MovieChat Forums > The Postman Always Rings Twice (1981) Discussion > what's with that title?

what's with that title?

posted 21 years ago by halfcolombian
6 replies | jump to latest

Can someone please explain why this movie is called "the postman always rings twice"? Is it something about her having an affair or what? There's no ****-ing postman in this movie!

[–] stasia 21 years ago

The title is explained at the end of the GOOD version in John Garfield's own words just before the execution. This remake is soft-core pornography. A casting director might have advertised in the newspapers as follows:

WANTED, personnel to perform in a dramatic movie. Talent not a pre-requisite. Experience not required. An intensive one-day training will be provided as well as a BOX-LUNCH. Auditions? on a first-come, first-serve basis.No telephone calls please.

[–] Paper-Street 18 years ago

Aren't we just the most helpful person on the web?

LOOK! An undead monkey!

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jgoodfriend 17 years ago

I found this on Wikipedia, for those interested:

The title is something of a non sequitur; nowhere in the novel does a postman character appear, nor is one even alluded to. When asked for an explanation, Cain stated that the manuscript had been rejected by 13 publishers prior to being accepted for publication on his 14th attempt, so that when the publisher asked him what he wanted the work to be entitled he drew on this experience and suggested The Postman Always Rings Twice.

[–] harryfyhr 16 years ago

Also from Wiki:

The "postman" is God, or Fate, the "delivery" meant for Frank his own death as just retribution for murdering Nick.
Frank had missed the first "ring" when he initially got away with that killing.

However, the postman rang again, and this time the ring was heard, when Frank was wrongly convicted of having murdered Cora, and then sentenced to die for the crime.

Which makes no sense in this version,since the movie just ends with Cora's death.
EDIT: But I guess one can argue that he did ring twice for Cora.

Also:

When informed that his last chance at a reprieve from his death sentence has been denied, and thus his execution is now at hand, Frank is at first incredulous that he will be executed for murdering Cora, even though he is innocent of having done so. But when informed that authorities now have irrefutable evidence of his guilt in the murder of Nick, Frank decides that his impending death is actually his overdue punishment for that crime, despite his official conviction being for killing Cora.

Frank contemplates that when a person is expecting to receive a letter, it is of no concern if at first he does not hear the postman ring the doorbell, because the postman will always ring a second time, and that second ring will invariably be heard. After they escaped legal punishment for Nick's murder, but nonetheless with Cora now dead and Frank on his way to the death chamber, he notes that the postman has indeed rung a second time for each of them...

-----------
badgers? badgers!? WE DON'T NEED NO STINKIN' BADGERS!!!

[–] halfcolombian 14 years ago

Thanks mate, good stuff. Interesting.

[blu]The next wings you see will be the fly's buzzing over your rotting corpse.[/blu]