MovieChat Forums > The King (2006) Discussion > The movie copped out

The movie copped out


All through the movie there this ominous sense of this isn’t going to end happily, and then it doesn’t end at all. Instead it takes the easy way out and leaves the audience to surmise what could have happened, rather then dealing with the more difficult subject of the ramifications of Elvis’s actions.
What would happen to the pastor and his newly 'adopted' son, with all that Elvis has done and given the pastors devote beliefs?
I can see how with this option it defies audience expectation of a satisfying resolution, but it just left me feeling cold that this movie all the way through seemed to build up to something bad, something disastrous, and then nothing, like it didn’t have the balls to show what happened. It could have had another scene, one that showed how the pastors relationship and Elvis’s would have progressed/ended, or it could have gone for another half hour showing dissolution of his flock, dealing with consequences from maybe killing Elvis or putting him in prison, losing respect for god, his flock losing respect for him, the dissolution of a proud man when faced with an unimaginable atrocity. Whatever ark the story took, it could have gone down so many roads.
It did leave a detached, somewhat melancholic and pensive impression (which is the vibe throughout the film) and a definitive one at that, but for such a morally grim story it didn’t deliver on what it had promised throughout. It’s like it ended halfway through the 3rd act. What a cop out.

reply

i disagree

reply

I disagree too.

I'm not really jumping aboard the abrupt-ending-wagon, but it's not a horrible ending. The thing is the movie really didn't promise the viewer anything. Nothing.

reply

Fair enough, but I felt like it had an obligation to show the consequences seeing as it hadn’t shied away previously. It went for the pseudo-clever ending and that’s what kept it from being a really good movie.

reply

I think the ending was making a statement on Christianity.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

You're clueless. The movie showed the consequences of William Hurt's character's lies to and about himself, and left everything on his plate. It was a brilliant, crushing portrayal.
Ever read or hear the Bible verse "the sins of the father"?

reply

I haven’t but as one of the writers said, the movie was not meant in any way to be a commentary on religion. You’re just reading into what you think happened after the credits ended, When in fact we have no idea as too what happened to William Hurts character or what he felt. As far as consequences go that’s a pretty extreme justification, a man disowns his son and in return has his whole family murdered. If that were the consequence of every such debauchery then the world would have far fewer people living in it.
A more brilliant way would have been to actually show the consequences rather then to shy away from them. Perhaps the writers just couldn’t top the dramatic visual shock of seeing what happened to Hurt's family. Ending in such a way was merely pseudo-clever and falls far short of brilliance.

reply

[deleted]

The movie showed the consequences of William Hurt's character's lies to and about himself...
I thought the father was a truly damaged character. He was extremely arrogant in his Christian beliefs...like when asked to provide a credit card at the dealership he whipped out Jesus' business card instead and tried to convert the salesman.

He blasted his son because he didn't like the song he played in church and then when his son disappeared, he seemed to believe that he just ran away...it didn't take him long to replace him with his "other" son.

reply

What's wrong with a little ambiguity??? So what if it ended abruptly? If the film would've ended any other way it probably would've been too preachy and that wasn't the vibe of the film at all. I really dug the ending, i didn't need it spoon-fed to me.

Via Con Dios...

reply

uhh, did you miss the scenes where he murders all of his fathers family? why does every movie have to be formulaic? its that type of boxed in thinking that produces so much of the easy way out films we see every year. this was a risky film that does not make it easy for the audience to handle, and a true cop out would have been tying up any loose ends it leaves. this is a very brave film, and there are plenty of cookie cutter ones out there for you.

reply

Yeah, thanks for the condescension but perhaps u didn’t actually take into account my previous points. It’s the easiest thing in the world to do nothing, its much, much harder to take a stand and make a point.

Seeing as this movie had nothing at all in common with cookie cutter rom-coms made by timid studio execs sitting on piles the size of watermelons. I think it had the right to take the audience where it promised to take them. It tried to be bold. It tried to be brave but in the end it turned out to be just another pussy with a snazzy haircut.

reply


i don't think it's *that* open-ended, as a cop-out.

why the need to show him seeing his family dead ?

it's obvious Elvis is confessing, so we KNOW the Pastor KNOWS that happened.


why do we need to SEE what the Pastor will do next ??

whether he reports Elvis to the police, or takes personal vengeance or even packs up and leaves the community to be with "all he has left"; the movie ends a chapter of HIS life from his 'transgression' to it's conclusion.

it's a PERFECT ending, you leave the theatre with PLENTY to discuss, or muse with other people, "What Would Tyler Durden Do ?"


It’s the easiest thing in the world to do nothing, its much, much harder to take a stand and make a point.
well then, YOU make your point now.



...in mourning for those who lost so much
http://tinyurl.com/greatloss

reply

Its a verb used erroneously as an adjective, I.E. a spelling mistake.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]