MovieChat Forums > The Glass Menagerie (1987) Discussion > Did anyone else cry at the end of this f...

Did anyone else cry at the end of this film?? (spoilers)

posted 19 years ago by fiatlux-1
17 replies | jump to latest

spoilers

I cried when Karen Allen's character was let down yet again at the end of this film. She seemed so alone...and scared. Why , I wonder was it so important for a girl to be married back then?? Why couldn't she just be happy being single? People think things have changed, they have a little, but in many families women (and men) are looked at strangely because they don't wish to get married, or aren't married at "the appropriate time".

And the fact that some people might be put off by Karen Allen's character's physical handicaps enraged and saddened me more. I would never (and haven't) not liked someone romantically or otherwise because of their physical handicaps!

Great performance by Karen Allen here!!! Get out your tear-movie kit!!!

Anyone agree??

[–] robbielooney 19 years ago

It was very sad when Laura is yet again let down. The point of her getting married isn't all about social acceptance of the time. Tom, Laura, and Amanda live outside of reality in their own worlds. Tom lives in the world of the movies and alcohol while Amanda lives in memories past and Laura lives in the world of her glass. For Laura to get married would make a bridge from her world to the real world. Laura can not handle the real world because she has lived for so long in her family's delusions. The gentleman caller would help her cross from her world into reality. Laura's "handicaps" are also outside reality and her belief in them is fueled by her mother and her own insecurity. She is not seen by the real world as handicapped as the character Jim points out that her limp is barely noticable if existant at all, it's just another illusion in the unreal world of the Wingfield family. I hope this helps out. But like I said, I do agree that it is a tear jerker in the end.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Sunflower007 18 years ago

~ I also cried in the end of the movie & after reading the play.

*~~*

[–] seaniesharko 18 years ago

it was very important for girls to get married at that time in history... it was definitely not like it is now, and girls weren't as independent as they are now. most of them got married as a way of supporting themselves.

[–] Icecrono3 18 years ago

I shed a tear after reading the play.

[–] theworldcanwait 18 years ago

Laura isn't "let down" by Jim at the end of the show. The whole point is that Jim showed her that she has the ability to lead a "normal" life, but Laura chooses to remain with her life as it is. She knows that she could leave her mother-- the real handicap-- behind, but she can't make herself do it. That's the biggest distinction between Laura and Tom-- that Tom is braver than her, or stronger, or has some other character trait that allows him to leave.

But to answer your question, I also cried at the end of the show. I sobbed the first time I saw it, and the next time, when it was in front of an entire class, I couldn't stop crying, but thankfully it was a silent cry. Everything about the end of the show, mainly Tom's last monologue, makes me cry, and just thinking about "Blow your candles out, Laura", or hearing that stupid song makes me tear up.

Definitely the saddest show ever, in its own weird way.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] katiewon 18 years ago

Cry? What, are you kidding me? I wanted to cry for Laura at the beginning with that pushy, obnoxious mother and that closet homo"I'm going to the movies" brother - both of whom were going to decide Laura's life for her...and it wasn't pretty. Laura wasn't mentally ill, but those two could drive you crazy.

Then, Norman Vincent Peale, i.e. Tom O'Connor comes to dinner, her high school crush, spouting PMA and the fact that Laura wasn't the only one with problems and despite her difficulties, she could still take care of herself using something of her talents. He literally tries to pull her from feeling insecure and worthless but its too little too late. He explains that she creates her own reality by how she reacts to the things that happen to her. Unfortunately, she didn't listen.

So why cry, because he didn't marry her? How 1950's. If anything, Tom should have taken her with him - if anything be angry with him.

[–] pandorasbox 17 years ago

"Why , I wonder was it so important for a girl to be married back then?? Why couldn't she just be happy being single?"

Someone has to pay the bills. Amanda sent Laura to secretary school, but Laura dropped out. If Laura is never going to be able to support herself, then back in that time the next logical step would be to find a husband to take care of her.

[–] jobla 15 years ago

This film is a tear-jerker for me, too. I tend to well up about Tom, who is clearly attempting to make amends for having deserted his family. His sense of regret, expressed in the concluding monologue, is as moving as Laura's brief flirtation.

Personally, I'd have given Oscars to both Karen Allen and John Malcovich for those performances, and to Paul Newman for his sensitive direction. Why, oh why, isn't this film on DVD?

[–] zurichpoet 15 years ago

It’s more of a hovering sadness for me.

[–] Xcalat3 15 years ago

When there's no more room in hell, The dead will walk the earth...

[–] Warmfire 14 years ago

I didn't cry, but I felt for Tom. He tried to help his sister and make his mother happy by bringing Jim in to meet Laura, and even though Jim actually told Amanda there's no way Tom could have known Jim was engaged to someone, Amanda blamed Tom anyway.

The saddest part for me was that Tom didn't stick around to find out that Laura meeting Jim was actually one of the best things that ever happened to her or to see if Laura's short time with Jim made any lasting effect on her. What Jim told Laura was significant. I can't imagine she'd ever before heard someone tell her those things. Most people don't encounter someone in life who helps them in that way. Even these days, there are some trained experienced therapists who fail in that regard.

I understood Tom's leaving. I just wished he at least stayed in touch with Laura.

[–] grantss 12 years ago

For me, the saddest thing wasn't that there wasn't a romantic interlude at the end of the tunnel for Laura, resulting in a husband. (No, like the OP, I don't think that marriage is the be-all and end-all of a woman's existence. Being single is a viable option. The play / movie, however, reflecting society's mores of the time, portrays marriage / a boyfriend as her salvation.)

No, the saddest thing is that she would (of her own choosing) forever live with and be dependent on her mother. Her confidence-destroying, paranoid, controlling, glass-half-empty mother. Laura will never be independent, self-confident, have a life outside the house, or really exist.

That is sad.

Like a bird on the wire, like a drunk in a midnight choir, I have tried in my way to be free