Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by metal134, Mar 20, 2017.
Law Abiding Citizen
Wow. That explanation is very cool. I like this movie a lot, partly for it's questions about religious faith and synchronicity of events, but it never occurred to me the shadowing M put on the water. On reflection I like that it is just laid out to explore instead of explained. It gives a depth to the movie.
Never watch the TV edited version of The Magic Christian. They delete the entire ending!
Knowing. Nice build up though.
...or they ARE aliens who have visited the Earth before coming back to reclaim it for Lord knows what. Gibson wasn't a priest per se but a minister who lost his faith when his wife died in the accident caused by his neighbor. Nevertheless, it still doesn't make sense why they would invade a world where 3/4s of the planet is covered with water, there's water everywhere with lakes, streams and being piped in. It's an example of MNS not thinking through the entire set up which he found would be a perfect suspense film and its a glass of water that works in Gibson's home.
It's part of the joke, I know, but I really wonder how "Monty Python and the Holy Grial" would have ended if they didn't run out of funds and had to resort to (spoiler alert; read no further if you haven't seen the movie yet for some reason) arresting the cast and crew when things got on a bigger scale....
Possibly the aliens don't know they are succeptible to the water on earth? It is just another retelling of War of the Worlds after all. MNS uses water but it could have been dirt or wood or anything else that is common to all parts of earth. What I found Signs to be saying is that all of the things that happen in our life relate to another and have impact on something that comes later. Life is not random or misplaced and those things that perplex us have a purpose even if we don't think they do.
I thought the ending of JAWS was kinda lame, with the scientist emerging from the depths having survived his shark attack. I suppose this happy ending would test better with audiences but it undermines the ending with our terrified, inexpert sheriff alone on a sinking boat, the two companions who knew anything about the shark or the equipment gone.
You think that’s weird, you should see DeMille’s director’s cut of ‘The Ten Commandments,’ which also ends with a concert by Smashmouth.
Larry Crowne - I thought we'd at least get the see the French Toast
I said the same thing the first time I saw the film back in the 80s. It has an incredible sense of wonder about it for the first two acts, and then the tone just shifts abruptly and it becomes profoundly stupid. That film should be a classic about the joy of discovery. But it's not.
The thing that kills Signs is the plot hole of aliens capable of interstellar travel who are unable to operate a door knob, and the unsubtle-ness of Gibson's epiphany, which clobbers us over the head lest we miss the point. It's a pretty decent movie up to that point.
Downbeat endings were part of the zeitgeist back then, man. Still, I really like this movie, and the cinematography is great.
Steven Spielberg’ War of the Worlds.
Great, great movie, until Tom Cruise’s son comes out the door at the very end.
In the theater, my brother and I both looked at each quizzically and thought it was a cop out.
I thought Mulholland Drive was cheesy until the ending came up. Now I'd say it's one of the most amazing movies I've ever seen.
I'm not a fan either. I'Ve seen it twice and I can't really even think of what the ending is right now.
Martin Sheen should have killed Kurtz and then walked back into the hut, taking his place. That would have made the ending great instead of just calling in the bomb strike. That was a copout.
We Were Soldiers Once.
Despite being a Mel Gibson vehicle it was quite good, as both popular filmmaking and as a recreation of a historical event...until the final scene--which simply did not happen in the actual historical Vietnam War event known as the Battle of Ia Drang.
I'll never watch Match Point again.
2001: wouldn't be following the book because, frankly, the book came into existence because of the movie. Clark and Kubrick worked on the idea, concept, plotting together and then each went away and wrote their own version. Kubrick rejected the original ending they came up with because he felt it wouldn't work for the film whereas Clark felt it would work for the book. I felt the ending for each was perfect.
I'm one of those life doesn't have a purpose guys. There's no reason for what happens. There's no grand plan. I would also argue that aliens WOULD scout a planet before deciding to invade it knowing and figuring out that 3/4s of the planet would be toxic to them. It was a stupid ending and abrupt for a film that was all set up and no follow through.
It's too bad that previews can't detail what the underlying film plot holes and philosophy may be. It would have saved you two hours.
As to what aliens would or would not do, if we use your premise that there is no master plan then the idea that these are stupid aliens is equally valid. Humans prove that stuff happens all the time.
The whole last 20 minutes or so were stupid IMHO. The aliens were stupid, the whole "interconnectedness" message or whatever was stupid, and the whole thing ended up feeling like it'd been concocted by a teenager. Or perhaps aliens.
...but who probably get paid a boatload for the script. The awful script for The Truman Show garnered $750,000!!!!
Separate names with a comma.