I don't think the studio forced that in?
Films with stuck-on endings
- Thread starter JoeZhang
- Start date
I don't think the studio forced that in?
Given the manner in which Zwick justifies this in the commentary (by arguing that he didn't want the standard tragic romantic ending where one of the lovers dies, a la Madama Butterfly), I assumed that the director did want that ending. Or was satisfied with it enough to defend it, anyway...
You're right. I read your first post too quickly and just registered the bit about tacked on endings. OTOH I suspect if Russell Crowe hadn't miraculously survived being shot to shit the studio might have "suggested" a more upbeat ending.
Are you referring to the 2002 version with Guy Pearce? Because that's certainly not the way the George Pal version ends.
Yeah the 2002 version - I only saw it once so cannot remember the squence but remember reading about it. The studio wanted a more upbeat ending, so they did a close up shot of Pearce and Mumbo holding hands - using doubles...
(at least that's how I remember it).
Well, obviously the original release of "Blade Runner."
It wasn't the studio's fault (that I know of) but the whole last act of "Sunshine" diminishes that film considerably.
"Stargate" is a movie that just gives up about half-way through, shifting gears from something with a real sense of wonder and imagination and becoming a pretty standard run-and-shoot.
It wasn't the studio's fault (that I know of) but the whole last act of "Sunshine" diminishes that film considerably.
"Stargate" is a movie that just gives up about half-way through, shifting gears from something with a real sense of wonder and imagination and becoming a pretty standard run-and-shoot.
Interesting, I didn't think of it as a romantic ending but one where the hero goes out because he can't or won't conform to a different way of life or compromise their beliefs. Still a cliche I suppose but I love those kind of movies.
Isn't that the one where the guy travels back to when he was in the womb and strangles himself with the umbilical cord? I'd hardly call that a happy ending.
That was the ending of the Director's Cut.
They filmed four endings, I think, for that film, including a more upbeat one (or two... or three) that are on the DVD extras.
Blade Runner came immediately to mind with this thread title. AFAIK, it was the studio's fault; they felt the original ending was not good enough and forced the addition of the clouds scene (taken from other film's footage) and the 'happy ending.' In the Director's Cut and the ultimate Final Cut, Ridley Scott rightfully restored the original ending and removed the intro voiceover narration, which was also something the studio forced on Harrison Ford.
"I Am Legend." Apparently, depicting Neville as a mass murderer of intellegent creatures is a major no-no for the audience, so we get the martyr ending instead. The original ending was great. The theatrical ending kinda drags down the whole movie.
The studio didn't force the narration on Blade Runner. That was always a part of Hampton Fancher's script. He was writing a noir detective film, albeit one set in the future, and a laconic voice-over is a part of the genre. See Paul Sammon's Future Noir, which covers the making of Blade Runner in exhaustive detail, for more information.
The ending with footage from The Shining was a studio thing. The voice-over was not. Which is why any cut of Blade Runner without the narration is incomplete.
For stuck-on endings I would have to add Beneath Planet of the Apes. They have been playing it on AMC and for some reason I watched it and then wanted those two hours of my life back. Chartlon Heston's character pushes this button and you hear a bomb go off and some voice-over about some medium size star in blah blah blah all life ends. WTF??? It made no since whatsoever.
I'm not sure if it was forced by the studio, but the last twenty minutes or so of (the 2000 British comedy) Saving Grace feels tacked-on. It's got one sort of character throughout most of the film, then the freaky business with the police raid, after which it's as if the real ending was hacked off with a dull hatchet and something of a completely different personality stuck on with duct tape and framing nails. It's not out of left field; it's as if the ending belongs to another movie altogether, one with characters who are vaguely similar in appearance but not the same people you'd been watching.
I recently saw the alternate ending and thought it was much, much better. I showed it to my wife and she agreed it was better as well.
I have to admit I never thought of it from the mass murderer angle though. I think that take on it could be debated, but we'll leave that for another thread
Well, not exactly. The beginning is the same as was intended, except there is now a stuck-on opening monologue (where there had been no dialogue originally). This explains some things that aren't made clear until later in the film and slightly undercuts one of the conceits... but to be honest, I think it's a pretty good monologue and is well delivered by Kiefer Sutherland, who spends most of the film mimicking Peter Lorre's delivery in M and doing a fine job.
Also... see Dark City.
Similar threads
- Poll
