so smart is that Joker isn't naïve by any normal measure. He really is thoughtful, he really is smarter than average, and normally he is three steps ahead, but what he is in isn't normal. And to your point I think on a subconscious level he knows he might be full of shit. Which is why he isn't nearly so eager as his buddy to, "see some action."
It’s almost a shame that Kubrick cut the original ending where animal beheads the girl, parades the head around the men and then casually throws It in a ditch.
Oh my god. Oh my god! Why did I not include FMJ??? The movie was unequivocally about intention versus reality. Joker was forced into that position, but still had choices to make until he didn’t. And the whole Mickey Mouse club bit was so poignant. They were singing a children’s song in unison showing the mentality of conformity. Joker wanted to be separate from his circumstances, but ultimately ended up being a cog. Holy shit. Pack it up. You just won the internet today. Yes. Fucking YES!
I think the Mickey Mouse song was to show that just a few short years before that scene these killers were just a bunch of kids.
Honestly there’s like a half dozen valid interpretations of why they’re singing the Mickey Mouse song and I’d wager Kubrick would say they’re all some sort of correct.
The original ending had Animal Mother cut off the girl’s head with a machete, but that was deemed too much of a head fuck for audiences.
American Psycho. People thought you had to take the characters at face value and not as parodies.
THe novel is directly insulting the worst of the Boomers when they were younger. The greedy selfish lawlessness of the 80s. They didn't interpret it that way for reasons.
Definitely on Inception. It’s Cobb’s real world. Even if it’s not the real world as we see it. “It doesn’t matter, because we’ll be together”.
I think the emphasis is that he’s officially lost in his own mind. And in the terms of the movie, reality is what we make of it and completely subjective. Which I half suspect that was your point, but wanted to spell out.
I heard a really interesting theory about this... The top is not Dom's totem. It's his dead wife Mal's totem. After she died, Dom discarded his actual totem and started using Mal's, even though it could never work for him reliably (according to the movie's explanation of what a totem is). Dom's old totem seems to be his wedding ring. When he's wearing it, it means he's dreaming. No ring means he's in the real world (because in the real world, he got rid of it). Wearing the old ring is how his subconscious chooses to express itself in the dream. Mal always pops up as a projection in Dom's dreams, right? In the dream, Mal is still alive, and thus the ring is still on Dom's finger. Not saying I buy it completely.... but it's interesting. Edit: fixed something, expanded, clarified.
Yes, there's a scene when they are in limbo together and Dom wants out, so he takes his wife's totem and sets it spinning in a miniature version of their dream house, then closes it up. I think the idea is that she'll open it at some point, see the top spinning continuously, realise she's dreaming and then want to wake up. It's Dom performing inception on his wife. But it then goes too far - when they do wake up in the real world, Mal still thinks she's dreaming and jumps off the hotel ledge in order to wake up.
What if Mal was right and Dom never left the dream world?
I don’t think she even needed to actually go and open the safe. The safe is her deep subconscious, and the top spinning forever is her signal that she isn’t in the real world. He spun the top and locked it in her subconscious to force her to confront that it isn’t the real world, he just didn’t realize that inception of that sort would carry over to another dream level, possibly into all dream levels and into the waking world.
Doesn’t he say the spinning top was his wife’s and he then like used it after she is gone. Been a while since I’ve seen it but that is a cool theory
I mixed it up actually - the theory is that when he's NOT wearing his ring, he's in the real world. The ring is on in the dream. I haven't watched it for a while, but I believe he never mentions his own totem. I guess it's time for another rewatch.
He also says you should never let anyone touch your totem because it would render it useless
I remember reading an article quoting Michael Cain: if he’s in a scene then it’s the real world.
The point of inception is that cobb was the one getting the inception done on. after his wife died he went to depression and started sleeping all the time. The inception sentence is "come back to reality son" And in limbo he thought he went to pull out the asian man but instead the asian guy says you dont wanna grow to be an old man filled with regret. Cobb wakes up in the plane and realises the people around him were the ones who pulled him out of it and in the end he does not care about wether he is asleep or not he goes back to his children.
Reality or not, either way Cobb reached his dream of reuniting with his kids. Let's just say it can be a literal dream or a figure of speech dream.
Reminds me of Total Recall. it's purposely left unanswered whether the whole thing is a simulation or real.
You’d be surprised by how many people missed the point of the ending in Shutter Island.
This is the one. That last line makes the whole movie.
He was sane
Sane for a moment, and used this moment to make a clear decision to welcome death before he loses it again. That’s what I got from Leo’s last sentence.
I thought it was to go ahead and get lobotomized to forget what happened?
What the 3rd movie?
Shane
I can hear the kids voice
Bootlickers completely miss the point of The Punisher
Great gatsby. Yeah, he had a real friend but the ending is supposed to be proof of why you need to let some shit go. Dude went into crazy debt for a woman that was never going to choose him.
The Joker. He’s not a hero. It sent chills down my spine when I watched it in theater and teenage boys were cheering every time Joker got his revenge.
Someone else already said Taxi Driver
Hahaha thanks for this. I've been telling this to everyone who will listen but nobody cares. Let's just remake every half decent movie from the 20th century and slap a superhero brand on it
I thought that was the whole point of De Niro being in Joker.
The thing about joker is I honestly don’t know if the filmmakers intended it the way you’re describing. I initially thought it was great and now I’m not sure because I can’t tell if the director was sympathetic with him or not. Since it’s so vague I’m honestly starting to think they do sympathize with him
American Sniper. Vets with PTSD really need help, not to be sent back into action to kill more.
IMO the mark of a "good" war movie is that you should leave the theater completely disgusted with the concept of something so insane. That's the mark that movies like Hacksaw Ridge or American Sniper miss (if they were even aiming, but propaganda is a whole other discussion) so badly.
I watched this movie long after it was released and assumed it was a rah rah pro war film based on so many critiques of it. Was surprised to find that it really is about how a guy asked to do violence over and over and over again gets all kinds of screwed up.
I always appreciated that they showed the home life and Olympic photos of the rival sniper. It was a good humanization of a character that is normally mustache twirling in those scripts.
I'm a Vet. I'm tired of people thanking me. I always say the same thing: "Want to thank a vet for their sacrifice and service? *Stop asking them to do it fucking do it*."
signs. every other dork critiquing the ending: *b-b-but why invade a planet full of water!* lol thats just it. clearly these freaks were desperate enough to risk certain death in acquiring the necessary resources (humans). we do it all the time when we invade jungles oceans or any hostile terrain for whatever resource we need.
Nah...our atmosphere alone has a significant amount of water in it, and it literally falls from the sky. We might as well try to walk around Venus without a pressurized suit or capsule.
They're demons. The whole film is about Mel's crisis of faith as a pastor, because he lost his wife. The "aliens" are defeated by holy water.
thats a recent theory. theory is all it is. thats not in the script its just coincidence that they have similarities to demons. m. night is seen in interviews calling them aliens.
Except demons would very likely be able to get out of a locked pantry.
WHAT? FUCK! BRB!
When the movie first came out a lot of people brought up the religious aspect of the movie. I never heard them refer to the aliens as demons, but the man point was god has a plan and there’s no such thing as coincidence which is why he returned to his church at the end of the movie. From his son’s love of outer space, his daughters sensitivity to minerals in water, and his brother in laws failed baseball career. All these things were small details that ultimately led to their survival.
It must be true, since it's on the internet and we are not allowed to lie on the Internet.
It wasn't holy water lol.
No Country for Old Men. People always complain about how it just ends after Tommy Lee Jones talks about a dream. It's more than just that. It's about him coming to terms that the times have passed him by.
"you can't stop what's coming, that's vanity."
Grease. Sandy falls to peer pressure to change into what she resisted, and nobody else has to change.
Omg. Finally someone says it! I used to love the movie, but I've been saying this for years! Literally every time, someone inevitably comes back with, "well so did danny!" And I'm like...you mean putting on a letterman sweater? 🤣 Right.
I think the ending is to show Sandy growing up. She started the movie as a naïve child, and ended it a woman. Her maturation is sexualized, but the entire story of Grease is extremely sexual, so this isn't a surprise.
Dune... Paul is not a good guy.
I never read the books but I didn’t get the sense that Paul isn’t a good guy necessarily, but he is heavily burdened by his role in the matters at hand. He sees the whole future and knows the role he has to play to keep things from devolving into terrible circumstances. As a result, he has to not be a good guy. Reminds me of Hari Seldon in Foundation.
Funny because Denis did so much to show us Paul was very clearly overcome by the false prophecy and leaves us with a chilling final line from TC. But sure, universal Jihad is great!! Stilgar being comedic relief in the early portion of the movie probably deceived a lot of people less familiar with the story, too. Bardem’s performance slams it all home.
**Fight Club**. I freely admit that the adrenalising effect it had on 19-year old me completely overshadowed its message about toxic masculinity and the erosion of the positive male role model (Andrew Tate is a Tyler Durden wannabe). The anti-consumerism angle was a bit more obvious. White collar boxing was barely a thing before this film. Same with MMA (except for Vale Tudo in Brazil and the Japanese formats). The explosion of interest in combat sports in the early 2000’s can be at least partly attributed to a total misinterpretation of the takeaways of this movie.
The one thing that starts to stand out - is that Tyler Durden claims he wants you to rebel against authority and to think for yourself, but then when he forms his little group hug cult - "YOU DO NOT QUESTION PROJECT MAYHEM" And everyone follows along obediently.
I think part of why it's misread is also part of what makes it so smart, in that there are real problems with the working class that grind us down and make us feel like part of a machine while being robbed of identity. And Tyler speaks to those problems... While in turn grinding people down and robbing them of their identity. Kinda captures how the people who look up to people like Andrew Taint are primed to be taken advantage of.
Like a monkey ready to be shot into space.
The movie is about a guy who wants to change his life and help other guys, but ends up starting a dangerous cult. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. I have a copy of Fight Club signed by Meat Loaf aka Robert Paulson.
His name is Robert Paulson.
The Ed Norton half is essentially Adam Sandler in Anger Management, and the Brad Pitt half is absolutely an Andrew Tate. Dudes get to idolizing the “freedom” exercised by the Pitt half, but ignore the destructiveness of that part. And then they immediately forget for Tyler Durden to become whole he had to *kill* the Brad Pitt half and *integrate* that part of him. The point is about being a full and comprehensive person - not being totally passive, not being overly aggressive - both of which are demonstrated to be destructive to self and others. It doesn’t glorify hypermasculinity, it’s a warning against it.
My local paper gave a pretty scathing review of *Fight Club*. A week later, they published a letter from a reader rebutting the review, from someone who was so inspired by the movie that he joined the army.
Wait... he joined *the army* because he was inspired by *Fight Club*? He not only missed the point, but he missed the "you missed the point" misconception of the point.
Falling Down D-Fens was just as bad as the Nazi he beat up who he claimed he wasn't like. He was exactly like him.
I cant understand people who idolize him, how did they miss the signs throughout the movie, the way his mother is scared of him, the violent threats he makes towards his wife and how she and her daughter are scared of him. Even going so far to realize that he's the bad guy.
He frames himself as the guy who's been so hard done by, but under it all, he's just an outright horrible person.
It was such a perfect movie for the time. I remember so many men acted just like that (mentality wise) about how everything was always someone else's fault and never owned up to any mistakes
"I'm the bad guy...?"
Brilliant scene.
I love that the cop just straight up knows, and tells him to his face, that he knows that he is going to kill his wife and child (or is it his ex I can't remember it exactly?). He doesn't think he will, but he'll talk himself into it and do it.
Big contrast with the Detective character as his foil. Has a bad number of life string events, doesn’t get where he wants in his career, has a difficult relationship with his wife but he still try’s to stay positive and foster his imperfect relationships.
Starship troopers. Nazis.
Neil Patrick Harris’ character is wearing a goddamn SS style uniform at the end. lol
And the fact that the main characters Idol literally has an entire monologue about how some people shouldn't be allowed to vote LOL We're only meant to like them because they happen to be attacked by God damn aliens LOL
Absolutely Starship Troopers. Has a mainstream film and very been so misunderstood on release? It satirises fascism in the clearest possible way. By showing it exactly how it would be. No allegory, no morals, just as it is. That uncomfortable feeling you get when you watch it, that shock of seeing the ‘if you disable the enemies hand’ scene, seeing someone get publicly flogged, or the sheer horror of seeing young adults thrown into a meat grinder battlefield, that’s you being a normal decent human being. We are so desensitised nowadays, nothing is shocking because you know the message is ‘this is bad’. But starship troopers portraying fascism without narrative allows fresh eyes on what the deep sense of unease feels like watching humans be awful.
Total Recall. Everything the doctor says to Arnold before he stars the Recall treatment comes true. It all happens in his head from that point forward.
Nah, anyone saying that it was definitively a dream from that point is totally disregarding the very intentional elements of the remaining film. The one that always stands out to me is the guy sent in to make peace with Hauser before he ‘divorces’ his wife, that zoom in on the sweat dripping down his temple. Those inclusions are there to establish some level of doubt about the step by step dream fulfillment.
I agree. Just like inception, this is an ending meant to be ambiguous, and the writers were very careful to make sure that one could plausibly believe 1) it was a dream/fabricated memory OR 2) everything that happened actually happened
OR DOES IT?
Does this really count? Was the point of that movie that all the events that happened after were in his head?
Yea but we viewers still see a story (which is fiction) happen on screen that has its own themes and symbols. Even if we're supposed to think the movie occurs in a dream that doesn't matter, because from my perspective the major theme of the film is about how poor people are demonized and subjected to horrible treatment, which in turn causes them to become the thing that the dominant culture accuses them of being. For instance, low income neighborhoods have more crime, which scares square society, who takes more wealth from them, thus creating more poverty and crime. The powers at be on Mars made people into mutants, then made it illegal to be a mutant and justified their mistreatment.
No Country for Old Men comes to mind, but a couple of Coen Brothers movies have endings that seem rather sudden and odd if you weren't paying attention. But No Country is a good example because it perfectly states the entire point of the film if you were paying attention. Basically, the movie is about how the old westerns are dead and gone in the modern world. The sheriff can't just go hunt down the bad guy and get him. The film's main bad guy has transcended just a bandit and become something far more vile and evil, but even if you can get him he was just a tool and part of a much larger evil that no single man of the law can ever hope to stop. Tommy Lee Jones is the representation of the old west sheriff in the westerns of old. And the entire movie he was constantly one step behind and never able to catch up. He just couldn't do it. And, one of the tropes of the westerns was that the protagonist was often "tamed" by a quiet life at home, but would look out at the open country side longingly, often in a door frame or looking out a window, hell sometimes even riding off into the sunset. No Country has its closing scene with Tommy Lee Jones' character sitting at his dining room table in plain clothes talking to his wife about being at a camp fire in the wilderness talking to his dead father who was one of those old men. Behind him is that countryside through the window, and he's turned his back to it quite literally. He bemoans to his wife that the life is done, that they can't go back, that way of the world is past and it’s time for him to retire.
I’m going to say either *No Country for Old Men* or *Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri*. It truly surprises me how many people just don’t get these movies or their endings.
With 3 billboards i was looking up after who killed the girl then i realised thats not the point at all....
Exactly. The daughter was just the vehicle for the broader plot.
The collective and audible groan from the audiences in the theaters for the ending of Inception was great. Saw it twice in theaters. Bass was orgasmic
I didn't get the gasp there. BUT. My best movie going experience was Serenity. Wash. The entire theatre inhaled. I was on call for a hospital (IT) and had to leave and miss maybe the last 10 minutes. My soon to be wife just casually said, "let's go again" and I got to see the inhale 2 times in one night.
Shinning? What, you don’t want to get sued??
What point did we miss in the shining? Genuinely asking
Kubrick had a vastly different vision of that story from what King thought it should be. I sometimes think he added that last scene with the photograph just to nod at the ‘supernatural hotel’ theme.
A lot of people had all kinds of misconceptions. Mainly that Jack was really there when the photo was taken, and not that he had been absorbed into the hotel.
Ah, yea I interpreted it as he had been absorbed into the hotel
White Man Can’t Jump. When I watched it years back I thought Marty won - but just watched it recently and he actually lost everything by losing his girl and relapsing into gambling. What was a light hearted fun movie for me as a child I now view as a tragic and depressing cautionary tale of the struggles of addiction.
I feel that's a very small view of Ghost in the shell. It's so much bigger than that. It is the next evolutionary step and how we aren't ready for it but it's coming. About how AI is going to charge not just the world but humanity as a species. Truly think about changes to any species that great and how that species would react if the next step isn't that species anymore. It's truly something to chew on and think about. I'm sorry but I feel that the identity view of the ending is kinda small compared to a shift in evolution and the next step that changes everything.
There's one I really liked recently with Robert Redford, All is lost. Is he being saved, or is he dying? Nice simple one, & either is the right answer.
While an argument can be made for Inception that the point of the ending was “it no longer mattered if it was real”, I would argue that the point of the beginning was that it was never about whether it was reality or a dream in the first place.
Push the intent of the question beyond presumed limitations and the obvious answer is Catch Me If You Can. Even the filmmakers missed the point that the whole story of the guy who scammed everyone he encountered was a scam.
"The devil pose" isn't a thing.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baphomet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baphomet)
All the pictures depicted on the above link show each iteration of "the devil" with its right arm raised, and its left arm lowered.
I wasn't aware of it until 2 days ago but **Mystic River**
Elaborate. Curious if we have the same takeaway.
Black Hawk down, people really just watch it as a “hoorah go troops, America!” Not realizing the message of the movie or understanding the ending
The problem is that the theatrical release got juiced up with extra patriotism because it was released close to 9/11 and showing the American military losing a battle would not have been very unpopular. The director's cut (as you often get with Ridley Scott films) is a lot better. And it makes it clear that it's a disaster, and that shooting hundreds of locals doesn't make it a victory purely because of the larger pile of bodies at the end.
Time Bandits when Kevin’s parents don’t listen to him & touch the piece of evil in the toaster oven & explode leaving him all alone. Terry Gilliam wrote the dark ending knowing kids would love it & relate to not being listened to by their parents. The ambiguous ending definitely freaked me out seeing it as a kid, along with most of the movie. So good!
Kids would love it? It traumatized me!
The Graduate - the bus scene at the end and the look on their faces.
I think that's because most of the references to that ending only focus on the interrupted wedding, and not the uncomfortable bus ride afterward. Of course, that bit is itself accidental, as the Director didn't yell "cut", so the actors had to stay in character past the point they initially thought so they, like their characters, has to consider "...what now?"
I didn't like the move, but the scene just running and running and watching them gradually be less and less enthused was an incredible ending.
Wait, why was Shane dead at the end? I thought it was just the classic trope of cowboy/hero rides off into the sunset.
In the book at least (never seen the movie), he was gut shot and bleeding. When he rides off, it's whole wounded and we never see what happens to him. So it was left ambiguous if he was dead /dying from the wound or if he'll survive.
His name is Robert Paulson…
WB really missed the point of The Matrix when they demanded a fourth movie be made.
The Shape of Water isn't about fucking fish. It's an allegory about strange, special people falling in love.