could you help me please?
i'm confused as to the ending. why didn't he die? did they just not continue the movie that far? because he didn't look ill in the last scene when he was speaking to the police.
hasta la victoria siempre
[deleted]
MovieChat Forums > D.O.A. (1988) Discussion > could you help me please?
That reminds me! Dex was terminal and given 48 hours at the most. The 48 hours began when he ingested the poison 12 hours earlier. There was no cure the poison had already been absorbed into his body. Consequently, he was going to die, he knew who killed him and why. So, that's the end of the story. As far as the movie is concerned, poor Dex seemed to suffer symptoms only between action scenes (and the love scene). Personally, if I were Syndney, I would rather knowingly not have any potentially toxic fluids enter my body. The script didn't address that at all. So, he was strong enough to tell the detectives in great detail -- fade to black -- and then he dies.
shareFairly awful piece of film making, tho I did almost just watch it all again...not wasting any more words or thoughts on that - there are better ways to spend 90 odd minutes!
shareIn the 1950 Rudolph Mate original, the lead character dies in the police station at the very end. The detective in charge tells his sergeant to call the morgue - 'Tell them he was dead on arrival,' thus neatly tying in the title and bringing the film to a logical close. I've not seen the '88 remake, but by the sound of things it's a poor retelling of a phenomenal story.
shareThe end is a metaphor.
He walking in a corridor to the light... He going to heaven...
I agree that the end is a metaphor. I however think that this is a lame metaphor and a poor way to end this film. It just goes to show you just how great the orginal film noir films were. In the 40's and 50's they were not afraid of killing off the main charactor, But in the 80's they have to hide it behind an unneeded metaphor of his entering heaven. They don't make them like they used too.
shareI don't agree at all. It was not relevant to show him dying. The film concentrated on the mystery surrounding the events. His body obviously didn't give up in the police station so they let him go to spend his last hours where he wanted.
Although I liked the original, I thought it was silly how he died within a minute of telling his story. How convenient. Plus the way he just cavorts over is hilarious.
It would not have been pretty if we had to watch Dex die in this - probably a lot of coughing, spluttering and vomiting.
I like how the film ended - it gave a very sad story a slightly more upbeat feeling for us, the audience.
Agree with Rhapthorne. It wasn't necessary to show him dying. You know he will anyway and I also felt the way he dies in the original was corny and overdone. I do like the first one but I prefer this one over it.
Buffy: "Alright, I get it. You're evil. Do we have to chat about it all day?" -Amends
Real police would not let a killer walk away even if he was dying (except in Scotland).
shareWell that's movies for you! They wouldn't really want him to wander off and wait for a poor member of the public to discover his body! In all likelihood they would have arrested him and placed him under police watch in the hospital until he died.
But... if they had done that at the end of the movie, everyone would have been on here moaning about that being a rubbish ending!
IMO the ending suited the movie's atmosphere - it gradually blanks out - a reference to his own novel "Blanking Out" which he signs for Sydney at the start. Although, one could argue that the entire film references this book title as the colour is lost as the plot progresses.
It's a remarkable movie and one of my favourites from the 1980s.
Oh, and lol at your Scotland quip John6538!!