MovieChat Forums > The Naked Spur (1953) Discussion > Hated the Ending

Hated the Ending

posted 13 years ago by chefmetalguy
8 replies | jump to latest

I just finished this movie 5 minutes ago. I thought the movie itself was nice, characterization, pacing, angle, all that stuff but I thought the ending was rediculouly unrealistic. You're telling me this guy is gonna give up 5000 in 1800's money which is like 100 grand today for a broad he just met five days ago? C'mon now its so unbelievable and not based in any type of reality what a bad way to end a movie, might as well have a CGI unicorn come via a rainbow and whisk them away at the end. Sheesh.

reply

[–] Percivalx 13 years ago

Great movie but also found the ending weak.

“Let's be crooked, but never common”

reply

[–] Lord_Snizzleditch 13 years ago

You are an idiot.

This movie isn't about money.

This movie is about the corosive affect obession has on the soul.

James Stewart's character was never a bad person but his obession with capturing Robert Ryan turned him into something he could never live with.

He didn't give up the money for the "broad" he gave up the money to save his soul. The "broad" only showed him something he knew deep inside.

In the game of chess you can never let your adversary see your pieces.

reply

[–] beauedson 13 years ago

the plot - the bounty itself - was out of whack with the somewhat minimal drama of showing mercy v. treating ryan like cattle. too many beats repeated in between, it seemed stewart was already over his destructive ways by showing mercy to ryan several times when ryan's actions didn't even remotely warrant mercy, but then we get the emotional outburst at the end telling us - not showing really - that stewart apparently wasn't over it yet. cut out a bunch of scenes in the middle and the ending might work, but it feels way off as is

if instead of that outburst it was just a shot of stewart digging a hole, maybe with leigh putting her arm around him, ryan's body in the shot or not (if not, could be burying old man), id have no problem with it. jimmy was out of line with that sob attack tho

reply

[–] athomed 12 years ago

It wasn't just about the girl. He didn't do it for the girl. He did it because that wasn't the man he wanted to be. Lina helped affirm that for him. I do like the scene where Kemp breaks down. It was a hard life and he had lost so much. He made getting his ranch back a priority above all else, even turning to being a bounty hunter to make the necessary money, breaking down and ultimately deciding to bury Ben cleansed Kemp's soul.

_______
Stripping under the name Malcolm Sex, I pleased the ladies by any means necessary.

reply

[–] Xcalat3 12 years ago

It wasn't just about the girl. He didn't do it for the girl. He did it because that wasn't the man he wanted to be.

this.

When there's no more room in hell, The dead will walk the earth...

reply

[–] jhvaughan2 12 years ago

If the ending was just as you expected, would you then call it predictable?

Unlike many films today, some films (and literature) have a message that the creators wish to present. Film is/was not always just about the plot. A message does not have to be morality or preaching, it can just be about the human spirit.

The other hit it head on. The message was about Kemp's "redemption". The money did not represent wealth, it represent putting things back they way they used to be. In his quest for this had become someone he despised. He yelled at everyone because he was mad at himself. Lina gave him someone to care about, which brought out the person he wanted to be, and the realization that the ranch represented his lost love, not a livelihood. Buying it back would not make things good again.

reply

[–] deforest-1 10 years ago

The ending as it is is soooo predictable. He's going to say to his beautiful young co-star, "Don't know why you're in this movie -- Get lost, I'll take the $5,000 and stick with my dream of the ranch!" He despised himself because his previous "love" had given him very low self-esteem by preferring someone worthless. I would say that if I could have the ranch AND Janet Leigh -- as she allowed him to in the end -- I would have taken both, not thrown $5,000 away as a "symbolic" gesture when they could have used it to settle down.

reply

[–] prplayer 8 years ago

it didn't bother me, i mean he was out to get the money, but ended up with something much better: Janet Leigh

so many movies, so little time

reply