Why did Caroline look back at the end of the movie?? - Pumpkin (2004) Discussion

[–] PARTSDUDE 19 years ago

I don't recall the question She asked Pumpkin at the end, but when he didn't understand the question, she turned around and gave the camera a look like "Uh-Oh, what did I get myself into".

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kmaults27 17 years ago

The first time I saw it I was thinking "wow she actually ended up with pumpkin" and then she shoots that look. I thought it was her looking at the audience in a "don't judge us" sort of way. But I like your interpretation better.

reply

[–] charmedguyz 11 years ago

I just watched & didn't quite get the end either or what she said, then I noticed this posting on IMDB & realized I wasn't the only one ;) I was watching it streaming on Netflix so I decided to rewind & post the time stamps to the scenes being discussed & I agree with PARTSDUDE, I think it was a "Uh-Oh" moment :)

25:25 why does the moon change?

1:53:45 when you asked me about the moon, did you mean it literally or metaphorically?

On a side note... Did they really need to throw in all that extra nonsense having Kent's car go off a cliff, burst into flames twice in mid air, then explode on impact if they were going to have him survive without a scratch just so they could put him in a wheelchair?

That part bothered me the most ;)

reply

[–] benniewoodell 11 years ago

I think they had the role reversal with Pumpkin and Kent and definitely needed him in the car crash, although it was quite epic to come out unscathed. She wound up with the "jock" at that point, and looked back longingly at Kent who was now the person in pain and handicapped. I think deep down she wanted a troubled person as she was troubled herself and when Pumpkin didn't know what she was talking about with the moon she looked back and realized her life didn't end up changing, much like the poem she wrote about a pumpkin never changing. I don't know, that's kind of how I was seeing the ending when I watched it tonight. Either way, it was so relieving to see a film with an ambiguous ending that's led to an IMDB thread with over 7 pages of people posting, it's an interpretation that no one can really get wrong, which is what films are missing with everything being wrapped up in a neat little package all the time. I'm glad I didn't see this film 10 years ago as I wouldn't have appreciated it as much as I do now. What a great film.

reply

[–] nutzerwutzer 11 years ago

Really is a great one. A nice happy ending that really is mysteriously less than happy, a hilarious movie that isn't really funny; so many delicious contradictions. Loved it on first stumbling onto it, and on repeated views never get tired of it.
My question is how do you refer to the moon's phases metaphorically? "What?"?
And she couldn't even answer his question literally.
Incidentally, this whole thread blows out of the water the other thread about the last section of the movie being set in Heaven.

reply

[–] anniejohnston79 19 years ago

She was responding to Pumpkin's confused response to her question about whether he meant his question about the moon literally or metaphorically. I think the look back showed both that she was worried about what she'd gotten herself into (as someone else said) and that the relationship just wasn't really going to work because despite their chemistry and emotional connection, they can't really communicate. Depressing, but true.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MuckyMudzkipper 16 years ago

You nailed my interpretation of the ending. Very bittersweet. As odd as some people may find it, I found myself rooting for the two of them to get together, although it obviously would be a challenge... ah, I don't know. I just plain liked the movie. Loved how it had a balance between cuteness and darkness. Don't see that often.

reply

[–] peterantonrev 14 years ago

Very much like the end of The Graduate.

Sometimes movies imitate life.

reply

[–] roryculkin15 19 years ago

i thought it was a really interesting way to end the movie.

reply

[–] lilacsmile16 17 years ago

I think she looked back at the movie cus she was giving her old boyfriend one last look like "sorry, ur a good guy and im sorry things didnt work out. thanx for evrythin"

reply

[–] samjoey-1 16 years ago

Uhhhh ... NO

reply

[–] larryromano 15 years ago

I took it a totally different way.

To me it was representative of her taking one look back at society as she walked away into a new life. She knows that the love they share will never be understood and so they will have to share it alone in a lot of ways.

I totally disagree that they wouldn't be able to relate to each other. They are both human. Underneath it all, we people are all the same. I think ultimately, that's the point the movie is trying to make.

reply

[–] EponineSabrina 13 years ago

I would agree with that if it wasn't for the question she had just asked him. One of the things that made her fall for him was when he asked "Why does the moon change?", because she thought he was being deep and metaphorical. Then she asked him if he meant it metaphorically, and he didn't know what she was talking about. That's when she gave that look.

"Just because you understand the mechanics of how something works doesnt make it any less of a miracle"

reply

[–] psychotronicbeatnik 19 years ago

I agree with everyone else who said she was suddenly worried about what she'd gotten herself into. I thought that look absolutely made the ending of the film - it was certainly unexpected. I bet John Waters loves this movie.

reply

[–] cocobug1 13 years ago

It kind of made me think of the last minutes of 'The Graduate' when reality sets in for the young couple.....

Do guys like "the thing"?
They like it better than no thing.

reply

[–] thomasryan 19 years ago

It comes down to the poem... "pumpkins are pumpkins//mice are mice." She was looking back at a world where mice are mice, and entered Pumpkin's world. A last look only makes sense.

reply

[–] XGlamorXGhoulX 18 years ago

I like that theory much better than that she was looking back second guessing herself :)

reply

[–] janfizz 9 years ago

absolutely!

reply

[–] mashana 18 years ago

can someone explain to me how a movie where someone takes advantage, sexually, of a challenged person, is a movie worth commenting on?

reply

[–] chuckdrich-1 17 years ago

I think the whole point of the movie is to make the viewers think about whether or not he is being taken advantage of. To make them question whether they really treat mentally challenged people like everyone else. If it's automatically wrong to fall in love and have sex with someone who's challeneged then does that mean it would never be okay for them to have an adult relationship? This is a movie that tries to make people discuss these issues rather than just be funny or dramatic or whatever and quickly forgotten like so many other movies.

reply

[–] samjoey-1 16 years ago

Did you seriously take this movie literally? "Pumpkin" is a calculated lark. It's not about the exact situation but the way people respond to offbeat circumstances and interpret differences, and it's poking fun at us for trying to unravel it all, hence the intent of the last scene described in the original post.
Carolyn finds herself questioning whether she'd made a mistake in her bond with Pumpkin, resulting in that one horrified, uncertain look. It's an unsolvable conundrum. The sex was simply an extreme way of submerging her neck deep into that conundrum.

reply

[–] DaliParton 15 years ago

can someone explain to me how a movie where someone takes advantage, sexually, of a challenged person, is a movie worth commenting on?

If that's your problem with this movie, then Oasis (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0320193/) would send you screaming to your government for censorship.

reply

[–] Dentongirl182-1 17 years ago

Either all of this or she was looking to see if someone was going to stop her! lol

reply

[–] skibum8713 18 years ago

She's absolutely second-guessing herself. People have totally misinterpreted this movie; it's satire. Caroline is making an awful mistake at the end of the movie, and the quick look back is the only recognition she gives of the fact that she and Pumpkin are truly not compatible.

reply

[–] dfedorsk 18 years ago

Somone mentioned she was taking a last look at the life she was leaving. Interesting idea. Here's what i took from it.I thought when she turned toward the camera in the end of the film that she looked confused. It seemed to me that she didn't understand her own question any more than pumpkin did. If i remember correctly all he said in response to her question was "What?" and at that moment she was unable to better explain what she had asked because she didn't understand the question herself. She learned some "big" words while she was in college but that didn't make her any smarter or more capable than Pumpkin. They're a good match.

reply

[–] AMH57 18 years ago

Thw whole movie Carolyn always saw Pumpkin as a "deep" person a poetic person who felt pain. And when she asked him if he meant the moon question as literally or metiphorically he said "what?" which implies that he really wasn't as deep and poetic as carolyn thought he was so she looked back, as everyone said which meant "what have i gotten myself into?"

reply

[–] kevinlinden1 16 years ago

Spot on.

reply

[–] andrew73 16 years ago

Well said & dead on.

reply

[–] DC-Tiki 15 years ago

That was pretty much my interpretation of that last look back too, well said.

reply

[–] heat_like_burning 15 years ago

i know people that dont what the word metaphorically means, who aren't mentally challanged.

but anyway, i kinda hope that the look was just one last look at the life she was leaving behind, and not a regret.

hey, yoda needs to give some better advice, or yoda needs to shut the *beep* up

reply

[–] lebellue 10 years ago

I agree with most of this...But the fact that Pumpkin didn't understand what literally or metaphorically meant, probably had more to do with his lack of education. Or it also could have to do with his possible lack of intelligence.

I believe that Pumpkin was a very deep person, but Carolyn was very educated and intelligent..I think she was looking back at Kent definitely wondering what she was leaving, but it wasn't necessarily depth she was considering, but instead, it was intellect and/or education.

reply

[–] greenpen33 16 years ago

I hope that's it!

Jennie

reply

[–] urchinau 10 years ago

Thanks dfedorsk. All of these repetitive shallow interpretations of this movie on this thread negate the whole point of the movie. "That's when she realized he's retarded." What a base theory that requires no thinking whatsoever.

reply

[–] aranha-azevedo 12 years ago

I believe that she realized that he is actually retarded and that psicotherapist she visited in the begining of the movie told her the true: she had fallen for an illusion, not for pumpkin, therefore she percieved her mistake in the end of the movie when she asked him about the moon... she was lost in a superficial world and found in pumpkin a way out. Once out, she could finally see the truth behind her relationship with pumpkin.

Sorry guys, I am 100% sure. ;)

reply

[–] marktripper45 18 years ago

"literally or metaphoricly?"

and she glared at US. as in, don't take this movie literally. its a metaphor.

reply

[–] TheisticRug 18 years ago

I thought it was some sort of pseudo-documentary reference, and she just wanted the camera to get the *beep* away so she could finally be alone with the man she loved...dont really know though

I wish Hulk Hogan was my dad.

reply

[–] irisrenaissance 17 years ago

Wow marktripper45! This is the best interpretation I've read so far.
My personal spin on it is that the movie is about how nothing is perfect. Carolyn asks why everything can't be beautiful and perfect. When she looks back at the end, it signifies not just doubt about the future of the relationship, but that even though the movie is a love story, Love itself is not perfect.

reply

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]