In regards to M. Knight, I find his movies to be the "enjoy it for what it's worth but don't think about it too much" type. Having said that, The Sixth Sense had a worse ending that Signs. How can Spongebob nearly drown in goo lagoon when he is already underwater you ask? The same way Bruce Willis can talk to his wife repeatedly without her ever answering and not realize he is dead. At least Signs holds "water" until the end. The Sixth Sense is full of holes throughout.
Posts: 1206 | Location: Hunting in the Korengal | Registered: 04 January 2006
In regards to M. Knight, I find his movies to be the "enjoy it for what it's worth but don't think about it too much" type. Having said that, The Sixth Sense had a worse ending that Signs. How can Spongebob nearly drown in goo lagoon when he is already underwater you ask? The same way Bruce Willis can talk to his wife repeatedly without her ever answering and not realize he is dead. At least Signs holds "water" until the end. The Sixth Sense is full of holes throughout.
WOW! You are really in the minority on this one as almost everyone else has completely the opposite opinion of the ending, including my self. I've seen this movie twice, especially looking for the holes the second time and really the whole idea of talking to his wife wasn't that problematic when I saw it the second time as the director was careful in how he directed the shot so that it was very plausible that Bruce Willis was really talking without being heard (it didn't seem out of the ordinary). I'm just wondering if you aren't having some negative reaction not the fact of the twist so much as the disappointment of the Mr. Willis's character's death.
Posts: 959 | Location: Utah, United States | Registered: 22 July 2005
have you seen Jackie Chan's "the myth"? the stunts were really amazing but it is the ending of the story that didn't made the movie that good. Same as with "house of flying daggers" it was dissapointing that the girl died but it is still very emotional and that's one of the factors that made me like that movie.
Originally posted by jakal40: I was VERY disappointed in the ending of Matrix Revolutions. Actually it was the whole movie, but particularly the ending. "What do you think I am, human?" Dog s*#t!
I thought that the ending was pretty damn awesome.
The entire movie was quite incredible on a conceptual, visual, intellectual level.
The final Superbrawl was unmistakably incredible, the ending was both clever and profound, and this film is perhaps the most 'truthful' of all three of the Matrix movies. The kind of big-budget artistic vision that is certainly in the league of Kubrick's 2001 and Scott's Blade Runner as one of the most powerful science fiction films ever created.
I think that M. Night's movies are cursed with the expectation of 'The Twist', which is a rather unfortunate limitation on the audience's perceptions when the man tries to create more of a moral revelation (as in Signs or The Village) than an actual 'twists' per se.
I suspect that Shyamalan is aware of this and will at some point attempt to do an overtly different kind of film to both expand his repertoire and range as well as allow him to wiggle out of that 'Twist Man' typecast a little bit.
Originally posted by Brian: Well even though I loved the entire movie up until the end, War Of the Worlds had a pretty lame ending in my opinion. Otherwise it was a great movie!
A hangover from the book. I felt Spielberg should have had the presence of mind to re-write that a little, but then I suppose he had to consider the criticism from hardcore fans of the original Wells novel.
Well most Hollywood movies could fall into this category.
A good example is the recent THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA, which I actually liked quite a bit. However, the film wimps out at the end. It is actually a very insightful film based on a best selling roman a clef. There is a great deal of verisimilitude in the characterizations.
Basically Ann Hathaway is the ingenue who goes to work for Meryl Streep, her gorgon of a boss. The film is set in the world of high fashion and Hathaway eventually gets caught up in it all, with the free designer clothes, the fabulous parties and the travel to Paris.
In other words she gets exposed this new world and starts to change and that causes problems with her boyfriend who wants the old, frumpy, Anne back. Instead of handling the ending realistically -- people do change and are no longer compatible -- the film wimps out and Anne quits Meryl and gets back with her b-friend and goes to work for a left-wing, muck-raking publication to show she has integrity.
Well, Anne may have had integrity to walk away from Meryl and all the glamour, but the film lost whatever integrity it had by having the unrealistic, but "happy," ending.
Maybe so, and I haven't seen the flick, but my wife and I both were making very good money as air traffic controllers, but WE BOTH quit because there was too much BS, too many idiots and not enough time to see each other and start a family. We chose life over the bucks and BS. Well, yes, we still have to deal with BS in our new jobs, but only up to a point, and we have more peace of mind and a family. Are we unrealistic and wimp-outs too? Does a happy ending have to be a Hollywood cop-out?
"Naked Woman, Naked Man Where did you get that nice sun tan?"
Posts: 12895 | Location: Behind the Orange Curtain | Registered: 14 May 2004
I didn't like the ending to "Pirates of the Caribbean Dead Man's Chest". The film itself was good but the ending just left far too many loose ends. I like suspense as much as anyone else but come on, to end it like that was cruel!
Posts: 31 | Location: Scotland | Registered: 13 September 2006
I didn't see the 1995 version of THE SCARLET LETTER, but I was reminded of it because last night I caught the 1926 silent version of the film that starred Lillian Gish.
The '95 SL, which starred Demi Moore, was castigated by the critics, but even worst a Hollywood-esque happy ending was tacked onto the Hawthorne classic. What were they thinking?
How Martin Scorsese chose to end The Departed was silly. The mood that the entire movie created--disregarding the last third--had breadth, but the climatic ending, distorted that mood.
The ending was un-necessary and it appeared that Scorsese wanted to please the audience(s) and studios, not end the film.
A nice Schoonmaker/Scorsese cut would be accepted on the DVD, because Scorsese is not foolish to lead the public into believing that the "rat" ending was what he truly wanted. Otherwise it appears that the rat of the movie was not any of the lead/supporting characters, but Scorsese himself.
I didn't like the ending to "Pirates of the Caribbean Dead Man's Chest". The film itself was good but the ending just left far too many loose ends. I like suspense as much as anyone else but come on, to end it like that was cruel!
Yeah, I gullibly expected the movie to continue a little while longer at that point. Way too good to be true.
The whole idea of this "trilogy" is pretty dumb. I cringed when I first read "two sequels of Pirates of the Caribbean are currently being filmed."
I can only imagine the conversation between the film makers and producers: I know, let's take this surprisingly popular movie based on a Disney World ride and make two huge budget 2-hr.+ sequels to it. People will see the first one, then there'll be such a big cliffhanger, they'll be forced to see the last one too.
There was a great article in the S.F. Chronicle about the difference between series that are forced to be a trilogy, like this one, and series that just naturally end up as a trilogy, like Star Wars or LotR.
Posts: 610 | Location: Oregon | Registered: 18 October 2005
Blair Witch Project had a strange ending, to say the least. WTF! I defy anyone to explain what that was about.
Don't diss me if someone has already mentioned this one because this is a popular thread and to be blunt i can't be bothered to read through all the posts.
Posts: 64 | Location: England | Registered: 07 November 2006
