MovieChat Forums > Head Over Heels (1982) Discussion > Saw this on HBO in 1980, it was called '...

Saw this on HBO in 1980, it was called 'Head Over Heels'

posted 11 years ago by johnnyclueless
9 replies | jump to latest

After reading thru some messages, I'm confused about things. I'm pretty sure it was broadcast in early 1980, February, I'm guessing. I remember telling the girl I was seeing at the time about a couple of parallels Charles & I experienced. Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that it was called Head Over Heels back then, and the ending was Charles running thru the park. Later on I heard that they changed the name to Chilly Scenes of Winter, but never saw or knew of this happy ending. So, I'm thinking it was originally released as Head Over Heels and later changed to Chilly Scenes of Winter.

[–] Mi5161 11 years ago

You are absolutely correct. Its original title was Head Over Heels and it had the "happy" ending where Charles and Laura end up back together again. A couple of years later they recut and re-released the film as Chilly Scenes of Winter and ended the movie the same way as the novel on which it was based. They don't get back together. I think I like the happy ending better but the "sad" ending hews closer to the source material and seems to resonate more with viewers perhaps because it is more realistic. Amazon has a MOD(Made on Demand) DVD of it that is half of a two disc set. It is packaged together with another movie that John Heard was in entitled Cutter's Way. This DVD version is the sadder ending one. The transfer has very good video quality. I just wish they would've included the happy ending as well.

[–] PenTheater 11 years ago

So sorry but the novel ends with them together.
"two snowflakes that are just alike."

[–] bruce-129 11 years ago

Movies and novel are different art forms.

[–] PenTheater 10 years ago

Movies and novel are different art forms.

I agree and your point can be used to bring up an idea I have about the two endings.
The novel being more detailed and longer than a movie could ever be we get wrapped up more and more about all the depressing things that are part of Charles life, so by the end its a more cathartic resolution to have them sitting together in that rocking chair, in love.

But in the movie, moving thru the emotions a lot faster we are able to realize and relate to the ending where he becomes free and walks away.
After reading this novel over and over since it was first published, and seeing this movie almost every year I have actually grown to like both endings.

Also I think a lot of us kept saying we preferred the "happy" ending simply because we hadn't seen it since the first showing, and knew the book. Now that we can compare both, I can go either way with the movie.
But in the novel I still think the ending is perfect after all that snowy, dreary, dark, depressing, mundane, quiet desperation each of the characters presented.

[–] bruce-129 11 years ago

This is one of my top favorite movies ... because it did not have the happy ending.
I cannot imagine the happy ending ... these two were not meant for each other at all.
As a learning experience, this movie came along at the same time I was going through
a similar thing and it was like magic. I started running, got very healthy and in good
shape, started getting a lot of girl attention, and poof, there went my heartbreak over
someone who was not really worth it.

I love this movie, it was as close to perfect as any movie could be.

[–] glvandermeer 8 years ago

Agreed, this movie is perfect, it captures the hopelessness of a failed relationship and the way it can bring a normal person to the edge of sanity. It's great and also one of my all time favorites. I saw it several times with the happy ending, then didn't realize it was released as it is now, I like the happier ending, it gives us all hope, but I think the sad ending is more realistic

It's great. (Happy ending can always be seen on YouTube)

[–] johnston.scot 9 years ago

I suspect people prefer the ending they saw first. I saw it in a second-run theater (do those even exist any more?) in the early '80s, in the "Chilly Scenes of Winter" / sad-ending version, and - presumably as a result - the happy ending seems ridiculous.

Ironic that the version whose title matches the book is the one with the ending that doesn't match.

[–] johnston.scot 9 years ago

"Head Over Heels," to me, doesn't really fit the feel of the movie, whatever the ending.

The first thing that comes to mind is the Go Gos song, which I suppose is somewhat unfair to whoever named the movie, since the song didn't come out until five years later. Actually, I suppose the lyrics of the song could kind of go with the movie, but it sounds fairly peppy (with some minor chords in there). It was one of the cheesier videos of the period, though, with the band members mostly looking kind of embarrassed to be in it.

It's also the title of a new stage musical that'll premiere next summer at the Oregon Shakespeare Festival and is based, simultaneously, on the music of the Go Gos and "Arcadia," a 16th-Century book.

It's kind of a popular title, according to IMDB:

- A 2001 Freddie Prinze movie that I guess is a romantic comedy with an unpromising premise: "A young woman is attracted to a man despite her thinking she's seen him kill someone" (per IMDB)

- Two TV series.

- Four recent short films

- A 1922 silent starring Mabel Normand

[–] WarpedRecord 9 years ago

In addition to the Go-Go's song, "Head Over Heels" was the title of a Tears for Fears tune.

I also remember this airing on HBO in the early '80s as "Head Over Heels," which is a lame and cliched title. "Chilly Scenes of Winter" is evocative and memorable — just like this film.