That's an interesting way to look at it. I feel like if I interpret the movie as literal, he goes through all of these trials and is given a second chance. There's some weirdness with why he's given that second shot and the time-distortion thing (maybe a metaphor for reincarnation or for prophetic visions?) but overall, that's solid.
For me, if the movie was just a metaphor for temptation and evil, I think the ending would iron out some wrinkles, but the rest of the movie would lose power. If it's just a metaphor and a kind of thought experiment Kevin is doing, the power of the tragedies in the film is diminished - for me, anyway.
In my opinion, the movie "wants" to end with Reeves besting Satan at the cost of everything he held dear, only realizing at the end what the righteous path is, and how to choose it. This is tragic, but glints of gold, as his sacrifice stymies a great evil. The "takes it back" ending weakens this and calls the metaphysics of the film into question, but it keeps the valid power of the majority of the film intact.
I'd have ended the movie (I know, it's not fair saying, "Here's my version") with Satan defeated by Kevin, but not killed. His apocalyptic plan is destroyed and his power diminished. Tag on a scene of his law firm losing a major case and Milton furious. Maybe I'd tack on a scene of joint graves for Kevin and his wife. Kevin's mom is there and gets comfort from a possibly-Divine stranger. The end.
reply
share
alex321 (57)
a year ago
I guess people come to different conclusions based on their own tastes. To me what makes the movie powerful and therefore has more of an impact on me is the moral element. It's not about necessarily having a hero and a villain but the inner conflict the main character is going through. That makes it more interesting to me. But, then again, I can see why some prefer to view it literally. It still makes for an entertaining experience and can at the same time leave the viewer questioning the same moral elements as if viewed metaphorically. I get where you are coming from when you mention that when viewed as the latter it diminishes the impact of the film if you see it as a tragedy that he didn't successfully kill Milton and it was all a ruse to make him believe he did. Having Kevin die at the end (as in he literally died for his sins to save humanity) would have been a noble ending but would have made his character more sympathetic rather than tragic IMO. I prefer to view it as it was originally intended by the filmmakers that evil can't be rid of, that it's on us to make the right choice.
reply
share
Ace_Spade (9458)
a year ago
Interestingly enough, I'd say that the morals and in character is more important to me, too. That's why I like elements of the film like Kevin being the architect of his own downfall - it's his ego and ambition that cause him to spiral, not Milton forcing him. I guess I just felt like that journey would hit a logical conclusion with the "first" end of the film where he suffered for his actions but found something good in the end, and I do like - as you say - the idea that evil isn't permanently destroyed.
My main problem with the ending is that I think it was going for a real hard, harsh ending - the bitter fruits sewed and reaped by Kevin - and I feel like they walked it back, then yo-yo'd it again by having Milton show up a second time. It was like they couldn't pick an ending.
reply
share