MovieChat Forums > Ultimo tango a Parigi (1973) Discussion > Big question (big spoiler)

Big question (big spoiler)

posted 13 years ago by puplover
6 replies | jump to latest

Dang, I thought I asked this, but I can't find it on the board. Anyway, I LOVE this movie, for so many reasons. However, I really, really need to hear other interpretations on WHY she shot him at the end??
We know she was coming up w/ "excuses" to her herself; "I didn't know his name...he followed me home etc." and kept repeating that, obviously she was in shock. But, WHY did she do that? Obviously she was more unstable than we all thought. But, was that her way of "deciding" between Brando and her fiancee? Was she turned off to the point of shock when he confessed his name, age etc. and that ruined the fantasy for her?

The end didn't fit for me, so I really could use some explanations...THANKS!!!!

[–] guaili 13 years ago

Well, let's be honest here, Brando's character was freaky and mental from the very beginning of the movie. The real question is why she went along with such an obviously demented person in the first place. My take is that, by the end, she realized just how crazy he was (and getting crazier by the minute) and decided that the only way to get rid of him was to shoot him. Frankly, I don't blame her.

I do agree that her sudden change of heart in the end (at the tango club) came out of the blue and seemed almost as forced as the initial relationship.

[–] puplover 13 years ago

So, are you saying it may have been her acting? I.E- she didn't properly motivate WHY she went along w/ him in the first place...and she didn't motivate WHY she subsequently shot him at the end?

[–] guaili 13 years ago

No, I'm blaming the script and the director, not the actors. It wasn't badly acted, but badly staged and written.

[–] guaili 13 years ago

And I thought I made clear why she shot him. He was crazy. The change of heart I was referring to was going from "I love you! Did you hear me? I love you!" to "This is wrong, we cannot be together!" with nothing significantly different in his behavior in between to justify it.

[–] iliff3 13 years ago

I took at as more of a breaking of her fantasy; that which drew her to have such an intense and psychologically damaging affair in the first place, for both Paul and her. Near the end we see him ask her some perverse questions like if she would have sex with a pig etc. At this point, I was under the impression that she had completely submitted to his will, which was her fantasy, as well as his. By saying that he loved her and revealing his past and the vulnerability that made him act the way he did, it broke this spell that he had over her, putting himself below her in a way by admitting that he had actually developed feelings for her, which he had not shown before at anytime. In fact, he was a complete ass to her, as conveyed by the fact that she kep coming back, herself admitting that she did not know why, despite the fact that he was indeed, in her own words, a monster. The director said that this movie eventually developed into his own fantasies, so the theme of dominance and submission has as much to do with the theme of love in the movie. Either way, whatever the directors intent, this struck me as one of the most disturbing movies i've seen, not for the infamous butter scene or the graphic sex, but for the underlying themes that I took from this film.

[–] guaili 13 years ago

I really have no problem with the plot progression of this film, but with the way it was executed at its two main points: 1) why she found him alluring, 2) why she decided to break it up. I can accept that she felt attracted to his dangerous, mysterious persona, and that at the end, as you said, her fantasy was over and she saw the light; my problem is the piss-poor job done in writing and directing these scenes. I'm not going to just accept what happened so the story can move on, you have to present it in a credible way, even if it's based on your own fantasies.