I guess the only question I have is with the dialogue at the end sort of leaving it fairly open to discussion, I guess I have to ask if he ended up dying after having his epiphany. I'm not so sure he did. I think with the change of his outlook and fulfilling his promise to his partner in regards to protecting the pregnant woman that he ends up as a character worth saving.
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
Forgive my mobile for the incorrect punctuation, and my lack of sleep for the poor sentence structure.
shareI recently met the director at a screening of Seven Psychopaths, and when asked this question, he said he refused to answer because there WAS no answer. He said he left it open so the viewer could answer it as they saw fit.
Tell it to the cleaning lady on monday.
I had a feeling that was the approach they were going for.
_______
Quick! Tell me about the F'in golf shoes!
It's a great ending, but I'm guessing with Ray's little speech at the end that it's assumed he did survive.
shareHello,
My impression is that the answer to your question is that it doesn't matter. What does matter is that Ray no longer wants to die.
All the best,
KW.
http://mymusingsonfilm.wordpress.com/2013/01/10/in-bruges-2008/
Yes, Ray died. Count the bullet holes and where they were.
shareSure his body was bullet-ridden but that same bullet-ridden body narrates about he now hopes he won't die. This can't be our criteria.
In fact, the question itself can only be answered with "the viewer is neither told nor shown whether Ray lives or dies," and my opinion is that the viewer is not told or shown this is because it doesn't matter. What does matter is that Ray no longer wants to die.
All the best.
KW.
This review might help:
http://mymusingsonfilm.wordpress.com/2013/01/10/in-bruges-2008/
It's not that he no longer wanted to die, it's just that he no longer wanted to die in Bruges. He hated that place with a passion and didn't like the idea of possibly being stuck there for the rest of eternity in the afterlife. I'm pretty sure that had he been somewhere other than Bruges when he got shot he'd have been more than okay with dying.
shareHi Khitt66,
Good thoughts.
The question originally asked is whether Ray dies.
The answer (the 'fact' part, if I can use that word) is that the viewer is not given an answer.
My thoughts (the opinion part) is that it doesn't matter whether or not Ray dies, and (also opinion) that importance lies elsewhere (like in Ray not wanting to die).
We --- you and I --- interpret that final scene rather differently but I think our starting point is the same, namely, that the viewer is not provided answer as to whether Ray dies.
All the best,
KW.
http://mymusingsonfilm.wordpress.com/2013/01/10/in-bruges-2008/
I don't think it has ANYTHING to do with WHERE he dies. I don't think he is saying Hell will be just like wherever you die. I believe he is saying that of EVERYWHERE he has been in his life, Bruges is BY FAR his last favorite so, at least for him, his Hell would be eternity in his last favorite place. Makes sense when you consider Hell is intended to make an individual miserable. It is one of my favorite movies EVER and I've ALWAYS thought that yes, he does die. He got shot to pieces and had already lost immense amounts of blood. Brendan Gleeson already did, Fiennes killed himself thinking he had inadvertently killed a child (something Colin tries to stop him from doing as it was NOT a child, but fails to do)...I kind of always figured the three leads all die in the building climax of the movie. End of story. But I like feeling that hope that maybe HE doesn't because it NEVER crossed my mind. I always just assumed!
IT'S ONLY FUNNY ' TILL SOMEONE GETS HURT..........Then it's FREAKIN' HILARIOUS!!
Yes, but otherwise what's the point showing that Harry gets dum-dum bullets from the gun dealer?
A single hit from a bullet like that could be leathal, but he got 4 if I remember correctly... so I think the reason of showing the bullets was to make sure you'll know he'll die
Hi thklista,
I think Harry getting the dum-dum's has some relationship to his shooting of the drawf in the conclusion of the film. When he buys the dum duum's he says something to the effect of "I know I shouldn't" and perhaps part of his not recognizing the drawf is because the drawf's head really has collapsed as a result of the dum dum's. I don't know, though. It's just an idea.
All this to say, I don't see the significance of Harry buying the dum dum's as lying in its communication that Ray really did die. The movie leaves that unsaid.
All the best,
KW.
Here's a reaction I've written to In Bruges: https://mymusingsonfilm.wordpress.com/2013/01/10/in-bruges-2008/
Hi Kelly,
he probably said he shouldn't because dum-dums considered inhumane (it was banned even in wars by international conventions), as it is constructed to cause massive tissue/internal organ damage by expanding inside the body.
No way one would survive several hits from such bullets to his chest and back: life-critical organs damaged irreversibly and strong internal bleeding.
In fact, it might be a goof also: I think the midget's head was hit by a bullet going through Ray's body - but the main goal of using dum-dums by special forces (besides quickly stopping a criminal) is to minimise chance of innocent people getting hit, because as a dum-dum expands it remains inside the body nearly always... (except of course when it hits a thinner part like a hand - but if it hits a man's back, it would remain inside the body)
Regards,
Henrik
[deleted]
That's what I was thinking as well. Harry shot Ray with the dum-dums, but the seemed to go through his body rather than "explode" inside of him like they're designed to. We know at least one of them did, exploding Jimmy's head instead. It's a strange oversight, because the way these bullets work is such a critical plot point. Yuri even comments on how they're supposed to work by "making the head explode". Of course, I'm not a ballistics expert, I just know that dum-dums are used to minimise chances of collateral damage. Harry just unlucky I guess.
shareThe point of showing that Harry got dum-dums was so that Jimmy's head would be blown off and he would assume he had killed a little boy, not an adult dwarf.
shareYes, but otherwise what's the point showing that Harry gets dum-dum bullets from the gun dealer?
A single hit from a bullet like that could be leathal, but he got 4 if I remember correctly... so I think the reason of showing the bullets was to make sure you'll know he'll die
The idea that someone couldn't have survived something like this is silly and a bit arrogant. People survive all sorts of things that one would not think they could. Ken's character could have survived a fall from that height (we know he didn't, because we saw him die). I can think of at least a few celebrities who have been shot multiple times and should have died. Hell, I have known a few people who have gotten shot and were a few centimeters away from being killed. Just because something is unlikely, like surviving multiple gunshots fired with hollow point rounds, doesn't make it impossible. It's incredibly justifiable to wonder if Ray died or not. Yes, he lost a lot of blood. Yes, he was shot like five times. But he was still narrating and conscious when the screen went to black. The director admits that it was ambiguous, so that the viewer would have to make up their own mind about whether or not he died, meaning that there isn't a right or wrong answer.
shareWhat do you mean where they were? The bullet holes I agree with but he got picked up by paramedics immediately, as we can see.
shareBecause logic must apply to movies.
All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain...
IMO Ray does not die, he lives but stays In Bruges which is his purgatory.
shareAll great responses. Thank you. I agree after contemplating and rewatching the film a couple times that the ambiguous ending provided is ultimately left up to the viewer to decide if ray lived or not, but I in fact agree that the answerless ending provided the far more important detail of rays realization that even in Bruges he was able to find peace after everything happened. If it were left up to factual bullet placement and with knowing of the custom ammunition type I'd say he doesn't have much of a chance, but I like to believe that it is his realization that gives him the strength to pull through.
shareI do agree with the unimportance of the number of bullets and such realistic interpretations, while what the director chooses to show - as in all kinds of art - remains the most telling. The movie's last shots are seen through Ray's eyes, lying in the ambulance, and the camera is moving, moving, moving while showing the ceiling of the ambulance, and then it stops. It stops and stays stopped, on screen for several seconds, before the credits start rolling. That recalls a photography, and reminds of a last picture printed in the eyes of someone who's died in that exact instant. So yes, despite certain people's wish for a happy Hollywood-like ending, the movie makes more sense so, as it was filmed, that Ray's dead. Plus Chloe's crying face has then some meaning.
shareOf course he wanted it to be an ambiguous ending.
Interestingly enough, in the original ending he lived, only to shoot himself when he got back to London.
I think it is a funny detail, that Ray is carried away, like they are carrying away a dead person, or someone not in a critical condition, and all people accept for Chloe, are not really reacting. If i would imagine a situation where a gun wounded guy was to be transportet to a hospital the medics at least would rush it a bit more. I cant figure it.
And if he died or not - agreed it seems totally up to the viever, and i'm a sucker for the lovestory so he survives.
But still those expanding bullets seems preetty lethal!
I like that they left it ambiguous at the end, personally I believe he dies....According to the "trivia section" on the film's imdb page, the screenplay has an extra scene revealing the dead boy's name and showing that Ray survives his injuries.
shareThere's no question about it, he died. The director, despite saying he wanted to leave it ambiguous, did not. with the number of shots that were fired and the kind of bullets he used, there's no way Ray could ever survive that. Not even if he was wearing a bulletproof vest.
shareThe point is that you don't know. The ending is actually a bit better IMHO because of the ambiguity...Obviously no one knows....you shouldn't ask questions you already know the answer to..
sharewell, with good medical care, which i believe is there in belgium, he might have survived the many shots, as none of them seem to have completely taken him out, and, although this is cheating, since he talked in the present tense when interacting in the film, but in the past tense when doing voice over, both at the start & finish (I think), it seems that he lived.
As for what the writer fella says, that's just the go-to answer for possibly ambiguous endings, and a fine one too, since there would, were this comment more timely, no doubt be a disagreement with what i have said... or it already happened, in which case, sorry for the bother.