Which Ending Is Better?


IMHO, the original ending where the bomb exploding is the end of the film is significantly better and darker than the one which is included on the DVD (the man and women standing on the beach). If I remember correctly, they edited that in as the official 'lost ending'?

reply

I saw this movie at a revival house in the early to mid '90's. I loved it, but was kind of disappointed with the ending. It was just too abrupt and it didn't make sense. I left the theater scratching my head...
Fast-forward to last night - I watched the new restored version, and I understood it. It actually made sense! I figured I was either drunk or too young and dumb to understand the ending when I first saw it 15 years ago.
Today, I look at imdb and find out there are two endings and now everything makes perfect sense. The following link is in the FAQ section and is fantastic:
http://www.noiroftheweek.com/2007/07/restoration-of-kiss-me-deadly-1955.html

To answer your question - The restored copy with the original ending is better for a myriad of reasons. The censored version is an abomination. Not only does it NOT make sense, it was done just to pander to religious conservatives in the South.

reply

I think the beach ending of wounded Hammer and the chick caught between the raging inferno and the stormy sea is one of the most stunning in all of film history. Gets the terror of nuclear holocaust across alright.



"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

reply

I can understand not liking the edited version, but to call it "the censored version" is daft. It's not censored. In fact, it's more violent. Pandering to religious conservatives in the South? As an atheist liberal in California I have to admit I thought my darker impulses were the ones being pandered to. I don't understand how "they set off a bomb and it blew up and killed them" is any more confusing than "they set off a bomb and it blew up but they escaped."

The choice of ending boils down to Spillane's character. He milked Hammer for loads of novels and naturally he had no need for Hammer to die off. And so he survives in the story. As good as this movie is, Hammer was always a silly character - a big, dumb cartoon detective who was invincible, impenetrable and little more than a way for Spillane to act out all his fantasies, both sexual and revenge. He makes Doc Savage look like something out of Dreiser. The director of the film had no intention of crossing Spillane on this and so the movie has him live.

But somewhere along the line a producer saw the film and said, "Who the f--- cares about the Hammer legacy? This isn't my baby. Let's just have this one end with a huge explosion." And I don't think it was a bad decision. After all, the guy in D.O.A. bit the bullet (another awesome dark ending) and his poison was nothing compared to the radiation Hammer took.

Hell, Hammer went on to star in loads of adventures. So credibility wasn't anywhere near Spillane's thinking.

A tip: [*URL][/URL](remove the asterisk) for all your linking needs. spread the word Use this sig!

reply

[deleted]

I much prefer the short, abrupt ending in which we lose sight of Hammer and Velda as they round the corner of that darkened, strobe-lit hallway.

It's scarier and more mysterious, and when the words "THE END" appear out of that burgeoning atomic cloud, it's as though the movie is daring us to argue with that.

hkfilmnews.blogspot.com
porfle.blogspot.com

reply

I much prefer the shorter ending. The ambiguity of the visuals in that ending makes it possible that the nuclear blast has fanned out much further than just the beach house. The characters' actions may have inadvertently led to the nuking of a huge area--perhaps all of L.A. That sort of dark, existential ending fits in well with film noir ideas of fate and with the overall bleak tone of _Kiss Me Deadly_.

reply

I have a feeling many of you are only favoring the truncated ending due to seeing so many other films in which the hero dies.

I feel you guys would say Doyle gets shot at the end of The French Connection even though the filmmakers insist the sound was for a dramatic effect.


"Listen, do you smell something? -Ray Stantz"

reply

Not me. As I said, I much prefer the shorter, more abrupt ending of KISS ME DEADLY but not once has it ever even occurred to me that Popeye gets shot at the end of THE FRENCH CONNECTION.

hkfilmnews.blogspot.com
porfle.blogspot.com

reply

If Mike was blown up at the end, there couldn't be a television series.

Click the link to see what I mean
http://www.imdb.com/find?q=mike+hammer&s=all

reply

The intended ending with Mike and Velda watching the house burn from the surf is so much darker.

They're watching the end of the world. They will not have a happy ending.

This was my interpretation before I ever knew about the shorter ending.

reply

They're watching the end of the world. They will not have a happy ending.


I understand what you're saying and the horror we (and the characters) are meant to feel, but we don't see a nuclear explosion, which would utterly obliterate the house, Mike, Velda and everything around in a blinding split second flash. What we see is a pretty ordinary explosion, like a house being set afire then dynamited, which is presumably what they actually did to create the effect.

I do like the longer, original ending because it provides more closure. I think Mike and Velda do survive, although obviously it's an open question and meant to be so.

As for the comments that Mike would die from the radiation burn, that is not at all certain. It would depend on how much radiation he absorbed. If his exposure was limited to just that burn, he might very well survive. In any case, the science of the entire "nuclear" storyline is pretty much nonsense, so there's not really any basis for conclusion one way or the other.

reply

Well, the so-called "original" ending is not, in fact, an ending that Aldrich or anyone else involved with the film's creation ever wanted and film historians seem confused as to how that ending ever came about. In spite of that, I like how terse and bleak it is, though as others have said in the restored ending with Mike and Velda standing in the ocean, it stands to reason that they'll soon be killed as a result of the blast. So it's really just a matter of whether you prefer them to die in the initial explosion or seconds later out in the water.

reply

I prefer the ending with Mike and Velda escaping the beach house. It's far more powerful than the abrupt, shorter ending, even if Mike and Velda certainly die in the latter. In the former, the sound of the open box and shards of piercing light and glaring brightness on the beach is striking. In the process, a genuine sense of urgency, wonder, awe and terror is created in a matter of minutes. This isn't entirely present in the shorter edit, which would still work in the absence of the longer cut and what was, it seems, Aldrich's preferred version. But those extra seconds add a tremendous amount to the overall effectiveness of the film.

NOW TARZAN MAKE WAR!

reply

The short ending has value for sure I would have to say I also prefer the longer ending from the surf. The protagonists' fates are still in question and I felt there were a lot of questions left to be answered after they escape. Hammer and Velda are left staring at the house, and you have no idea what could happen. As someone else pointed out, it feels like they are watching the end of the world, or, as I see it, some great evil slowly and irrevocably seaping out into the world as they watch helplessly. The smoke and ghastly noises coming out sounded very ominous.

I know the idea was that it was a nuclear blast, but the treatment made it seem different to me; slower, less explosive and more insidious.

'I've learned that life is one crushing defeat after another until you just wish Flanders was dead'

reply