Ending - Hell in the Pacific (1968) Discussion

[–] Jedi Clerk 19 years ago

well... it's obviously one of those absurd tacked-on endings that goes like "...and then, the entire planet asploded! THE END." Used to use it a lot back in 5th or 6th grade essays...

whats really strange is that on the DVD i just finished watching it has an alternate ending where they just sort pack up glare at each other meaningfully and go their seperate ways but then with a little Googling I encounter this, and i quote,

"The present ending of Hell in the Pacific is greatly at odds with director John Boorman's original vision, in which the Japanese officer angrily kills two Japanese soldiers who have come across the American and decapitated him. "

uh... okay... THAT wasn't on MY DVD... maybe the script or something perhaps had that in the original. Woulda been kinda cool I s'pose... go figger...

something else that's amusing is on the DVD menu of the version I have it has sillouhettes of two HELICOPTERS in the background graphic... yeah, right!

reply

[–] drukenirishman 17 years ago

There were a helicopters in WW2.What kind are on your dvd?

reply

[–] dimensional_dan 17 years ago

I liked the ending. It brought home like a sudden slap to the face that even though Marvin and Mifune could have gone on to develop a strong friendship and overcome the war in their own way that this is not how it happens.

War is a very sad thing, and it destroys people and their potential to live happy lives. If the movie had ended on another note the horror and sadness of war would have been forgotten.

Instead we mourn for Mifune and Marvin, because unlike most other films we've made a connection to the characters, and at a non verbal level at that.

reply

[–] rdoyle29 9 years ago

That ending was in the script, and everyone including Boorman decided not to film it.

reply

[–] movie_jail 19 years ago

well they went out with a bang did they not?

Though I think the original ending of Mifune killing the two soldiers who killed Marvin would have been better regarding todays standards, (though considering this being around the time of the height of the Vietnam War I think it may have culturally been recieved differently and possibly more rejected in the US).

reply

[–] Carmaman 19 years ago

I liked the non-bomb ending.

They couldnt get over their differences, but they had enough respect for each other to just walk away.

The bomb ending seems totally tacked on. Why the hell would an already bombed out base get bombed again?

reply

[–] zfedell 19 years ago

Yeah the ending made no sense, if their were bombs going off why were just standing around casually? It seemed as if they just editted that ending on later (The alternate ending on the dvd is the same thing just extended with no bombs) I wasn't even exactly sure what it is they were intending to show being blown up (I guess it was the shack they were in) but besides the ending, I thought it was great.

reply

[–] jlb1987 19 years ago

I think that the island they were on at that point was bombed by the americans, maybe because it was the end of the war and they wanted to get rid of any 'evidence'? Or stop the japanese from taking over the island again, as it was obvious before that that the americans had gone in and killed the japanese and then just left.

Have to agree, though, one of the other two endings would have been better, I haven't seen either, as I only own the 'barebones' version of the dvd, which I bought last week in a charity shop for £3.

reply

[–] destroyallhumans 19 years ago

This movie was on the brink of brilliance until the ending hit. What a cop out.

reply

[–] malismad 19 years ago

i actually enjoyed the ending. I think it demonstrates the sheer futility and absurdity of war. The two men's personal battle being ended by a random bomb. What i really wish is that someone would make a "hollywood" film where the hero gets killed unexpectedly after his triumph. getting run over by a bus or something.

reply

[–] Fool_2212 19 years ago

i didnt take the ending literally. i thought the bomb sound effects was just how they were feeling towards eachother. like the sound effects when the american was taunting the japanese by banging on the tin with the knife, whenever it's the japanese perspective its not exactly the same sound effect and it's not random, shows that the noise is driving him nuts (not literally) and pissing him off. then the explosion was them killing eachother but didnt show it... thats how i saw it at least. if it was literal bomb then it's just the pointlessness of war. or is it the pointlessness of friendship. who cares really. if it's how i saw it then whats the director trying to say about what sparked their violence? the alcohol? the anger of one god over another (none in this case)? the anger towards a race (pictures of dead japanese)?
...ah whatever. it was an ok movie

reply

[–] allhailal 18 years ago

I didn't even think of them being blown up when the building was exploded and began to topple until I started reading this thread!

reply

[–] mfrith 18 years ago

Couldn't agree with you more! How could so many people miss the ultimate message of this masterpiece. The contrast between the uncompromising kabuki and cowboy acting styles underlined the possibility of humanity overcoming cultural barriers to achieve peace.

reply

[–] dukeofauge 17 years ago

Mifune is not a kabuki actor.

reply

[–] KarlMaldensNose 17 years ago

"Dirty Mary and Crazy Larry" (1974) I believe will fulfill your requirement for having that happen.

Ah!...Now we see the violence inherent in the system!

reply

[–] AndrewRobertsVoice 19 years ago

If I recall correctly from Lee Marvin's biography, were numerous endings shot. There was no specifics, but he was not happy with the ending the studio picked. This is another FILM that the studios changed on the director, like they did with many of Sam Peckinpah's films.
The ending was so out of character for both men, too astute to not even notice the bombs going off in the distance. It made no sense to bomb what was already bombed, unless it was a practice range. But, why practice when you can bomb the real thing?

The alternate ending, both men going different ways with respect for each other, was better but it was not enough. To have seen the Japanese officer as he kills two of his own, and Pull back to reveal the decapitated American, would have been an ending that people would still be talking about. Sure it's gross, but, it's real and at least it fits John Boorman's style and completes the story.

reply

[–] matthewsheeran 19 years ago

Absolutely agree and completely fits in with whjat we know of the japanese officers character not to mention Mifunes other roles as an actor and leveraging that reputation in this film - Yojimbo, Seven Samurai etc etc and I guess the honorable part of the japanese bushido since they had become loyal brothers.

The big wigs at the studio really blew it but it ws probably par for the course for the times cf a later type of war film like Merry Christmas Mr Lawrence.

Unfortunately the director was ahead of his time and should have gotten his way considering it probably wasnt a big budget movie (only two actors!).

reply

[–] dukeofauge 17 years ago

Figure they didn't notice the sound of the bombing caus they were totally smashed on sake.

reply

[–] chrissso 8 years ago

come on ... you would have to be passes out not to notice artillery fire

reply

[–] chrissso 8 years ago

BRAVO!!! WELL SAID!!!

reply

[–] tickle-4 19 years ago

Good question. That's why I came to this site to find out why.

Thanks to everyone for your opinions and knowledge. Great movie, but the ending didn't make any sense. Now it does.

reply

[–] slaps_forehead 19 years ago

yeah all i can say its a real shame they ended it that way. Otherwise it would have quite easly made the Top 10 of all war films.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] spenny-6 18 years ago

i can see the point of the filmed ending its "deep" (sarcasm) but the problem is that they didnt set that ending up well. they could have pulled it off if, sa many peopls have pointed out if it didnt seem "tacked on" its clearly a case of the studio coming in and just putting an ending on the picture. '68 was close enough to the studio era for this to have happened

just my .02

reply

[–] hblb 18 years ago

Dear Movie-lovers,

As an European, may I suggest that one should not always expect an end which absolutely makes sense and whose number of correct understandings is exactly one.
However, if I utterly wanted to read between the few lines of the plot of this motion picture, my opinion would be that, finding a place filled with objects from their respective civilizations, both officers first celebrate their newly regained dignity but are soon overwhelmed with fragments from the war they previously waged against each other. In comparison with the battle for survival they just fought, war is a remote, insignificant and petty thing. However, decently dressed, shaved, sitting in a concrete building, drinking a beverage which has been elaborated by human beings, the memories of their struggle for life soon grows dim and is taken over from former basic propaganda war-carrying messages. War bursts as the bomb explodes.

reply