movie ending - Messages Deleted (2010) Discussion

[–] punkrawkshow182 14 years ago

I dont know, thats why I came to this board. I had a feeling it was him all along. When his agent asks him where he got the character Millie from, I didnt understand why he was so glum about it seeing as he just lost his girlfriend and his best friend to that psycho. It would be grat if anyone else can shed a light to this.

reply

[–] kloby80 14 years ago

Yeah,if he is a killer than he was working with his student together, and everything that is happening is written in script so everbody should know what will happen, right??

reply

[–] joyia27 14 years ago

I really think that Millie was a figment of his imagination. His dad was always telling him to write what he knows. Millie talked about setting the fire when she was locked in the closet. When Joel was at the police station, they talked about him feeling guilty that his mother died in the fire. There are definitely some loose ends in the movie, but I think his alter ego of Millie was setting him up the whole time. The motive would've been to write a good script. That's why he was smiling like that at the end. Millie was a part of him and it was what he knew.
OR

He was in jail the whole time and the whole movie is just his script. He could've written Millie based on himself, using some aspects of him that got him in prison anyway.

There are a lot of loose ends, so it's really hard to say. If they took out the scene with that crazy smile it would all make sense that Millie would be the killer.

reply

[–] kloby80 14 years ago

Agree joyia27, this smile at the end, is movie BUG :) I mean if he is a killer then movie is *beep* because all those killings and calls are *beep* with him as a murderer.

Conclusion : I like when I can debute about movie with others and get other people opinion about story but this movie doesnt get me that satisfaction because other possibilities about killer doesnt make sence in the movie at all.
Millie is killer and that make sense, others dont.

reply

[–] flawrencemyelin 12 years ago

That's right. It seems to me like the movie didn't actually happen - it was all his story.

reply

[–] TonyC4444 12 years ago

Yeah the movie was great up until the last two minutes. I think they ruined it right there. But I think you're right, the entire thing was just his script he was writing in Prison.

reply

[–] Decouvrirs 14 years ago

I JUST DON'T GET IT. I just watched the movie, and now its REALLY bothering me. I have no idea what the heck just happened. Whatever, I'm going to bed.

reply

[–] blackmage994 14 years ago

Another hint about him being the killer would be the knife he took form his girlfriends place. It was more than just a oh look he has a knife so it must be him. The fire thing makes perfect sense too and that the police station was questioning his past and why he was so angry. Also why she seemed to have read the scripts the exact same amount he claimed to read his and other peoples and was in denial and how she was able to show him what he had written to other people.

reply

[–] MazRock90 14 years ago

He Cant be the killer , he saw his girlfriend being murdered ...

reply

[–] kloby80 14 years ago

yap, thats true he cant be killer !!

reply

[–] gold167 14 years ago

he was the killer, he treat the whole things as a script and he was the protagonist
all along his dad said write what you know so all along he know the reasons behind the killings who the victims where etc etc

IT WAS HIM

reply

[–] TonyC4444 12 years ago

There was no killer, it was all a script he was working on in prison.

Cut out the last two minutes, and Millie is the killer.

reply

[–] dr-joe888 14 years ago

He's smiling at the end of the movie because he got away with stealing and selling Millie's script as his own.

There is the dialogue with his agent where he mentions that his older writing was not that good at the end. And even after he kills his friend Millie asks if he thought her script was better than his and he admits that it is.

So you're right that she is the killer, but her death in the end allows Lillard's character to pawn her script off as his own.

reply

[–] kingyhtd 14 years ago

maybe the whole movie was a script based on what actually happened and he replaced himself with Millie and used himself as the protagonist because the problem with the script was that he couldn't emphisize with the protagonist just the killer. so his and mille's roles were reversed in the script/ the movie so he could see it from her perspective?

reply

[–] bloozey 14 years ago

Dr Joe is right I think guys. He stole her script and got away with it, that's all.

reply

[–] formulakaz 13 years ago

I agree with Dr Joe too. Fame ended up being the most important thing to him. He was happy to be sentenced to jail because he finally had a script that sold, even if it wasn't his.

reply

[–] guarino2002 13 years ago

my conclusion of the ending, is that it was the only scene in which wasnt 100% predictable. It was such a confusing ending because they realized the entire movie was garbage. And people talk like The Last Exorcism is the worst movie ever.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] alachrymist 14 years ago

i think it was Andrew all along

reply

[–] waspfan33 14 years ago

IT DOESNT MATTER WHAT YOU THINK...

if hes not the killer why in the *beep* is he in jail?

spectre can

suck it.

reply

[–] formulakaz 13 years ago

This is what bugs me about the movie! I don't believe he was the killer, but surely forensics would show gunshot residue on the male detenctive & they could match the bullet from his gun to Millie's arm wound. Liekwise, Millie would have gunshot residue on herself which in turn they could determine she shot the female detective.

reply

[–] johnson40 14 years ago

***SPOILERS***

All the signs seem to indicate that he is a serial killer who wrote a script WHILE sitting in jail about serial killing. There is no indication that the murders for which he apparently stands trial for are in any way linked to the one's from his script.

We watched the film inside a film in which his script had already been used to make a movie, none of that was real obviously, only the part where his agent visited him was real.

He wrote about what he knew (like his father kept saying in the movie), which was killing. But none of it really happened as in his script because it would be impossible for him to be the teacher and watch some of the murders. It is also suggested that he killed his mother in the fire in real life, even though the police brining it up is just part of his script and not real.

There are some mistakes in the movie inside the movie though: in his script Millie is the murderer and the wheelchair guy said it was a HE who threatened him. Even if she wore the mask the movement, posture and voice should make it very hard for someone to not notice you're a woman.

reply

[–] alesisqs61 13 years ago

Plotholes aside.... for this theory to be correct....you'd have to be totally guessing because the movie does not led you to believe that it's this smart anywhere.

Like you said, the wheelchair guy didn't say a women, but that's besides the point, she could have told him to say guy, not girl, but that's all left out for us to know by the "twist" that Millie was bad, even though I had a feeling she was bad all along.

Perhaps he is in jail simply because he is the only one alove and they have to do all the testing before they release him...he's broke until he got his script sold so he cannot afford bail. I also just think hes happy because he finally sold a script, plus...it's the only ending that actually makes any sense to what you see on film.

To assume this is a film within a film holds no ground....not to say it's not cool....just where is the proof? The filmmakers would have been much more imaginative to pull off a film within a film idea and had to go about it completely different for me to believe that.

http://www.nuzic.net/members/1057/
http://www.youtube.com/user/alphazoom

reply

[–] popidillator 13 years ago

Just watched it. My first instinct was like most people - okayish beginning, hoping it would be smart since it was so 'meta' in terms of being about screenwriting etc, but then it just devolved badly and the twists I saw coming a mile away.

Unless the final twist is intended to be, as people have said - and seems at least hinted at - that Millie was a figment of his imagination..

I think now I tend to subscribe to the theory already put forward that probably he was a screenwriter who went nuts, killed all those people, went to jail, and wrote a script about it - but inventing the Millie character to be the villain and allowing him to be the protagonist. His scripted version of events is what we see play out. That's why there are so many times when we're reminded throughout the movie that his character, the protagonist, isn't necessarily the 'hero'. And why there's much discussion about the need to invent a strong villain, etc.

And as people have mentioned, the stuff about the fire etc and his incorporating that into the Millie character, in her background and in her attempt to light him on fire at the end

funny thing is though of course that without this final twist at the end of the actual film, the screenplay HE wrote would be craptastic; as derivative and obvious and banal as they come lol, hardly a hit ;)

I think this could've been really good but the very final 'twist' is so ambiguous/vague that we're discussing if it even it exists, when it should've come as the final decisive "oh *beep* now I get it!" moment. Good idea, bad execution

how much is mathew lillard like mathew perry?? lol

reply

[–] leo_cosmin 13 years ago

I really don't get u guys. He was just smiling because he finally sold "his" script. He just wanted attention, fame and to finally be a recognized screenwriter, not just a teacher. Just remember the reason y he broke up with his girlfriend - because he felt lik he was stuck on the script and she brought him bad luck or something like that. So, even though he was in jail, because the police already were on a hunt for him and him being the only one on the scene and all, he was happy he sold that stolen script, finally. He even says "write about what you know", that pointing that Millie existed and really did the killings, but nobody believes him.

reply

[–] chito1977 13 years ago

I figured that too, at first, that it was Millie who killed everyone, and that was the twist. Same old thing we see in every other thriller.

But, the stuff about the fire got me wondering. It seems somewhat unlikely that she would have had the same experience with the mother dying in the fire as he did. And of course, saying that Millie was a composition of people, mostly him.

And that smile at the end, that was creepy. IMO, that's not simply a "yay, I finally sold my script, but they don't know it's not really mine!" kind of smile. That's just my opinion, of course, but that's how it seemed to me.

On top of that, we don't really know that the woman detective died. In plenty of other movies, we see characters get shot in the side like that, and they live through it. Obviously this isn't other movies, but I'm just saying that we don't know for a fact that she died.

If she lived through it, there's no way Matthew Lillard would have been locked up, as it would have been made clear that Millie was the killer.

Or, there's the whole idea that he's got split personalities, and what we saw was actually happening, but we were seeing it from the viewpoint of one of his personalities. Millie could have been one of these other personalities.

But, that would just make things really confusing. :)

So, I'm going with the idea that what we saw, before the final scene, was what he had written. Again, just my opinion.

Who knows, maybe the whole point is to leave it somewhat unclear at the end, so that people will debate it? Maybe this is exactly what the filmmakers wanted.

reply

[–] TonyC4444 12 years ago

Assume? Guess? They came out and flat told you in the last two minutes that the whole thing was just his script.

"Where did you come up with the Millie character?"

"It's a compilation of people, but it's me mostly."

reply

[–] Logain_ 13 years ago

... the killer. It wouldn't make sense. He saw his girlfriend getting murdered. His girlfriend was WITH him when that guy fell out the window.

Millie did it. The reason he smiled at the end was that he just made a sh*tload of money. He had made it as a writer. His dream had come true. And he made it as a writer because he finally wrote about something that he actually had been through, which is what the whole movie was about.

The reason he was in jail was that he was interfering with justice when he chased the killer by himself. And let's not forget that HE KILLED HIS BEST FRIEND! Even if he thought his friend was the murderer, he would probably get prosecuted at least with manslaughter.

reply

[–] meshaky 12 years ago

I think people are used to last minute twist in movies now days, that's why even a simple smile makes people to over think.

I thought it was pretty simple, here is my theory:
This guy was bad in imagination and putting things together and coming up with a good script, but he was good at BS, so he got a teachers job teaching the same thing that he failed to achieve. His father always hinted that you suck in imagination instead write something that you know of instead of using your imagination.

Then whatever happened with Milli and the killings, everything we saw in the movie happened for real, and when it all ended, and he was in jail, he probably thought through everything that really happened and realized that every single person who knew of the whole real story were dead. So that leaves him as the only person with all the information, and he probably wrote down the whole real events into a script. And this script was his first real success.

So in the last scene what we see is, him smiling at his success that he finally achieved following his father's tip "write what you know". This also explains the comment by his agent..something like where did he come up with this Milli character...to the effect that she was some weirdo, which confirms that he wrote the actual events in which Milli plans & runs the whole show. It also makes sense that he asks about his trial, he is probably going for trial for all deaths because he did not give out the real information to the police, which could have probably saved him from going through the trial/jail because if he gave all the information to the police there would have been a good chance they would have dug into details of Milli and found real evidence (remember she had video system setup in her apartment, I am sure there would have been video footage). This kind of also explains his smile, he is fooling the world by writing in the real events and selling to the world as fiction, as something he created from his imagination. And taking the pride in doing so and openly saying it ("write what you know") becaus nobody would know what it means.

(I come to realize....may be I am over thinking.....lol)

reply

[–] brownguy2004 12 years ago

think he smiled cause he stole miller script one more time, and passed it as his own

Note he not convicted let. He asked about the trial..so trial may of not taken place let, he just cant afford bail being a broke liberal arts teacher. so sure he will get off.

Reviews..reviews and MORE reviews
http://streamingrevies.blogspot.com/

reply

[–] LTUM 12 years ago

the whole ending is F__KED and makes no sense

--------------------------------------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2dKNeLqNas

reply

[–] iheartjacksparrow 12 years ago

Saw this last night. I'm going to side with the people who say it was a movie within a movie. I think the clue is at the end, when the agent asks about how he came up with the Millie "character." Certainly if all the murders had been staged by Millie, which would have been his defense at trial, it would have been widely reported that Millie was the actual killer and her body would have been recovered. So why would the agent act as if Millie didn't even exist? The agent would have known his client's position as to the killings. If the agent hadn't said "Millie character" then I would definitely believe that she was the actual killer (which I had decided about mid-way through the movie).

reply

[–] LTUM 12 years ago

yeah maybe so. i need to replay the end convo

but perhaps, they shoulda tossed out tiny foreshadowing all through about him being in jail already, like maybe he sees an image, then WAKES up-- it was a dream. then another, then another...

and in the end we find out the 'dream snippets' were the actual reality. that way the viewer wouldn't have been so caught off guard by the jail scene.

b/c it surely looked like he was in jail for the murders, as that was the logical progression of the whole main plot of it.

(i think the jail twist, if there was one, was way too subtle)

--------------------------------------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2dKNeLqNas

reply

[–] gottfrid 11 years ago

the ending was the best part of an otherwise average thriller.

it leads to three interpretations:

1- we saw his script, not real life. he is in jail, for who knows what crimes, and wrote what we saw(the film). this is obvious when he says the millie character was based on himself.

2- everything we saw happened, and then he wrote about it, and became a well-paid writer, exactly what he had failed at, when he was writing of what he didnt know. now, because he knew about crime, after he was part of a crime plot, he took his fathers advice and wrote of what he knew, and finally found sucess. even though he killed the murderer, millie, the two cops and his pal also died, so he had no one to vouch for him, so in the end he paid for all the murders, even though now he works as a successful writer from behind bars.

3- a mix of both. we saw the film through his perspective, so maybe he was the killer and imagined everything else, including millie.

a hidden B gem, this film. i like lillard, and unger, and they were solid. the actress who played millie was hot, but didnt quite like her acting.

cohen still can write.

"It doesn't matter what Bram Stoker has told you... dead people don't come back from their graves"

reply

[–] LTUM 11 years ago

good points. good post

the only thing i will add is that a movie shouldn't be too vague in its communicating of story info.

my contention wasn't the WHAT of what was happening, but the way it was poorly SHOWN to us, the viewers.

because, really, nobody can say what exactly went on there. and that means IMO that the film didn't quite do its job (in communicating)

"rage to exist..." http://tinyurl.com/c9ush3z

reply

[–] gottfrid 11 years ago

maybe, but it could be intentional.

if it was a straight story, maybe I wouldnt have liked it that much.

but VISUALLY speaking I guess you are right. it felt like a TV drama at times. the cinematography and editing werent bad, but certainly didnt match the "obscure" plot. a "neo-noir" setting wouldve enhanced the experience, definitely.

"It doesn't matter what Bram Stoker has told you... dead people don't come back from their graves"

reply

[–] LTUM 11 years ago

"rage to exist..." http://tinyurl.com/c9ush3z

reply

[–] solarstone2002 11 years ago

I also was like WTF with the ending. I was the translator of this film for the Spanish dialogue replacement version and when I finished working on the film I thought "What the hell did I just translate?", like, "Did I do it right or did I miss something?" But it's just because of a bad ending. Like they wanted to make it more shock value, now that it's all the fad that movies are all a dream of the main character and all that shyt. The flick wasn't bad for a tv-movie, but the ending... duh.

reply

[–] Angus-8 11 years ago

Interesting that they didn't give someone translating it a deeper insight. Don't you need to know context to get the right translation?

Anyway, you are all forgetting a few things: he may not have participated in any of what we saw. He might be in jail for, I dunno, smuggling albatrosses, and the script was all fiction.

However, his agent singled out Millie as being the oddball, suggesting everyone else did exist. But the interpretation that everything that happened in the script happened, leaves us asking who the really killer was. Could the woman cop be right, that Lillard is a skitsophraniac, and Millie was his psychokiller personality? If so, the personality doing the writing would have a hard time getting the perspective of the other personality. The idea of co-authorship starts to get silly.

It was just another bad Canadian movie.

reply

[–] solarstone2002 11 years ago

Nah. They give you a combined continuity script, or in some cases a simple transcription with no annotations, and there you go. Only in some A-list 35mm films they provide you with a proper post-production script with all kinds of annotations. But I've found myself translating films from horrible transcriptions in which you find errors such as "loose" instead of "lose" (which would give a totally different meaning) or "he'd" instead of "you'd" which you can imagine how troublesome might it be had one not noticed there was an error. Luckily, they provide us with the reels so we get to watch the film. The worst part is that the person in charge of directing the dubbing actors doesn't usually know a word about English, and they modify the text using synonyms to fit the words to the original labial consonants and lip movements, and if they don't understand what it's happening beyond the translation, go figure.

reply