MovieChat Forums > The Trojan Horse (2008) Discussion > The Ending **SPOILER**

The Ending SPOILER

posted 16 years ago by starfleet_99
17 replies | jump to latest

So, what did we think of the ending??? I have to admit, I didn't really care for it. This is the movies, so the good guys win, the bad guys lose. TM being "bumped" off like that was so unsatisfying, and so wrong!!! Would it kill the writers and producers of these things to have the BAD GUYS WIN??

Although...I will say this; if something like that--a coup of some sort, happened to my country...I'd try and screw over the person(s) responsible too. AGAIN...it makes a BAD movie, however.

Not only that, but it is one of those typical Hollywood endings where they don't even have the guts to end it CLEANLY. Am I the only one who thinks that they've left it wide open for a sequel because the "death" of TM occurs off screen ( so they can say it DIDN'T happen if need be)? Cowards AND incompetents!!

All in all...the ending was CRAP.

"The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain"

[–] JDhypnotic 16 years ago

Really didn't like Marc Lavigne getting killed he was too good a character. The end of the TrojanHorse should of been Tom McLaughlin getting arrested for the conspiracy and at the end of the movie with him in prison, the cell door slamming behind him.............

Marc Lavigne: "What's a MILF."

[–] starfleet_99 16 years ago

I like Marc Lavigne's character as well, and wish he didn't get killed off...but yeah, an ending a bit more definitive instead of a "mysterious" death would have a bit better...

"The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain"

[–] CdnKuhner 16 years ago

I agree fully. I loved when they got Marc Lavigne, I wish they'd gotten that damned reporter too. But this ending, with Mary holding the trigger, we may see a third.

[–] tha_416_raver 16 years ago

I just didn't get it. There were so many directions they could have taken this. I would have watched it, if it was an hour-long weekly drama. So good, compared to the other productions these days.

It just didn't make sense to me. They spent all this time building up to the election results, and when he won - it seems like they didn't know what to do.

And Tom's speech to the reporter didn't make sense either. "We're going to follow all the rules, and make this country a better place!" Huh? Someone tell me why that's a bad thing?

Also, there were some plots that were just inserted for the sake of it. For example, the election program. They killed off people, and had the reporter go thru this whole ordeal - just to finish it off with Tom saying "I don't like it...I want to run and honest campaign." Again, huh? He had himself shot, and wanted to run honestly?

Would have been really cool if it was a cat-and-mouse drama about trying to get him back. Or if there was some monumental effort to seperate Canada again. Or if they showed us what he planned to do with the European Union. Or SOMETHING!

It just fell flat at the end!

[–] starfleet_99 16 years ago

EXACTLY. Once he won the election, they needed a quick way to wrap things up, and in so doing, sacrificed the ending.

TM speech was pretty good, but somewhat hypocritical, no? Boiled down to the basics, it was a typical, "Ends justifies the means" speech. My intentions are good, so being evil to fulfill them isn't a problem.

Another major theme, which might have been played up a bit more, is one of REVENGE. All the goals ( preventing another war in Saudi Arabia, etc) were really red herrings and false leads. It isn't until the end of the movie do we realize that TM's primary goal has nothing to do about making the USA a better country, but getting "back at it" for stealing his own country. That's why he keeps on going on about the story of the frog and the mouse. It's ALL ABOUT REVENGE, and all of the noble crap throughout the movie is just that.

That's why the speech is a massive turning point--it has nothing to do about making the USA a great country. It's all about revenge and getting even--using foreign powers to help you do so. In short, a coup or overthrow of gov't is BAD, no matter what reasons you come up to "justify" it.

But getting back to the ending. *sigh*. He wins the election, and reveals himself to be the defacto leader of an international coup to affect change in the USA, partly driven by his own need for revenge, despite the fact that it was his OWN fault that his country was eventually annexed by the USA. Now what?

All of your ideas sound pretty good. Personally, I would have liked to have seen TM pesuade the USA to give Canada back, or even better, show signs that TM was willing to take over other parts of the world who didn't share his view--one more "noble" dictator eventually becoming like all the rest.

"The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain"

[–] bholness-1 16 years ago

Why persuade the US to give Canada back when he had the power to turn the US into a larger version of Canada. Obey free trade agreements, participate in the UN and follow their resolutions etc. are a bunch of ideals that are supposed to be held by both Canada and the United States but are largely ignored in Washington (at least at this point in time). So even though the US came in an annexed Canada, it was just a rouse to turn the US into Canada.

[–] starfleet_99 16 years ago

This is true. And if he had been able to do that relatively honestly, upfront, direct--and ran on a platform of doing that, then it would be cool. I would have no problem with it. I think it went downhill when he tried to do it underhandedly.

"The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain"

[–] tha_416_raver 16 years ago

Now THAT would have been a true Canadian production.

Don't take over the world with military strength, do it with legislation!

I just don't get why everyone was so mad at him for using crafty ways to win the election. He still won, fair and square. The voters voted, and he won!
Can anyone tell me that every election is run with upstanding morals, and ethical behaviour?

For effs sake! They're comparing Obama to Osama down there!

There were other things in there too, that were just thrown in to make it spicy.

She had an abortion! Ok, so lets counter it with....hmmm...OH! The President's Gay!

It's like they took instances from real life, and peppered it in. There was George W. Bush (and the whole war thing) Larry Craig, Bill Clinton...any others?

[–] ben_stilwell 16 years ago

I felt the ending was a huge letdown.

I enjoyed the premise, being a fan of "what ifs". The show builds up to the election night well enough and then there is no climax. There was so little time spent on what the purpose of the coup was. As far as I can tell, the purpose was to force the US into being a totally non-isolationist nation but there also sounded like there was a premise for further global takeover.

After this was an incredibly odd move. Why would they kill all involved? The backlash from American citizens would be extreme. Think about this: So finally an independant Presidential candidate wins, a candidate that had survived an assassination attempt. So after winning, he is killed by a USAF jet. The people would go nuts.
Seems to me it would be far better to make him answer for his crimes(he was indirectly involved in several murders). Impeaching him should be a piece of cake, there is no need to kill him.

[–] CdnKuhner 16 years ago

I agree somewhat with Ben. Look at it this way, we have no idea what happened, really. We NEVER SAW the plane get blown outta the sky. If the fighter pilot saw movment from TM, they might say, "No f'in way Im shooting him down"

After all, he is the President-elect. Just a thought anyway.

[–] starfleet_99 16 years ago

This is true. Of course, as a plot device, it only sets up another potential part to the movie ( which I wouldn't mind seeing, if it was good).

But yes...the ending was anti-climactic.

"The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain"

[–] areyouaproverb 15 years ago

you all are kind of missing the point.

there are no "good guys" in this movie. they're all evil. the tom skerritt character is vile for inadvertantly causing the death of american children in Saudi Arabia. the Paul Gross character is evil for taking part in a massive conspiracy to "take down" the US gov't as a superpower (which would be fine except he did it by extremely deceptive means.)

and the idea that this guy could be impeached would mean implicating the entire EU in a coup attempt in the US which would destroy all european/north american relations. you cant end a movie on such a note. it wouldn't work. they ended it the only way they could...with the quiet destruction of those involved and a "return" to US rule of the US. it's a purposefully unsatisfying ending for a reason. the only person in the story who has NO blood on her hands IS the texan oil billionaire, ironically. and if there's one thing that's true about canadian drama, is that it LOVES irony. almost to its detriment.

[–] starcrafteconomics 16 years ago

What I thought was funny was that the VicePresident had overheard TM's rant, then decided to tell the sitting, hot Secretary of Defense (I assume as much since there was the shot of the Pentagon before hand). And the SecDef decides to knock him off. Didn't even bother to verify the VP-elect's statement.

[–] Tsockley 16 years ago

Did Canada stay apart of the United States? I am praying not. I am a Canadian and want my country to stay independant.

[–] SexWithAnimals 15 years ago

"In short, a coup or overthrow of gov't is BAD, no matter what reasons you come up to "justify" it."

Yeah, I mean, there was nothing wrong with the government in Germany in the early 40s.

If the USA government was doing real harm to its citizens directly (and don't start with that PATRIOT bull, we all know it sucks and it's going away soon) there would eventually be armed revolution.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson

[–] little_isys 8 years ago

Also, there were some plots that were just inserted for the sake of it. For example, the election program. They killed off people, and had the reporter go thru this whole ordeal - just to finish it off with Tom saying "I don't like it...I want to run and honest campaign." Again, huh? He had himself shot, and wanted to run honestly?

The election fixing software they discovered wasn't inserted just for the sake of it. Remember early in the first part where the referendum is held? The outcome was 51/49 in favour of joining the USA. That was an application of the election fixing software.

[–] harveyj1005-1 15 years ago

To be frank, I thought the whole movie was garbage. I went along with it right up to the point where the assassin broke into the hotel room and shot the ex-prime minister of Canada... but he did not shoot the reporter. This guy is an assassin. His first rule would be to shoot both people. Obviously contrived because she has to live through the rest of the movie. Also, at the end, where the president-elect spills the beans to the reporter. He didn't check for a wire?? He's going to tell her everything?? Give me a break! I enjoyed Tom Skerritt as the president, but the woman who played Mary, the senator from Texas and new VP... he accent was definitely bogus. I know Canada can make better movies than this.