Tuesday, June 19, 2007
A good ending?
Christy alluded to a certain disjointedness in the film in an earlier comment. I agree with her on that. When I first saw it in the early '90s I really liked it, and even though I couldn't even begin to explain some of what was going on in the film, it made sense to me as a whole. I enjoyed the aesthetic experience of the film's journey, even though I found it enigmatic. On second viewing in 2007, the film seemed more flawed to me, or possibly dated, and I found myself being much more critical of it, though still appreciating it on the whole. One thing that really puzzles me is the ending. I sort of thought it might conclude with Mike's triumphant partying with the band of merry hustlers on Bob's grave, while Scott looked on rather jealously and contemptuously from afar. But instead it ended with Mike passing out on the road, robbed, then mysteriously carried away to some unknown future. I understand that the film's narcoleptic ending mirrors the beginning, and maybe it makes sense for Mike to be alone at the end instead of in a social setting, and there's sort of a theme of going where the road takes you, but the end still perplexed me. Any thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
If it had just ended with him being robbed, then I think it would have left off that he was going to degenerate further or even die on his own. Maybe the man who picked him up left things on a note of hope, that Mike would encounter both bad people and good over the course of whatever his future holds. Of course, that's allowing for the fact that he was even on that road and not dreaming, or not dreaming since the start of the movie when he first collapsed on that same highway.
And what about that final message? "Have a nice day"?
Wasn't there something else in the movie about a smiley face? Maybe more than once?
When Mike and Scott get stranded in Idaho and Scott is trying to start the motorcycle, Mike looks down the road and says he's been there before, that it's "his road." Then he focuses at a point at the visible end of the road and says it looks like a fucked-up face, like it's saying "have a nice day."
And Scott says that when he left home, he told the maid, "Wherever. Whatever. Have a nice day."
The ending is perplexing, for sure. Maybe it is hopeful -- maybe he was picked up by some kind stranger who will bring him to some kind of meaningful life. Or maybe it implies that Mike's life will just keep circling back to the same places, that things will keep happening to him but he'll never really have control of his own future.
"Have a nice day" is often something that's said automatically, and hence insincerely, or something that we say sarcastically when what we really mean is the opposite.
As people, we routinely offer hollow pleasantries to one another, but genuine caring is a much, much rarer commodity.
Ooh! I just found this interesting tidbit review of the Criterion Collection release of "idaho": A real treat for fans are six deleted scenes that include more Shakespearean-influenced dialogue as Scott stages a mock encounter with his father as played by Bob (Richert). Another scene finally reveals who exactly picks up Mike at the end of the movie.
Yes, I read that somewhere. It was Mike's brother/father. Apparently Van Sant decided that the brother was too creepy, so he preferred the ending to be ambiguous.
Interesting. The brother/father would make a certain amount of sense, and it would certainly add something to the parent-quest theme in the movie.
I found the ending kind of creepy anyway — some seemingly random person carrying him away to who knows what.
I still like your original comment, Erin: The ending is perplexing, for sure. Maybe it is hopeful -- maybe he was picked up by some kind stranger who will bring him to some kind of meaningful life. Or maybe it implies that Mike's life will just keep circling back to the same places, that things will keep happening to him but he'll never really have control of his own future.
Post a Comment