When Roger was in his apartment after Nick left, and he's cleaning up a little bit, then just sits there for a few moments, who else thought the movie would end right there? I think that would've been a good ending, more somber and thought-provoking. The actual ending is really good too, but with a totally different tone. I wonder if the filmmakers did that on purpose--made the actual ending more of a coda.
share[deleted]
Uh, I'm not putting the movie down at all, I don't know where you see me doing that. I was just pondering the ending a little bit.
shareI see your point.
It was kind of a goofy ending, having Roger at the school, and spurring Nick on.
It was ok, and definitely made us feel that Roger has redeemed himself. But it's a little unrealistic - and too sweet, for this kind of movie.
And what's up with the, "Stop being so Hollywood !!" comment above? This ending was Hollywood. Realism would have had Roger continuing being a prick for a little while longer, at least.
I liked the redemption aspect.
sharePer David Edelstein, it did originally end as you said, and then poor test screenings caused them to panic and add an upbeat ending.
--------
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc
Aha! Well that's too bad that they chickened out.
shareIndeed. Those test screenings have a powerful effect, unfortunately (infamously destroying--literally--Orson Welles's masterpiece followup to Citizen Kane, The Magnificent Ambersons, after audiences laughed and shouted things at the screen).
--------
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc