MovieChat Forums > Blood Father (2016) Discussion > Really Cool Movie But I HATED The Ending...

Really Cool Movie But I HATED The Ending (SPOILERS)

posted 8 years ago by McGrit
23 replies | jump to latest

BIG SPOILERS ....

BIG, I'm not kidding.

The good news is that Mel Gibson is back. The bad news is the ending of this movie just sunk it in my eyes. This is certainly not “Mel Gibson’s Taken” because the flavor is completely different and there certainly will never be any sequels. The movie is as gritty as it gets and it’s very very dark. You do connect with Gibson’s character and that’s what makes the ending so disappointing. Killing him off just flat out sucked. It’s actually a predictable resolution because it’s simply THAT kind of movie. Yes, the more complex notions of complete redemption for the character are certainly palpable and the final shot of his tattoo showing him no longer being a “lost soul” is moving and artist. Yet, I wanted more tangible satisfaction from this story. His daughter’s final summation helps but you still leave the theatre on a downer note.

Overall: 6/10 because of the ending.

Had he lived 8/10

"A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man."

[–] 5535 8 years ago

Can you tell me why you disliked the ending WITHOUT spoiling anything?

[–] rs-61 8 years ago

but why didnt they just shoot him as soon as he showed up in the desert?

[–] rindercella 8 years ago

They were moving off the main road to another location. Link set them up; did you hear the cops? That was Link who wanted them there.

"Guys like you don't die on toilets." Mel Gibson-Riggs, Lethal Weapon

[–] legnadibrom (5697) 4 years ago

no, get out of this thread as it explicitly states that it has SPOILERS

[–] StarkTech 8 years ago

Have to say the ending stunk.

Stunk means it sunk the movie.

[–] rindercella 8 years ago

It ends like the book, which is great btw.

Real life situations there. Mel and the cast were all great.

"Guys like you don't die on toilets." Mel Gibson-Riggs, Lethal Weapon

[–] Xasablanc 8 years ago

Was it also in the book that that little girl took part in Alcoholic Anonymous meetings? That part was ridiculous: just a little kid; when would she have the time to develop alcoholism?

True Self is righteous. It's a conspiracy to portray man as a savage that needs taming and policing

[–] cyril_grey 8 years ago

A- it may not have been Alcoholics Anonymous. I could have been Narcotics Anonymous or Adult Children of Alcoholics or simply Unspecified 12-Step Group number 141.

B- was she that little?

C- is there a minimum age for a 12 Step group? (no, that's a serious question- is there?)

D- does one have to be a proper "alcoholic" to attend AA?

E- how does one even prove they are a proper alcoholic (aside from cirrhosis of the liver...)?

[–] Xasablanc 8 years ago

I think it takes constant drinking over a longer period of time to develop alcoholism. Like nicotine addiction, alcoholism is a chemical thing of the blood more than psychology. In either case, she was basically too young to have had the time to develop any of it. It was just not believable.

First I thought it was a support-group for those who've lost loved-ones but then she said something like she'd been off the drink for some time now and there I was, feeling sorry for the film to end with that.

True Self is righteous. It's a conspiracy to portray Man as a savage that needs taming and policing.

[–] Alex_Hurricane_Higgins 7 years ago

Actually you can still attend if you feel drink is taking over your life.

[–] MarilynM0814 8 years ago

Great points, Cyril...and good questions too.

A. As she stated she had been clean for a certain amount of time, I'd say it was probably NA...but a drug is a drug and alcohol is a drug.

B. Nope...she was a teen, and most addicts start young.

C. No, there is not (serious answer)

D. There are 'closed' meetings where a person has to admit addiction to attend...but no, you don't have to be an alcoholic to attend AA, you can be an addict and vice versa. A meeting is a meeting/

E. The person believes they are powerless over alcohol or drugs and their lives have become unmanageable. Instant proof.

Cheers...no pun intended. :D

[–] cyril_grey 7 years ago

Thank you.

Unfortunately, most of the answers are pretty frightening. I can't imagine being young, having a brain that is still in development, hormone levels that are all over the place from day to day, and an unbalanced view of the world, AND THEN adding a mind-altering substance on top of it all. I can't imagine how long the recovery is for a young person because even though they bounce back quicker than older folk, their body may not have the baseline set to get back to.

thanks again.

[–] One-Eyed_Jack 8 years ago

Nah, the ending was great. He had to die. Badasses like that don't get to live in movies like this.

[–] simian_ninja 8 years ago

I saw the ending from a mile away, that being said, I still enjoyed it.

--------------------------------------
Death is the standard breach for a complex prize.

[–] Okeelani 8 years ago

Stories like this one don't get wrapped up in a nice, happy bow. They are usually tragic......but with some redemption or reason for hope. Link had to die for this parable to work and have maximum impact.

[–] jpkrunch 8 years ago

I agree. I didn't think the movie tried to do so much artistically so why the predictable, tragic end. When they were heading into the showdown I said aloud "Daddy dies, girl lives". The idea of killing off the anti-hero is so overdone yet for some reason people still think it has some sort of impact/realism. I like the pacing and it was just fun. Why not have a fun ending?

I would say my memory is not what it used to be. But I don't remember what my memory used to be.

[–] Okeelani 8 years ago

There's a time and a place for a happy ending....but this movie is not one of them.
For this parable to have a true feeling of redemption, in its full and complete meaning, Link had to die. He gave his life for his daughter. A story that has been done before? Sure. How many "boy and his dog" stories are out there? How many "would-be thieves picked the WRONG guys to steal from, and are now on the run" stories are out there? How many "cop on the edge" stories are out there? Etc, etc....

In other words, there are only so many stories, plots, ideas out there. Many of the best themed stories have already been told, centuries ago. So....all we can do is repeat many of them, with a feel that is updated for the times. And that's fine. A "redemption" story is just about the oldest theme out there. Been told already....many times. But that doesn't mean the theme should go in a vault and never get revisited again.

That said, it then just comes down to nuances. Setting. Performances, etc. We'd watch a Lethal Weapon 5...even though the general theme of those characters has been done to death. But we'd watch it anyway....because even if you've had 5,000 chocolate chip cookies so far in your lifetime....number 5,001 is still going to be enjoyable, if you like chocolate chip cookies..

The WORST thing they could have done is change the tragic ending (which, BTW, is from a novel)....and instead, give it a happy, everything-is-going-to-be-ok "Hollywood Ending". No, instead....they did it just right. It was a dark ending....not happy. But......hopeful. The daughter was shown in rehab, where we first saw Link at the start of the movie. Presumably....her second chance at life may just work out. We don't know, but we're shown a glimmer of hope.....and that's enough.

[–] jpkrunch 8 years ago

I have news for you: This was absolutely a "Hollywood Ending" and the kind that has been trending for quite some time. That was my point. This film had no real meaning, no great plot, no enlightening dialogue (but some of the dialogue was fun/funny Mel: "This kind of Sh@t is party to a dirt bag like me"! Awesome!). It was just a fun movie that should have had a fun ending.

I would say my memory is not what it used to be. But I don't remember what my memory used to be.

[–] denthegod 8 years ago

I gotta disagree. I loved the ending. The guy died with his boots on knowing he saved his daughter from a horrible fate and also knowing how much his daughter loved him. It couldn't have been more perfect than that.

[–] firstwinsgop-1 8 years ago

I think it takes constant drinking over a longer period of time to develop alcoholism. Like nicotine addiction, alcoholism is a chemical thing of the blood more than psychology. In either case, she was basically too young to have had the time to develop any of it. It was just not believable.

AA has a whole "Young Peoples" section. I forget what the maximum age is but it is mostly all kids 15-25. They have conventions and everything where thousands of kids attend. They aren't "alcoholics" really for the most part but just screwed up kids who have spent years drinking, shoving drugs up their veins, hooking, ect and feel that the structure of AA helps them get their lives back together. So while you can ridicule the whole concept, it absolutely has a basis in fact and was in no way "unrealistic".

https://www.icypaa.org/about-icypaa