MovieChat Forums > Meek's Cutoff (2011) Discussion > All the 'B.S' aside, this is a 'B.S.' mo...

All the 'B.S' aside, this is a 'B.S.' movie.


Yes, I have read the comments regarding the filmmaker's choice to leave the ending ambiguous. Sure, that is always their right, but that doesn't often translate into a good movie.

Imagine what the movie "Titanic" would have been if it had ended right at the point where the iceberg is sighted.

Imagine what "Avatar" would have been if there had not been the big battle scene.

Imagine what "Raiders of the Lost Ark" would have been if the movie ended when they started digging in the desert.

Imagine what "Hunger Games" would have been if it ended when she said she would take her little sister's place.

"Meek's Cutoff" is a failure in experimental film-making. It really is a lot like watching paint dry. Then, with the build-up to the end, it just ends. There is no resolution to anything. Did they all die the next day? Did they start to slaughter each ox for food and to drink the blood? Did they find water? Was the Columbia River right over the next set of hills?

Anything could have happened yet the filmmaker chose to let it all be in our imagination. While that may work for some movies, it doesn't work for this one. After watching patiently for almost 90 minutes the filmmaker owed us more.

TxMike
Make a choice, to take a chance, to make a difference.

reply

Avatar would have been a far better movie without that battle scene. But they have to sell it to teen-agers (of all ages).

reply

I haven't seen Meeks cutoff yet, just building up to it, but having a definitive ending doesn't make Avatar or Hunger Games good, they aren't, not even close. Also I wanted to tell you Raiders does have an ambiguous ending...Indie is told they are looking into the box and it's safe, however we see that they are just storing it in a warehouse filled with boxes...what are these boxes?...what's inside them?...what do they actually intend to do with the Ark? Are the other boxes equally dangerous? Lots of questions...lots of ambiguity.

reply

"Did they all die the next day? Did they start to slaughter each ox for food and to drink the blood? "

The ending is for you to decide for yourself what happened. That's just the sort of film it is. For me, the last few shots where the Michelle Williams character staring at the Indian framed within the tree branch and a reverse long shot of him staring back at her, then without any sort of emotion or gesture, he turns around and walks off into the desert and the film fades to black. I think they all died in the desert[1]. That's why the film faded to black and he showed no gesture or emotion towards her or any of the party.

[1] Disclaimer. I am a big pessimist. I believe the real world is a mean place populated by good people who have become desensitized by media and the realities of life and find it very easy to become indifferent to other peoples suffering and pain. Hence why my bleak interpretation of the the open ended ending of this film.



" Can this really be the end..to be stuck inside of mobile
with the Memphis blues again."

reply

"Meek's Cutoff" is a failure in experimental film-making.
From the manner in which you've used the endings of Titanic, Avatar, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and Hunger Games as examples in comparison to Meek's Cutoff's "experimental film-making" ending, leads one to believe that you consider Titanic, Avatar, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and Hunger Games experimental films. That's funny stuff, man.

...regarding the filmmaker's choice to leave the ending ambiguous. Sure, that is always their right, but that doesn't often translate into a good movie... the filmmaker owed us more.
If it's "their right," why do they "owe us more?" Everyone has their own opinions. And your not liking Meek's Cutoff (just the ending or all of it) is fine. But Reichardt owes you nothing. Or maybe you loaned her 20 bucks the other day?





"What doesn't kill you, defines you."

reply