Great movie, but what a disappointing ending!

Keith Kelly3 said:I partially agree. It’s totally wrong for people to assume everything from Hollywood's Golden Age is some kind of masterpiece—there were plenty of bad movies back then, too. For me, the Dracula from Van Helsing doesn't even touch the '31 version, and the same goes for the werewolf and Frankenstein stuff. At the very least, the acting is better. I will give you this: Van Helsing has a certain undeniable charm when you're watching it...

OT—everyone was hyping up the ending of Van Helsing like it was some massive twist, but after Kate Beckinsale died, I just didn't care. Though, she was 😍

My issue with those old horror flicks is the overacting. I suppose modern method actors have spoiled my tastes. If you can find it, try looking up a documentary on how they filmed Van Helsing. There are some great bloopers...

David Price5 said:My issue with those old horror flicks is the overacting. I suppose modern method actors have spoiled my tastes. If you can find it, try looking up a documentary on how they filmed Van Helsing. There are some great bloopers...

I know exactly what you mean—I think our generation just isn't used to that style of acting, so it looks ridiculous to us now. Apparently, though, it was terrifying back then.

Pretty sure I saw that documentary on a DVD extra once. Liked it—the movie itself has some pretty cool touches too.

Personally, I thought all The Ring movies were great. Even the third part had a perfect fantasy ending, though I know plenty of purists and fans of Tolkien will probably argue against it (they miss the showdown with Sauron and the whole industrialization angle, which honestly would've been a pretty bad ending in my book). Thinking about this topic, some random movie just popped into my head: I Am Legend with Will Smith. Not only did the ending let me down (including that alternative version), but the entire second half—all that religious nonsense with the daughter and the fighting monsters... man, the movie could have been so much better if they just stuck to the book. Cast Away with Tom Hanks also had a totally crappy Hollywood ending. I mean, who actually falls for the joke that after a dangerous ocean voyage on a raft, you're suddenly saved and perfectly adjusted to civilization after just one camera cut, despite having spent months talking to a VOLLEYBALL!?! War of the Worlds with Cruise started off great too; the plot was developing nicely until it hit that endgame stretch filled with mindless bombs, action, and an ultimately disappointing happy ending (the idea that aliens traveling at light speed in spaceships were killed by microbes (!) — if that isn't the peak of stupidity, I don't know what is. Sure, it's like that in the 1898 book, but science has progressed since then, and so has the average viewer...). Batman Begins also really disappointed me with its finale. The movie spends the whole time on character development and psychological depth, only to turn into a brainless rock concert full of flashy explosions and stupid train scenes. I'll also mention Knowing which I watched recently, featuring Cage. It starts off so well and builds tension, only to force in the whole formula involving aliens, some crazy lady and her daughter, Noah's ark, Adam and Eve... it was just a disaster and the epitome of stupidity. I can think of others, but I'll add them later.

rustyscout34 said:Personally, I thought all The Ring movies were great. Even the third part had a perfect fantasy ending, though I know plenty of purists and fans of Tolkien will probably argue against it (they miss the showdown with Sauron and the whole industrialization angle, which honestly would've been a pretty bad ending in my book). Thinking about this topic, some random movie just popped into my head: I Am Legend with Will Smith. Not only did the ending let me down (including that alternative version), but the entire second half—all that religious nonsense with the daughter and the fighting monsters... man, the movie could have been so much better if they just stuck to the book. Cast Away with Tom Hanks also had a totally crappy Hollywood ending. I mean, who actually falls for the joke that after a dangerous ocean voyage on a raft, you're suddenly saved and perfectly adjusted to civilization after just one camera cut, despite having spent months talking to a VOLLEYBALL!?! War of the Worlds with Cruise started off great too; the plot was developing nicely until it hit that endgame stretch filled with mindless bombs, action, and an ultimately disappointing happy ending (the idea that aliens traveling at light speed in spaceships were killed by microbes (!) — if that isn't the peak of stupidity, I don't know what is. Sure, it's like that in the 1898 book, but science has progressed since then, and so has the average viewer...). Batman Begins also really disappointed me with its finale. The movie spends the whole time on character development and psychological depth, only to turn into a brainless rock concert full of flashy explosions and stupid train scenes. I'll also mention Knowing which I watched recently, featuring Cage. It starts off so well and builds tension, only to force in the whole formula involving aliens, some crazy lady and her daughter, Noah's ark, Adam and Eve... it was just a disaster and the epitome of stupidity. I can think of others, but I'll add them later.

I don't buy it. IMO, the ending was actually pretty solid and realistic, even if some people want to overanalyze everything. I don't get why everyone is making such a huge deal out of one tiny detail. I wouldn't even know where to start trying to figure out a superior race.Just because they're smarter doesn't mean they're right. Either their immune systems are on autopilot or they’re just built tougher than us.I honestly don't see where you're getting this from... we aren't even talking about ID4 here. It wasn't like Cruise personally wiped out every single alien at the end like Will Smith; the military fought them, which goes without saying... they just failed miserably. To be real, Cruise didn't do anything in that movie that an average guy wouldn't have done... he was just fighting to stay alive and protect his kids. The only part where... The guy who survived. He shouldn't have...

Not that I'm looking for a fight... just putting my two cents out there.👍

War of the worlds—that’s basically how the book wraps things up...

Nicholas Walker3 said:The ending is really just one part of the whole movie—I wouldn't go so far as to single it out specifically...

I think you're missing the mark this time. Honestly, the ending totally shapes how the whole movie lands. For some of them, that final scene is pretty much the only reason they stick in my mind. PredatorSo, let's take that last Eastwood guy, for example. Gran Torino *Gran Torino* will be remembered forever, mostly because that ending was handled with such incredible mastery. It just worked. But imagine if they had gone a different way—something much worse. Like, what if Eastwood just grabbed a gun, took out the whole gang himself, and then we ended the movie watching him sitting there alone? I guess that would have ruined the whole point. Gran Torino Cross the border into Mexico. If you aren't totally disgusted by an ending like that, then more power to you—but you're really out here saying that? The ending is just one part of the movie. I wouldn't go separating it out on its own..

Honestly, even this ending didn't really blow me away—there isn't anything here that hasn't been done a million times before in movies like Wild Horde, Duck You Sucker, and plenty of others...

Richard Wilson4 said:War of the worlds—that’s basically how the book wraps things up...

But who said the ending of the book was actually good?

I don't see why a tiny detail like that couldn't wipe out a supposedly superior race. Being smarter doesn't automatically mean they have stronger immune systems than us!

The ships were buried for millennia. This invasion was long-planned. It’s hard to believe a civilization so technologically advanced wouldn't think to check the air. They could have easily realized the oxygen itself was lethal to them, perhaps due to methane levels or something similar. Such a truth might exist, but a highly advanced, aggressive occupying force shouldn't be that careless.

Talking about random topics here, but I Am Legend with Will Smith immediately comes to mind. Not only did the ending disappoint me (including the alternative version), but the entire second half involving that religious woman and her son, plus the fights with monsters... it just didn't work.

(If I recall correctly, he dies at the end of the book too. Of course, the vibe is different since there is no sacrifice involved..)

Cast Away with Tom Hanks also had a terrible Hollywood ending for me. I mean, who falls for the cliché where after such a harrowing ocean journey on a raft...

Wasn't he supposed to lose his ability to speak due to PTSD? He isn't shown much at the end, but trust me, he changed.

Quote: Batman Begins also really disappointed me with its conclusion. The movie focuses so much on character development and psychological depth, only to turn into a mindless action flick filled with flashy explosions and stupid train scenes.

Is it an action movie with a final showdown or a standard film with a proper resolution?

Even this ending didn't particularly impress me; nothing we haven't seen in movies before (Wild Horde).

Not at all. The protagonists might end up in a similar way in both films, but those are two completely different conclusions. The reasons why the gang in the Wild Bunch went out fighting are entirely different from why Clint

The whole thing really comes down to the fact that both heroes end up facing their own internal battles at the end!

Nicholas Walker3 said:The whole thing really comes down to the fact that both heroes end up facing their own internal battles at the end!

True, but that’s getting a bit too broad. If we go by that logic, we could include any movie where the actors actually survive the finale.
The ending of *Gran Torino* feels uniquely different because most of us are intimately familiar with Clint Eastwood's body of work. We all remember how many of his films traditionally wrap up with a burst of violence where the villains get what's coming to them. Honestly, I fully expected *Gran Torino* to follow that pattern. Instead, we were given a much better resolution. The innocent walk free, the bad guys head to prison, and our protagonist gets to keep his peace of mind... without firing a single shot. 👍

Anthony Smith3 said:I don't buy it. IMO, the ending was actually pretty solid and realistic, even if some people want to overanalyze everything. I don't get why everyone is making such a huge deal out of one tiny detail. I wouldn't even know where to start trying to figure out a superior race.Just because they're smarter doesn't mean they're right. Either their immune systems are on autopilot or they’re just built tougher than us.I honestly don't see where you're getting this from... we aren't even talking about ID4 here. It wasn't like Cruise personally wiped out every single alien at the end like Will Smith; the military fought them, which goes without saying... they just failed miserably. To be real, Cruise didn't do anything in that movie that an average guy wouldn't have done... he was just fighting to stay alive and protect his kids. The only part where... The guy who survived. He shouldn't have...

Not that I'm looking for a fight... just putting my two cents out there.👍

let's just think logically for a second. i guess you'd agree that human history is basically just a series of small steps that eventually led to massive shifts in how we live and see things. before fire was mastered, people couldn't, say, cook meat, so mortality rates were probably higher. then came the wheel, which made building stuff way easier. until cars existed, people spent months traveling from point A to point B. then planes, then rockets, maybe one day we'll have starships. what i'm getting at is that progress didn't happen overnight, and it follows a certain logic or sequence. we didn't drive cars before we invented the wheel, right? so i don't get how aliens who can travel through space easily, cross huge distances quickly, and colonize planets, wouldn't have figured out DNA, genomes, bacteria, or microbes first! (if those Signsi guys from Shamellan were actually logical, there isn't much point in arguing this further, is there?)

Anthony Smith3 said:I don't buy it. IMO, the ending was actually pretty solid and realistic, even if some people want to overanalyze everything. I don't get why everyone is making such a huge deal out of one tiny detail. I wouldn't even know where to start trying to figure out a superior race.Just because they're smarter doesn't mean they're right. Either their immune systems are on autopilot or they’re just built tougher than us.I honestly don't see where you're getting this from... we aren't even talking about ID4 here. It wasn't like Cruise personally wiped out every single alien at the end like Will Smith; the military fought them, which goes without saying... they just failed miserably. To be real, Cruise didn't do anything in that movie that an average guy wouldn't have done... he was just fighting to stay alive and protect his kids. The only part where... The guy who survived. He shouldn't have...

Not that I'm looking for a fight... just putting my two cents out there.👍

it's fine. if we can just agree the movie is good but has a major flaw, then there's no need. (i watched it three times even though i thought the ending sucked) 👍

If you somehow find the logic behind those Signsi from Shamealan acceptable, then there really isn't any point in us continuing this debate, is there?

If you think about it, most of the major agricultural belts are located far inland anyway, so their positioning isn't actually that nonsensical... though I have to admit, their Achilles' heel was definitely bothering me too.

Right, because taking out a twenty-meter-tall, three-legged killing machine with nothing but a single bomb is just a casual daily task for the average guy like me—just to kill some time.

You’re selling yourself short :-). You don't truly know what you're capable of until you put it to the test :-)

You don't need to be a Marine or spend ten years in the service to be precise when handling something the size of a bomb.

David Price5 said:

If you somehow find the logic behind those Signsi from Shamealan acceptable, then there really isn't any point in us continuing this debate, is there?

If you think about it, most of the major agricultural belts are located far inland anyway, so their positioning isn't actually that nonsensical... though I have to admit, their Achilles' heel was definitely bothering me too.

Right, because taking out a twenty-meter-tall, three-legged killing machine with nothing but a single bomb is just a casual daily task for the average guy like me—just to kill some time.

You’re selling yourself short :-). You don't truly know what you're capable of until you put it to the test :-)

You don't need to be a Marine or spend ten years in the service to be precise when handling something the size of a bomb.

fair point. after all that practice in Half-Life 2, i guess i could probably take him out without even needing a bomb... 😁

rustyscout34 said:fair point. after all that practice in Half-Life 2, i guess i could probably take him out without even needing a bomb... 😁

You're reading my mind again. I was just about to drop a Freeman reference 😁

David Price5, the ending actually works because it's the only way we could've ever stood a chance against enemies that advanced...
But yeah, I guess it’s a little weird they didn't check, though honestly, viruses and stuff are always mutating anyway...

Insomnia

Richard Wilson4 said:David Price5, the ending actually works because it's the only way we could've ever stood a chance against enemies that advanced...
But yeah, I guess it’s a little weird they didn't check, though honestly, viruses and stuff are always mutating anyway...

Why did we even need to win? It could have ended with us losing—which wouldn't be the first time—or an open ending where we still managed to put up a fight. Honestly, both would have been better, though I'd prefer the resistance scenario. :-)

Imagine an ending without the virus—maybe a FlashForward set 100 years later. The entire country is overgrown with red weeds, aliens have built their own civilization here, and we see famous landmarks in ruins. That's it. We're just gone...

David Price5 said:True, but that’s getting a bit too broad. If we go by that logic, we could include any movie where the actors actually survive the finale.
The ending of *Gran Torino* feels uniquely different because most of us are intimately familiar with Clint Eastwood's body of work. We all remember how many of his films traditionally wrap up with a burst of violence where the villains get what's coming to them. Honestly, I fully expected *Gran Torino* to follow that pattern. Instead, we were given a much better resolution. The innocent walk free, the bad guys head to prison, and our protagonist gets to keep his peace of mind... without firing a single shot. 👍

...because otherwise, the bad guys wouldn't end up in jail anyway...

And honestly—Clint's whole body of work isn't really what you described—that mostly applies to movies like Dirty Harry. Personally, I found the ending totally expected, and when I first saw it, I couldn't wrap my head around why people made such a huge deal out of the finale. Then it hit me: the idea that Clint's legacy is tied to this specific style is just total nonsense. Every movie should stand on its own—you shouldn't hype up a film just because of some old connection to a previous cast. It reminds me of that ridiculous scene where Neo falls in a duel with a rat—I mean, logically, someone has to go down!

Nicholas Walker3 said:...because otherwise, the bad guys wouldn't end up in jail anyway...

And honestly—Clint's whole body of work isn't really what you described—that mostly applies to movies like Dirty Harry. Personally, I found the ending totally expected, and when I first saw it, I couldn't wrap my head around why people made such a huge deal out of the finale. Then it hit me: the idea that Clint's legacy is tied to this specific style is just total nonsense. Every movie should stand on its own—you shouldn't hype up a film just because of some old connection to a previous cast. It reminds me of that ridiculous scene where Neo falls in a duel with a rat—I mean, logically, someone has to go down!

It simply won't fly. We already knew they were committing crimes without facing any consequences. They even assaulted a relative and got away with it. But after this latest stunt, they can't hide behind their excuses anymore.

Nicholas Walker3 said:...because otherwise, the bad guys wouldn't end up in jail anyway...

And honestly—Clint's whole body of work isn't really what you described—that mostly applies to movies like Dirty Harry. Personally, I found the ending totally expected, and when I first saw it, I couldn't wrap my head around why people made such a huge deal out of the finale. Then it hit me: the idea that Clint's legacy is tied to this specific style is just total nonsense. Every movie should stand on its own—you shouldn't hype up a film just because of some old connection to a previous cast. It reminds me of that ridiculous scene where Neo falls in a duel with a rat—I mean, logically, someone has to go down!

To be honest, my first association with Clint Eastwood’s acting is always Harry Callahan, rather than that guy with the orangutan or the circus manager. I can't quite recall what all the fuss was about regarding that showdown between Pacino and De Niro. I don't remember there being much of a stir.

David Price5 said:It simply won't fly. We already knew they were committing crimes without facing any consequences. They even assaulted a relative and got away with it. But after this latest stunt, they can't hide behind their excuses anymore.

To be honest, my first association with Clint Eastwood’s acting is always Harry Callahan, rather than that guy with the orangutan or the circus manager. I can't quite recall what all the fuss was about regarding that showdown between Pacino and De Niro. I don't remember there being much of a stir.

I mean, what did I actually say? 😛