MovieChat Forums > The Hand (1981) Discussion > Two problems I have with this movie (MAJ...

Two problems I have with this movie (MAJOR SPOILER)

posted 12 years ago by petekrug17
10 replies | jump to latest

1.Lack of explanation. I can enjoy a good supernatural horror movie as much as the next person, but for me I need some reason for how and why it's happening. Example: CHILD'S PLAY, where the killer is able to transplant his soul into a doll because he practices voodoo. Or THE EVIL DEAD, where demons enter our world because certain passeges from a mystical book are read out loud. In cases such as this I can suspend my disbelief and accept what I'm seeing on screen. In this movie, however, a guy's hand gets severed in an accident, then suddenly comes to life and starts killing people, "just because." And...that's it?

2.The ending. The hand kills the doctor in the hospital, the guy starts laughing evilly...and then the movie ends. Or, rather, just stops. What happens next? Does the hand kill him? Does the guy and his hand then go on a killing spree together? What happens next?

[–] germite 12 years ago

1. It is kind of strange, but at the same time, there wasn't much of an explanation for Michael Myers' powers and behavior in "Halloween" and that's generally seen as a benefit. It's a little scary that an ordinary guy's hand becomes a killing machine with only his rage to feed it in this movie ... no possession, no supernatural silliness. It could happen to just about anyone because of this. Also, does his hand really come to life and start killing people, or was it him the whole time?

2. Why do we need more story at the end? Yes, it's pretty cheesy with his maniacal laugh, but we thought the hand's killings were over (or Michael Caine's killings were over), but he's able to kill again inside the facility he's in and escape the strange stupor the doctor had him in. It's like any other bland horror movie where the killer survives, only in this case, the killer is also the main character.

"Stwike him, Centuwion ... vewy Wuffwy!"

[–] rahmat9-575-752833 11 years ago

germite - I liked the scene at the very end. I thought it was one of the strongest moments of the entire movie, and definitely one of the more "horror" moments for the mystery/thriller/drama. The black and white tiles shot from above is amazing. I thought the movie couldn't go without it - in fact - it needed more scenes similar to that in the middle, perhaps.

From the commentary, it appears that Stone wanted to go with the drama and domestic issues. He was focused on a whole other story - it's apparently based on (or inspired by) a book - to a certain extent.

That's just me and my tastes. With the movie, I would have rated it like a 6/10, but seeing how it actually had such great camera angles, and was actually worth watching in bits and pieces again (a second time) as a thriller, I gave it a 7/10. But anyway, my point is, just me, I liked that scene a lot. Especially on a visual level (and dramatic - almost theatrical). And since the movie was going for what I think Stone might have referenced as a "Psychological Thriller," the ending was perfect in that respect.

[–] jztzt 11 years ago

I think Oliver Stone deliberately made the explanation ambiguous. It keeps the mystery and intrigue throughout without spilling the secret for the audience. I am not a fan of this film but I think he made the right choice in making it ambiguous. If he were to reveal or explain it, then the result would be less. This may not even be a supernatural horror film, but rather a psychological thriller. There are two possible explanations: either Michael Caine had developed a split personality with "the hand" in control or the severed hand actually reanimated.

[–] rahmat9-575-752833 11 years ago

Warning: SPOILERS

It's pretty much implied that Michael Caine's character kills her at the end. We see it from his perspective. That's why he laughs. He becomes totally crazy, but as Stone says in the commentary, he's "excited" at that point - when he's talking to the nurse - or doctor - I don't remember what her job was exactly (look at the medical equipment moving up and down like an earthquake). Anyway, it does appear a little left open on the outside, and it seems clear that Stone wanted to keep it mysterious, but with the other two victims left in the trunk, the only idea to stay with in the end was that it was Caine's character - Jon or Jonathon Lansdale - all along.

He was imagining the hand, and blacking out. That's all explained (a little too much IMHO - in my humble opinion - but it's all there for a reason).

It was Jon.

[–] Mr_Hamster 10 years ago

It's pretty much implied that Michael Caine's character kills her at the end. We see it from his perspective. That's why he laughs. He becomes totally crazy [...]

It was Jon.

Exactly.

Jon laughs at the end because he now knows there was no hand to begin with, that it was him from the very beginning. He finally accepts his anger and madness and doesn't try to suppress it anymore.

He's free, but also completely insane from now on.

A great ending to a good film (7/10), it reminded me of Cronenberg's early works ('The Brood' comes to mind).

Who are they? And what do they want?

[–] eviljawa101-245-848254 7 years ago

I had assumed that the ending was supposed to imply that Jon had been "consumed" by the hand so to speak, that the split personality that killed Stella and Brian had completely taken over. I think it's meant to be ambiguous though, whether he actually killed the psychiatrist at the end or if he simply hallucinated that bit.

[–] Edward_de_Vere 9 years ago

1. In my opinion, the severed hand was never "alive" to begin with. It was all a hallucination in Jon's mind, because he was trying to escape from the reality that he killed all those people during his blackouts (the "hand" was merely just a manifestation of Jon's own rage, that he was continually attempting to suppress and run away from throughout the film). There's a bit ambiguity earlier on in the film (is the hand truly alive, or is Jon really insane?), but by the film's climax, we see that Jon is responsible for all the killings, and than the hand is just his way of escaping from the reality of who he truly is, and the deep rooted rage inside his mind

That isn't just your opinion, the movie makes it pretty explicit that there was no living hand and that Jon was the killer all along in flashback scenes. Yet a lot of people who watch the movie seem to miss this and think that in the film's universe the severed hand "really" comes alive and kills people. That would indeed be a ridiculous premise for a cheesy horror film, along the lines of Child's Play (and if you believe the hand really is killing people, that would explain the film's low rating). Instead, we get the interesting premise of a man obsessed with the loss of his hand (and his phantom limb) displacing his paranoia and murderous impulses onto it.

Obviously, this isn't a great film or even a very good one (the supporting cast was mostly terrible, for one thing), but the premise is worthwhile and Caine gave a good performance. I thought this was a better film than Dressed to Kill, though I suppose that isn't saying very much.

[–] carters6 9 years ago

One thing I keep thinking every time I watch the end is WHY is the little girl there in the garage? The officers already had an idea there were dead bodies out there, just because of the smell alone. So I always wondered why they didn't keep her out of there and with her mom. What a traumatizing thing for a little girl to see. I'm thinking the filmmakers just wanted to give her a chance to throw that "Christina Crawford glare" for us that she did so well in Mommie Dearest, and that was the perfect time to do it ;-)
Enjoyed the movie, though...very entertaining (and more comical now watching it as an adult). Michael Caine with his crazy looks and crazy hair still freaks me out. He definitely plays crazy well!

Shanika
shanikapatrice.com

[–] SpaceMountainMike 8 years ago

I think the scariest part of the movie was when Jon lost his hand. I was 12 when I saw this movie and that part was just traumatic. The rest didn't bother me.

_______________

My iMDB profile http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4297325/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]