MovieChat Forums > On the Beach (1959) Discussion > Question about the ending

Question about the ending


When Julian gases himself in the garage, he plugs the space at the bottom of the door, but there are an awful lot of cracks in the door's wood. If anything, I'd expect them to do more to let out the gas than the lower space would.

Realistically, would he still die from that, or would he be disappointed to find himself alive after however many minutes?

reply

It wouldn't surprise me if he had one of those death pills in his pocket for "just in case".

reply

I agree with you, those doors had a lot of holes through which the carbon monoxide fumes could have vented, even with the cloth under the doors (and even that's stuffed in more on one side than on the other). There was probably enough CO emitted to have caused Julian to pass out, but when he did so his foot would probably have slid off the gas pedal and the car's engine sputtered to a stop. That plus the holes in the door might well have left Julian unconscious but not dead. That would have led to a much messier end, since even if alive he would have been sickened by the CO itself and rendered unable to do much of anything -- like getting his pills and killing himself that way.

I also dislike this means of "exiting" because Julian loved his car and I wouldn't think he'd have left it running until it finally conked out, which could have been a while, with the motor on and the engine still engaged even after it had stopped. In the book, the scientist (named John Osborne) gets the car in top shape, raising it up on blocks so the tires won't deflate, making it all whole and in good repair, in order to preserve it as best he could. At that point he climbs into the seat one last time. Originally he had intended to leave the car in the garage and go back to the Pastoral Club (where he had taken a room) with the intention of taking his pills there, but sitting in the car he decided that this was where he wanted to end his life, since the car had meant so much to him. So he took the box from his pocket, opened it to take out the pills, threw the carton on the floor and, lacking water, "swallowed them with an effort" (from the book). That's a much more true and satisfactory ending (not to mention a surer one) than what happens in the movie. I don't know why they changed it. Maybe they thought asphyxiation was more dramatic but it seems a bit ridiculous when you think about it.

reply

It was clearly changed because on-screen I'm sure it looked more dramatic, in that you're starting up the car, you have the noise etc. It shows movement whereas taking a pill might read well, but it doesn't come off as a bold and dramatic statement the way it's done in the film. Maybe it isn't more "realistic" but cinematically I do get the reason why Kramer did it that way.

reply

Maybe, but note that nowhere in the film do we see anyone take their suicide pills. This is an interesting barrier Kramer seemed unwilling to cross...or did showing someone taking a suicide pill offend the still-extant censors?

I think they could have done the scene dramatically enough by having the camera close in either on Julian taking the pills while sitting in the car, or better, by giving him a close-up, then panning down to his hand taking the box from his pocket, removing the tablets, and moving his hand upward -- his actually taking them done off-camera -- followed by his arm slowly dropping back to his side. All done without roaring noise, jarring music or disrespect for his car.

Nothing is more effective than the eloquence of silence. This is the way the world ends, not with a bang but a whimper. But Kramer wasn't imaginative enough to think of such a thing.

reply