The most obviously tacked-on movie endings ever (Spoiler tags).
- Thread starter nkarafo
- Start date
10 Cloverfield lane doesn't even need defending. Some unfortunate souls for one reason or another just don't get movies like this. The Mist is another perfect example. Their loss, really.
I thought the ending to The last samurai was tacked on. The final battle was enough to communicate the underlying message of the movie. But the movie then went on for another 10 minutes and hammer that message to the ground. Unnecessary. Too much hand holding.
I thought the ending to The last samurai was tacked on. The final battle was enough to communicate the underlying message of the movie. But the movie then went on for another 10 minutes and hammer that message to the ground. Unnecessary. Too much hand holding.
nkarafo
Member
Care to explain to us unfortunate souls?
I already given a reason of why the
action scene
Also about the Mist:
You didn't have a problem in how four different individuals, who were supposed to be the reasonable folks, all agreed to kill themselves, no doubts or anything. Nobody was afraid of killing himself. All four people just agreed to that the moment it was suggested. Not even one of them protesting or thinking about it a bit.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
The end of War of the Worlds in Boston had me raging as I left the theater. What a cop out
survival by the son.
SodiumBenzoate
Member
Rosie was in the first movie.
A 30 minute ending to a 3 hour movie may have been too long for some people, but that's not what it was; it was a 30-minute coda to a 10 hour movie.
It was all one story, really.
Barkley's Justice
Member
Is this thread most speculation?
supermarioworldE
Banned
Little Shop of Horrors (1986)
Im a little conflicted on this one. On the one hand, the theatrical ending was very clearly tacked on and isn't 100% satisfying. On the other hand, the original filmed ending was closer to the play but felt abrupt in the film.
The theatrical cut lets Seymour off way too easy. It's true that this cut downplays alot of his flaws in the workprint, but he still did plenty of terrible things that would justify some sort of comeuppance. Chopping up Orin, leading Mushnik to his death, covering up the murder, taking over the flower shop, and making money off of Audrey II. To end the film with Seymour living happily ever after with Audrey just feels wrong to me. He and Audrey are sympathetic characters right up to the last frame, but I feel like Seymour should've paid his dues to some degree for the horrible things he did.
The original workprint (not to be confused with the "director's cut" released on blu-ray) did a much better job of openly portraying Seymour as someone who grows more and more despicable as time goes on. This cut respects the moral of the play as Seymour gives into temptation from the devil himself and is punished severely for it. The problem is that the ending goes far too dark and not comical enough to match the rest of the film. Seymour contemplates suicide after audrey's death, and the "Mean Green Mother" feels much too mean spirited as the plant is performing an entire song that effectively ridicules Seymour for his loss. The "Don't Feed the Plants" ending is more of an afterthought. The problem is that it goes on too long and is of so big a scale that it's almost too disconnected from the rest of the film. It didnt help that the main characters were left out of the number, unlike the play, which better tied the ending to the rest of the story through this.
Im a little conflicted on this one. On the one hand, the theatrical ending was very clearly tacked on and isn't 100% satisfying. On the other hand, the original filmed ending was closer to the play but felt abrupt in the film.
The theatrical cut lets Seymour off way too easy. It's true that this cut downplays alot of his flaws in the workprint, but he still did plenty of terrible things that would justify some sort of comeuppance. Chopping up Orin, leading Mushnik to his death, covering up the murder, taking over the flower shop, and making money off of Audrey II. To end the film with Seymour living happily ever after with Audrey just feels wrong to me. He and Audrey are sympathetic characters right up to the last frame, but I feel like Seymour should've paid his dues to some degree for the horrible things he did.
The original workprint (not to be confused with the "director's cut" released on blu-ray) did a much better job of openly portraying Seymour as someone who grows more and more despicable as time goes on. This cut respects the moral of the play as Seymour gives into temptation from the devil himself and is punished severely for it. The problem is that the ending goes far too dark and not comical enough to match the rest of the film. Seymour contemplates suicide after audrey's death, and the "Mean Green Mother" feels much too mean spirited as the plant is performing an entire song that effectively ridicules Seymour for his loss. The "Don't Feed the Plants" ending is more of an afterthought. The problem is that it goes on too long and is of so big a scale that it's almost too disconnected from the rest of the film. It didnt help that the main characters were left out of the number, unlike the play, which better tied the ending to the rest of the story through this.
Dr. Benton Quest
Banned
Can't agree more. 28 Days Later has incredible pacing and character interaction until it turns into shitty action schlock at the end.
Why did they do that!?
KimonoNoNo
Member
The Shawshank Redemption should of ended after Red gets on the bus and gives the ending monologue. Red even says he does not know whether he'll see Andy again but for the first time he feels hope, and it should of been left to the audience imagination whether he succeeds or not.
Switch Back 9
a lot of my threads involve me fucking up somehow. Perhaps I'm a moron?
I don't really care about the ending one way or the other but people are free to complain that shit dragged on just a bit too long.
Mineshaft_Gap
4077th
Stop watching movies.
ThLunarian
Member
I think a lot of people put too much value in leaving things to the audience's imagination. Sometimes it's really satisfying to spell things out explicitly, and let there be no doubt about what happened.
That last scene is definitely a dream. The way it is shot with Red appearing out of nowhere and Andy surrounded by nothing is so out of step with the direction of the rest of the movie heavily implies that it is occurring in Red's head
SparkleMotion
Member
I keep seeing Return of the King mentioned. What part of that ending was tacked on? "It was long LOL!" does not mean that anything was tacked on.
Teletraan1
Banned
10 Cloverfield Lane was part of the Cloverfield franchise, people complaining about
at the end seems kind of strange.
Tying up loose ends in the 3rd movie of a trilogy which also featured extended cuts that bolster the 3 movies into the 10+ hour range seems pretty appropriate as well for ROTK. McSociety would have probably ended it
. I actually like the ending but I didn't have to piss when it "dragged" on.
Aliens
Tying up loose ends in the 3rd movie of a trilogy which also featured extended cuts that bolster the 3 movies into the 10+ hour range seems pretty appropriate as well for ROTK. McSociety would have probably ended it
when the ring was destroyed.
?
that IS the ending. she
literally has nowhere else to go but to become satan's servant. I'll agree that the witches flying was a little goofy, but I thought them chanting around the fire was great. it showed that Thomasin was just one of countless other women that Black Phillip has done this to.
peanutbutterlatte
Member
Don't remind me. Got through a watch through recently only to stop before the final episode.
SparkleMotion
Member
I don't think anyone is complaining about the inclusion of aliens. The over the top action sequence was entirely out of place with the rest of the movie.
Teletraan1
Banned
But not the franchise. I was waiting for the whole movie for shit to hit the fan with some shaky cam stuff just like the original. Just because they framed the beginning of the movie the way they did doesn't stop if from being set in the cloverfield universe. In fact I think that the beginning of the movie did too good of a job making you think it was all on goodman's character and that nothing was actually happening outside of the shelter that wasn't his doing.
SparkleMotion
Member
The ending was literally tacked on, in the most literal sense, to make it part of the franchise. The movie was made from a script called "The Cellar" and adapted to be part of Cloverfield. The ending makes this patently obvious with how incongruous the last ten minutes are from everything that preceded it. 10 Cloverfield Lane is the textbook example of a tacked on ending, except for maybe Blade Runner.
Dunedain_Ranger
Member
Absolutely would have bummed the shit out of me
gutter_trash
Banned
I cared more for the AI teddy bear than the AI boy
SparkleMotion
Member
For the people who have said that Return of the King's ending was tacked on, what would you have cut out? Where would you have ended it?
obin_gam
Member
The most beloved film in the series ends with a main character being frozen in carbonite and turned over to a bounty hunter.
Cliffhanger endings kind of suck in the short term, but time will pass. Soon enough, that anticipation build-up will be in the rear-view mirror and people will be able to watch them back-to-back. And in that context, the period that the movie will live in much, much longer than the "what'll happen next" period, having some questions and uncertainty from one movie to the next can be a perfectly effective device. It instills continuity and consequence much better than tying every installment's conflicts up with a nice little bow at the end.
SparkleMotion
Member
Her finding Luke was a cliffhanger. There's not a finality there. All the post movie speculation is about what is going to happen as a result.
RustyNails
Member
What a horrible first post. The ending was tacked on because you wanted to piss?
The Extended Edition was released a year after cinema release.
Solid SOAP
Member
10 Cloverfield Lane is such a great movie I'm willing to overlook the ridiculous ending. It's like... a bonus scene! It's like a fan fiction attached to the film just for fun!
The ending is a representation of how escaping captivity isn't a magical cure for the PTSD you've experienced, shown by terrifying aliens who represent a world the character no longer understands.
And then her driving towards other survivors is representative of her dealing with her guilt complex over letting that little girl be abused by her father/running from her boyfriend after one fight.
But yeah, tacked on sequence. Should've ended with her starting in horror at a space ship. Because lord knows that's better than seeing a woman choose to be heroic despite her fear of conflict
And then her driving towards other survivors is representative of her dealing with her guilt complex over letting that little girl be abused by her father/running from her boyfriend after one fight.
But yeah, tacked on sequence. Should've ended with her starting in horror at a space ship. Because lord knows that's better than seeing a woman choose to be heroic despite her fear of conflict
kavanf1
Member
The book ends like that, with the words "I hope". Agree that they should have left the film like that, but it was probably considered too downbeat.
Yeah, but it was released in cinemas.
You're about 50 percent wrong.
The original ending of 10 Cloverfield Lane (which was never shot, as I recall):
In the original script, Michelle escapes the shelter and is chased through the farmhouse by Howard, who still wants to “protect” her. She blinds him with bathroom cleaner, he tells her about his tragic life (dead wife, missing daughter, treacherous Nate, etc.), and then she shoots him in the kneecap and runs away. He ends the movie alive, entreating Michelle to “be careful.” Later, after traveling down empty roads and finding no one around to help her, she crests a hill and sees the Chicago skyline, smoldering and destroyed. No explanation is given. We don’t even know what she will do next, only that she now knows that Howard, for all his oddity, was correct. The final line in the script is, “She slowly pulls down the mask on the hazmat suit before taking a breath.”
Also, the film is not connected to the original Cloverfield and was never intended to be connected. They want the title to indicate a mood or overarching feeling to the film, and they are not part of a connected universe.
In fact, for a majority of the film's life it was actually titled "The Cellar". It was only at the end that they changed the title and added the Cloverfield name.
GreatEdmondo
Member
He also said that the time in storage had degraded the tape, so it couldn't be restored to a releasable quality.
If you didn't get it while watching it, you aren't going to get it via an online forum post either.
It's akin to an overprotective parent telling her/his child that the boogeyman is real so don't go out at night. And when you grow up and finally manage to break out your psychological prison, out of nowhere you encounter the oh so far fetched boogeyman himself.
Such a fun ending.
Also about the Mist:
Not far fetched at all. In the face of insurmountable odds they made the choice to do something rather than run around and be a victim. That was a perfectly rational choice.
Pulling the trigger is a lot less fearful than facing the monsters that they were dealing with.
Zero issues with this ending as well. What a magnificent movie the mist was.
FreshCakes
Banned
The first 3 Transformers. From what I remembered, the fightings over, Optimus Prime voiceover, then Linkin Park plays
nkarafo
Member
Haha, no. It was stupid and totally unrealistic. Especially after the movie trying so hard to build up those last few characters as the "reasonable" ones.
Hollywood has convinced you that
killing yourself is so easy. I bet you think people who sacrifice themselves or attempt suicide also say some cool quote too before they die. I assure you that out of 4 people in the car at least 3 would not agree to that, no matter what they would be facing
It's not even how the book ended by the way. Of course the movie changed the ending and went with a more digestible, lowest common denominator ending so they can also give you the "oh no, he shouldn't" end twist. By the way, even the movie told you in the end that they made the most idiotic decision, isn't that ironic?
Its good that you liked it though. It was a magnificent movie indeed (apart from the ending).
You know what they they about making assumptions, don't you. Without divulging too much about my work life, every day I come across patients who are suddenly informed they have months instead of decades left to live. And fear of dying manifests itself in many different ways. Some are calm and serene, others aren't. No need to inform me about how people deal with fear of death in reality.
But anyways, that's not even a decent critique. When I am watching a movie I want good storytelling and characters first and foremost, not realistic or unrealistic depiction of something. And in what world was the ending of the mist cookie cutter? It's one of the most nihilistic movies to come out of Hollywood in I don't know how long.
But like I said initially. Some people just don't get it. And here we are.
nkarafo
Member
The characters in The Mist didn't run out of options.
- They were driving really slow with whatever gas was left in the vehicle. How many hours were they driving? How much distance did they cover? I bet not too much. Certainly not enough for them to assume the whole place is consumed by the mist, let alone the country. Or the planet. So even though they weren't sure about how much distance the mist is covering, or what happens in the rest of the world,
.
- They were pretty safe in the car. They could have wait it out for a day or two. Maybe more until hunger and thirst takes them over. Maybe the mist would fade away. Maybe it was moving instead of spreading. They didn't know. Maybe someone would appear to help. Maybe the military would appear
. They still had plenty of time to wait it out and see if something happens.
- Even after they waited it out,
. These characters were supposed to be the logical, smart ones. They would try and find more possible outcomes, no matter how unlikely. Additionally, at least one or two would be
. There would be some discussion, someone would cry, someone would doubt.
. It was four people. Yet, they all thought the same thing, felt the same thing and did the same thing.
It was a pretty unreasonable, cartoonish ending, tucked in just so you
. It felt so forced to me that
. I even laughed at the whole thing.
- They were driving really slow with whatever gas was left in the vehicle. How many hours were they driving? How much distance did they cover? I bet not too much. Certainly not enough for them to assume the whole place is consumed by the mist, let alone the country. Or the planet. So even though they weren't sure about how much distance the mist is covering, or what happens in the rest of the world,
they decided to kill themselves
- They were pretty safe in the car. They could have wait it out for a day or two. Maybe more until hunger and thirst takes them over. Maybe the mist would fade away. Maybe it was moving instead of spreading. They didn't know. Maybe someone would appear to help. Maybe the military would appear
(which is what happened anyway)
Instead, right after they stopped they decided to kill themselves
- Even after they waited it out,
the choice of suicide would still be hard to swallow
at least afraid to kill him/herself
Someone would rather carry on as long as possible and see what happens
It was a pretty unreasonable, cartoonish ending, tucked in just so you
just for the "oops" twist
after the military showed up, i felt nothing for the character who realized how wrong he was
Nobody ever said that.
Quit the condescending tone. Theres a difference between "they don't get it" and "they don't like it". Just because someone has a different opinion than you, it doesn't mean he is stupid. The book has a different ending, which is the original one by the way. So if i like that one more it means i'm not as clever as you?
Disagree. Lord of the Rings absolutely has to go back to the Shire. It is 100 percent necessary, even if you don't do the Sharkey subplot.
She was in the first movie briefly. Also, again, it's vital to the characters and story to show the hobbits moving on with their lives after the war.