Customer Discussions > Movie forum

Don't You Hate Movies That Simply End Without Any Type Of Resolution .


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 129 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Mar 24, 2012 9:16:50 PM PDT
Green Meanie says:
Don't you hate it when you have invested the time to watch a movie and it suddenly ends without any type of resolution or conclusion . All you get is a freeze frame and then the credits roll.

Posted on Mar 24, 2012 9:50:03 PM PDT
J. Baker says:
>"All you get is a freeze frame and then the credits roll."<

What, like '400 Blows'?

No, I don't necessarily dislike that. Most things in life have no resolution. I don't see why that would be an invalid dramatic approach.
What I hate is when I feel I'm wasting my time during the first hour and a half (or whatever;) a nice 'closure' is optional to me. If a movie ends abruptly, I just feel like 'oh, well', and trace back, and imagine what the perfect ending would be if I made it. The choose your own adventure approach to watching movies!

A rushed ending can't ruin a good movie for me, if what came before it was truly interesting and worthwhile.
In some ways I prefer a movie that doesn't wrap everything up for me. Some abrupt-ended movies haunt me for much longer and give me more to think about.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 25, 2012 9:44:49 AM PDT
Green Meanie says:
A lot of Grindhouse films from the 1960s and 70s had those abrupt endings where nothing plays out and then a freeze frame and the credits roll. I watched this weird movie called the Pink Angels and that happened at the end.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 25, 2012 10:10:24 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 25, 2012 11:38:12 AM PDT
How abrupt is too abrupt for you though? Can you give a good example? I personally like when they don't have to put a "pretty bow" on it at the end. It insults my intelligence that they feel they have to. Typically I like the movies that leave it open ended, much like how life is.

Posted on Mar 25, 2012 11:28:25 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 25, 2012 11:37:38 AM PDT
UrMajesty says:
Not to knock your desire for closure but Hollywood has corrupted the human psyche and now there is a constant uproar if there isn't a neat little pink bow presented at the end of every story. Not every story begins with once upon a time and "NOTHING" ends with "and they lived happily ever after" except in a fairy-tale and that's the problem. There is a GIANT-SIZED uproar now in the VIDEO GAME INDUSTRY ( CAN YOU BELIEVE IT ) over a game called MASS EFFECT. It was presented in 3 parts ( a trilogy ) and the ending of the trilogy was luke warm at best in a bloody, mind-bending space odyssey AND PEOPLE ARE THREATENING TO SUE BECAUSE OF LACK OF "SUFFICIENT" CLOSURE!

IT'S GETTING BAD OUT THERE FOLKS!!!

Maybe if we all were more concerned and passionate about the realities of our situation and worked on those things more the massive Disney mindset would be less prevalent. ( Sorry for the soapbox ending )

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 25, 2012 12:12:37 PM PDT
Too abrupt? How about the Ides Of March.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 25, 2012 12:29:58 PM PDT
Tonè says:
Ides of March was such a huge setup/letdown. The "crux of the matter" in the movie had so much potential, they could have done so much with it ... then ...??? they just let it walk out the door.

Other (really) good movies that leave you hanging:

* Babel
* Crash

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 25, 2012 12:35:22 PM PDT
Tonè says:
<<<<UrMajesty says:
Not to knock your desire for closure but Hollywood has corrupted the human psyche and now there is a constant uproar if there isn't a neat little pink bow presented at the end of every story. Not every story begins with once upon a time and "NOTHING" ends with "and they lived happily ever after" except in a fairy-tale and that's the problem.>>>>

If we're accepting bad endings in movies, then we can accept bad starts --- i.e. characters introduced from nowhere who do inexplicable things without motive. That's the way life is?

Posted on Mar 25, 2012 12:48:38 PM PDT
Cuvtixo says:
There are several thousand years of tradition for telling stories- with closure- and usually happy endings at that. Sure, "Disney/Hollywood" doesn't do much to break convention, but making an ending without closure doesn't automatically make a great work of art, either. The end of the series "Twin Peaks" was bitterly disappointing to me. It was a mystery series that had no good reason to break with the promise of solving the mystery and I had invested so much time and emotion into it. I can can do without closure if the movie is very good and such an ending is appropriate, sometimes it ain't appropriate.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 25, 2012 12:53:23 PM PDT
Green Meanie says:
A good example is Revenge of the Dead. The end had a dead wife come back to life and the hero hugs her but then you hear a waterfall and then a scream and then the credits roll.

Posted on Mar 25, 2012 3:51:50 PM PDT
Cuvtixo says:
A movie I liked with an abrupt ending and no resolution or closure is 1966 Blow Up It ends with the main character watching hippie-types pretend to play tennis on a tennis court! Somehow it fit because the main character is confused and clueless about what to do next -- And it was fun to think about what he might do. Blow Out (The Criterion Collection) [Blu-ray] has a similar plot- but Hollywoodized and instead of a photographer, John Travolta plays a sound engineer. I wish that one ended more abruptly (hint: in the end the guy saves the girl)

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 26, 2012 12:12:15 AM PDT
Balok says:
@Cuvtixo:

"The end of the series "Twin Peaks" was bitterly disappointing to me. It was a mystery series that had no good reason to break with the promise of solving the mystery and I had invested so much time and emotion into it."

If you mean the disclosure of Laura's murderer, that was the network's idea, not the creators', and it left the creators floundering for a while, partially because Lynch was off doing something else, and partially because they had to think of an excuse for keeping Agent Cooper in town. If you mean the cliffhanger series finale, the reason that the series ends with a cliffhanger is that at the time the final episode was written, it was not known that the series would be cancelled, and the "final episode" was intended to leave issues to be resolved in the following season.

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 12:12:34 PM PDT
Green Meanie says:
The final Sopranos is another good example of leaving you hanging when the credits roll.

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 1:42:10 PM PDT
I had no problem with the ending of "The Ides of March". The story showed the full disillusionment of the Ryan Gosling character quite well, and his empty stare at the end was quite effective.

The only Godard film I've ever seen was "Every Man For Himself". The film ends so abruptly it's as if the projector suddenly broke down in the middle of a scene. The lights instantly came up, and when somebody down front yelled out "RIIIIIIP-OFF!!!!", everybody in the audience applauded.

A recent article on the Sopranos claimed that the ending was chosen because the writers figured the audience really didn't want to see anybody get iced. So they went with anti-closure. I didn't see it, nor had I watched the series, so I can't judge what they did as valid or not.

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid had an elegant solution to the problem. Butch and Sundance had to die, but you see a freeze frame of them in their last valiant attempt at escape. Had Sam Peckinpah made the film, you would have had ninety seconds of slow-mo carnage and buckets of blood....and the audience would have been disgusted, and the film would've gotten miserable word-of-mouth, and might well have tanked at the box office. Would we even know who Robert Redford was had that happened?

In the book of interviews with Truffaut, Alfred Hitchcock said that movie audiences will accept an unhappy ending to a film if there has been sufficient entertainment value throughout. And Butch Cassidy certainly had this.

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 1:48:50 PM PDT
Much as I love "Monty Python and the Holy Grail", the strange ending does hurt. The "filming" is shut down by the police, and we are shown a pink screen and three minutes of "filler" organ music. It's a conceptual joke that must have seemed like a hilarious idea in theory, but watching pink screen is not really funny. "The Meaning of Life" has a similar anti-climax. The meaning of life is finally shown us....and it's an obscenity. I love the Pythons, don't get me wrong, but in both cases you get the sense that they didn't know how to end the movie and just shrugged their shoulders.

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 3:28:47 PM PDT
Savage Lucy says:
The Pythons were masters of the absurd. What's absurd about a conventional ending that ties up loose ends/wraps up the issues addressed in the picture?

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 4:56:48 PM PDT
stevign says:
I like endings either way, as long as it makes sense and feels organic to do so. Call me cynical but it seems to me that many movies with vague endings are made out of a desire for the movie-makers to look cool and hip among their contemporaries and fans.

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 5:05:37 PM PDT
J. Baker says:
Hip To Be Garry Marshall.

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 5:24:45 PM PDT
Savage Lucy:

I take your point. But there is funny absurd and there is boring absurd. Three minutes of pink screen with organ music was boring absurd. The knights who say "Ni!!" were funny absurd. The movie is still a classic, but the ending just wasn't very good.

If absurdity per se were the objective, they could have filmed ninety minutes of visual gibberish, maybe running it backward, sound and all. But no one would have sat through more than a few minutes of it.

They were comedians, and their job was to be funny, and for 95% of "Holy Grail", they succeeded, and that's a bigger percentage than even the best film comedies can claim. So I say, hooray for "Holy Grail"!! Despite the thud of a conclusion.

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 5:39:01 PM PDT
Green Meanie says:
The Holy Mountain had me on a journey then the Director gave me the finger with that ending.

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 6:18:50 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 26, 2012 6:19:21 PM PDT
Oz le Fou says:
I've grown to enjoy unresolved - or open ended - endings. When younger I preferred everything to be wrapped up nicely, but nowadays I prefer the ambiguous ending. The open ending has become more fashionable, so with more films doing it, there are more examples of it working.
Of late, both 'No Country For Old Men', and 'A Serious Man' offered the open end, which works so well with these films. The glory of these two examples is its left up to us to decide how it really ends, as opposed to an ending that fails to satisfy (which depending on how bad the ending is, can sully the whole film).

Another that springs to mind is the brilliant ending of 'Broken Flowers'. At first we think it's been wrapped up, but that last shot leaves it as open as it ever was, and that ending makes me smile every time i see it (which is often - i really dig that film).

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 6:24:32 PM PDT
Green Meanie says:
I like Grindhouse Type Movies and there was a recent Zombie Film that the title eludes me now. Anyway it was shot with Someone's Camera Phone !! Anyway the heroes are running from the Zombies and then a freeze frame of them running and then the credits roll. That is the type of ending that I hate.

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 6:27:10 PM PDT
I really don't like it when movies end with a ending it makes me feel cheated.
All I can think of is AND THEN or What happens next...

Posted on Mar 26, 2012 6:50:18 PM PDT
Laust Cawz says:
I LOVE when a movie is left without any definite resolution
(assuming I think it's a good movie to begin with),
just so long as the movie doesn't contradict any of its own plot points.

What I HATE is the phony, tacked-on happy ending that completely defies
everything else that's happened. That's when I feel horribly manipulated.
Some examples of this aren't quite so blatant ("Xanadu" comes to mind),
while others are positively shameless about it ("E.T.", anyone?).
If a happy or resolved ending makes sense,
I don't necessarily have a problem with it.

"Mixed Nuts" (1994) has a happy & resolved ending,
but it doesn't just come out of nowhere.
In fact, it makes sense & actually follows up on other elements of the story.
Maybe the only great movie Nora Ephron's ever done.

Cuvtixo--

(SPOILER ALERT!!!!)

At the end of "Blow-Out", the guy (Travolta's Jack Terry)
does NOT, in fact, save the girl (Nancy Allen's Sally).
Her recorded screams are later used for the horror movie
for which Jack is providing sound.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 27, 2012 12:48:36 AM PDT
Balok says:
@W. David English:

"In the book of interviews with Truffaut, Alfred Hitchcock said that movie audiences will accept an unhappy ending to a film if there has been sufficient entertainment value throughout."

Where in the book does he say that?
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Movie forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Movie forum
Participants:  29
Total posts:  129
Initial post:  Mar 24, 2012
Latest post:  Mar 29, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 5 customers

Search Customer Discussions