MovieChat Forums > Dead Reckoning (1947) Discussion > Holy Mackeral! Am I the only one confus...

Holy Mackeral! Am I the only one confused by the ending?

posted 16 years ago by contact-258
14 replies | jump to latest

I really enjoyed this film. And maybe I'm not recognizing some film rule that Film Noirs are supposed to be confusing.

But I was following the movie quite well I thought until the very end.

SPOILERS!!!!

I am very confused as to why she was trying to shoot Rip in the end. Maybe I need to watch it again. Did she not really love Rip? Was she working for Martinelli the whole time? Was she never planning on running away with Rip? I'm sure there are many of you that are much smarter than I am, so please explain the ending.

[–] chuckleberryfinn21 16 years ago

She was just out for herself. She was a user of men.

She used Martinelli to get out of the slum. She used her 'husband' for money and Bogarts friend for an alibi. All she wanted was the evidence that could prove her guilt. She thought Bogart had it as he left the house, so she shot at him.

That is how he knew she was bad news.

[–] sjankis630 14 years ago

I also get the impression that she would have taken care of Bogie after they had gotten away and she had the gun. Which was the only piece of evidence that allowed Martinelli to blackmail her.

[–] franzkabuki 12 years ago

Well it is kind of strange of her as she had just strongly & repeatedly insisted Bogart should ´not´ go and try to retrieve the gun to begin with.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] lrschuler-396-989644 12 years ago

True, but she also had just said - they could go hop a train to New Orleans and 'get lost' ... so Martinelli having the gun would no longer matter to her.

[–] jawebster2000 12 years ago

franzkabuki got it wrong, probably intentionally so, indicating he is a Reagan hating Liberal. The correct Reagan quote is "facts are stubborn things" and so is the truth Mr. Kabuki!

[–] franzkabuki 11 years ago

The quote is right all right and you know it. More right, in fact, than the other version cuz it accurately describes the mindset of your doddering fool of an idol and the other lying sociopaths in his administration.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] fbergeot-1 10 years ago

The truth (if it exists) seems too be here:

http://oupacademic.tumblr.com/post/60397790031/misquotation-facts-are-stupid-things

[–] northsouth1 8 years ago

"Lying sociopaths"? It sounds like you've dodderingly confused the Reagan administration with the Clinton administration. Perhaps you're projecting?

[–] USAFmedicVET 7 years ago

In Ronald Reagan's speech at the 1988 Republican Convention, his statement in misquoting *John Adams* is: "facts are stupid things..stubborn things should I say".
Reagan-Haters delight in leaving out his IMMEDIATE CORRECTION. This only makes them look like conniving FOOLS willing to distort Historical Accuracy to make the narrative fit their agenda!-sad-
______________

"We in it shall be remembered;
We few, We Happy few,
We Band of Brothers"
~ Shakespeare

[–] liscarkat (16469) 5 years ago

True, this idiot who uses the Reagan misquote won't admit he's a fool. Yeah, Reagan said it, but in context it was clearly a slip of the tongue and even he laughed at his own mistake when he said it. But it's just the sort of thing a leftard will desperately grasp at and distort.

[–] Zanza8 11 years ago

The ending was pretty clear. She would be with Rip because she liked him, until he "pushed her." That's how she described taking care of herself-somebody always pushed her and then she would do something. Wonder how many bodies she had racked up. Anyway, she would have taken off with Rip if she could, but he insisted on getting the gun. She saw that she couldn't control him, so she tried to kill him. Simple as that.

http://thinkingoutloud-descartes.blogspot.com/

[–] telegonus 9 years ago

Not so much confusing as weird: Rip's affection for the dying Lizabeth Soott threw me for a loop given that she had tried to kill him a few hours earlier, that he was badly beaten up and nearly died in a car crash, and now he's saying "Geronimo" to her as if she was one of his flying buddies from the war  . Seems kinda like an insult to deceased former comrades to tell her that she'll be in good company,--with them!--this makes no sense. It's an enjoyable, well made movie but the relationships are poorly thought out, especially the Bogart and Scott one. She was a psychopath, he knew it, and yet this been around the block hard guy from St. Louis gets suckered in by her again and again. I can understand why Scott's character would shoot Bogart's as he left Martinelli's,--that was her nature--but Rip! 

[–] Techto (1061) 4 months ago

I agree that Bogart’s feelings for Mike (Lisabeth Scott) are a muddle. He admits to having caught feelings for her and that they will only fade with time. The way I interpreted Bogie’s comforting parting words to her was that he was showing compassion to a dying person — a bad person but nonetheless someone for whom he had cared.

[–] [deleted] 7 months ago

i thought she didn't kill her husband.