Does anybody feel the ending is abrupt? That structurally it lacks balance because there is no coherent conclusion? I hear the director intended to make a sequel: it surprises me that this should be a matter of conjecture, since as I see it, the end (or final part) is clearly missing.
You're just wasting your breath, and that's no great loss, either.
I felt that the ending was brillant, there should not be a part 3, I hope there won't be one. The final scene is very emotional and meaningful...a desperate man abandoning his 'morality' in search for his long dreams, the dream which he may not even surely know himself what it really is...and what is stopping him is the crowd of people having fun, sumbolizing the social conditionings. Sometimes we all have this immposible dream, vaguly defined, and it can be forgotten due to weak motiation or social pressures. \
[deleted]
[deleted]
thanks for your comment akon5!
I was a bit ambivalent about the ending, having just finished the film less than a hour ago, but your comment reasonates and makes me appreciate it much more when you dig deeper in the intent and meaning.
To my knowledge ,they never talked about a third part;anyway Carné's star,the glorious Arletty,had problems when the movie was released.They did not forgive her for falling in love with a German and she was jailed for some months and blacklisted (like the greatHenri-George"Diabolique" Clouzot ,and she returned to work only in 1949.
Arletty could not attend the premiere of the movie;she was not invited !
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
The ending as originally scripted has Baptiste striking down - and leaving for dead - Jericho as the latter accosts him whilst he's trying to find Garance. This is a reference to an incident in the life of the model for Baptiste: Jean-Baptiste Debureau. (Lemaitre and Lacenaire are also based on historical originals.) For me, it's a pity that Carne didn't film the original ending, it would have been satisfying and resonant to see the informer figure done in like this.
shareI first saw LES ENFANTS DU PARADIS on stage in 1995 (a touring company in the UK), and Baptiste did strike down and kill Jericho in this manner because the old man is deliberately blocking his way.
It is satisfying to see Jericho get what's coming to him, but equally I hated the idea of innocent Baptiste being left with blood on his hands. He's not Lacenaire, he has more respect for human life than that, and I believe that's why the murder was dropped from the final version.
I just finished watching the film on DVD and I too felt that the ending was not consistent with the feel of the rest of the film. It certainly had that look of studio editing without directorial input that afflicted Orson Welles' "The Magnificent Ambersons." The brief shot of Garance in the carriage lacked the finesse of the editing of the rest of the film.
Compare the ending of the second part with the ending of the first part, to see what I mean. The dramatic tempo at the end of the first part was impeccable. At the end of the second part, the tempo was choppy.
I also noticed that the film ended nearly exactly on 3 hours. I was expecting 186 minutes from the DVD case. The last six minutes were filled with trailers, and a blank stretch. This is consistent with another poster's argument that there was some sort of regulation restricting films to 90 minutes in Occupied France.
Still, I think most of the story was told by that point. There wouldn't have been much left of the film anyway, but a neater ending would have been less jarring. It wouldn't have taken much, say something along the lines of the end of Casablanca. Baptiste and Frederick together, or something like that.
Oh well.
It is unsatisfying, especially after three+ hours of these characters, it really needed a better resolution. I enjoyed it and there's a lot to admire, but there are flaws too and that's one of them.
share