Meaning of the last line
-
jjasper-2 — 21 years ago(December 15, 2004 05:54 AM)
Good catch on the last line!! It was just after this year's viewing when that line caught my attention as "huh?" I too vote for meaning #1, that's more or less what I took it to mean. Kris IS santa and left his cane so that Fred, Doris and Susan would know for sure that he was indeed Santa and that the house was meant for them. Personally I'm happy allowing myself full immersion into the fairy tale fantasy and just going with all's well that ends in a good clinch between the lead characters. Could anyone be a better "real" Santa than kindly voiced Edmund Gwenn?? Today, they'd cast Nicholson to ensure that there was a sufficient level of cynicism and avante garde edginess - thus guaranteeing another thoroughly forgettable film. Thank goodness for these old movies and the gifted crews that put them together!
-
janetdesapio — 21 years ago(December 16, 2004 02:09 PM)
I guess #1 makes the most sense. Doris is realistic and down-to-earth to the end ("It must have been left here by the people who moved out") while Fred lets his fantasy take over - a fitting ending. I would add that the tone of voice John Payne uses for this line adds to the confusion.
-
erinurse2000 — 21 years ago(January 09, 2005 05:50 PM)
My family voted for #1 as well; I'd like to think that my argument (non-lawyer that I am) was the deciding factor. I said that proving a peacock is a peacock is not very hard, but if you prove that the dog is a peacock, you've done something pretty spectacular!
-
soma-2 — 21 years ago(February 09, 2005 09:18 AM)
This line bugged me, too.
Mr. White has a reasonable interpretation, which also popped into my mind when hearing the line. Consider that Kringle never went anywhere without his cane, and would not have left it in the house by accident. He might have left it there as a message to the family that he intends to live with them. It's possible that Fred was expressing dismay at learning that Kringle left his cane there.
While it's reasonable to think that Fred could have been boasting about his legal skills and then retracting that boast with the last line, I fail to see how seeing the cane would have changed anything. All it shows is that Kris Kringle was likely involved in securing the housenot that he is Santa Claus. The case was won on the fact that the post office decided to deliver Kris Kringle the mail, which Kringle had no control over; seeing the cane doesn't change this. When you get down to it, knowing that Kris Kringle scoped out the house really doesn't affect the trial or Fred's legal skills at all.
With all that said, I think #1 is the most likely interpretation; it was just poorly written. If the #1 meaning was intended, the scriptwriters could have made things a lot more clear by using the words "maybe I didn't do such an EXTRAORDINARY thing after all." -
gojirob — 20 years ago(July 04, 2005 10:17 AM)
I always love seemingly ambiguous lines like these. They force you to look at the language, and how its used at a given time. I go with explanation #1, and view it as : "Maybe it wasn't me pulling off the miracle, after all." Yet it still forces you to wonder who Kris really was. The remake, sadly, has no room for faith : Its him, no doubtno wonder. Here's a fully furnished house to prove it.
I place that one with one from Return Of The Jedi : "It is pointless to resist, my son." It always sounds to me like Vader is speaking to the Emperor, rather than Luke. -
gladden-2 — 20 years ago(July 21, 2005 08:10 AM)
Oh, come on folks, don't be so analytical. I've seen the movie more times than I can count and I never thought the last line was troublesome at all. In fact I thought it was one of the great last lines in moviedom. Yeah, Fred the lawyer, is patting himself on the back (figuratively) for taking a "little old man" and proving to the world that he was Santa Claus. Of course Fred, the adult (and a lawyer) didn't believe him at first. How many adults REALLY believe in Santa. But all of a sudden they're in the EXACT house that Susan had dreamed of and there is Kris's cane. Now Fred is wondering WAS he just a "litle old man" or was he really Santa? He doesn't know, the viewers don't know and that's pretty much the point. And what about that cane? Did Kris leave the cane there by accident or to send a message to Fred. Who knows? Such ambiguity is a literary device and, in the case, a good one. Don't analyze it to death. In 1947 (and I was 10 years old at the time) viewers would accept the scene for what it was, smile, shake their heads a little and not worry about it. They didn't have to have everything spelled out and made absolutely clear the way we do today. It's a delightful, fantasy movie, for Heaven's sake, not a legal brief. Accept it, enjoy it and get over the pop psychology nonsense.
-
mandlk — 20 years ago(August 29, 2005 01:43 PM)
I agree the delivery leaves a bit to the imagination but I NEVER doubted that it was Kris's cane and that he scoped out the house, causing young lawyer some doubt. I never even considered the idea that Chris did NOT live at the retirement home and might have lived in that house. Interesting things that get brought up here.
-
so_it_goes — 20 years ago(October 28, 2005 09:57 AM)
Right, let's remember that we don't actually KNOW what Fred meant to the letter, but my take on it is, I believe, one that hasn't yet been mentioned:
He was merely comparing his own achievement (getting the judge to acknowledge that Kris was, BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT, Santa Claus, for purely mercenary reasons on the judge's part, it has to be said!) with Kris' achievement: of making a didactic family believe in dreams, and of pointing them in the right direction of a house that he knew the little girl would like.
Err.and if it WAS his cane, couldn't he have bought another? or was it surgically attached? The spirit of the movie is surely that life is much more of an adventure if we accept things that defy explanation..and if the movie is taken in that spirit, it will be enjoyed much more than if you try to analyse it to death.
Merry Christmas to you all! -
thomas196x2000 — 18 years ago(December 25, 2007 05:19 PM)
I would like to believe it is number 1, but I don't know.
Why does Doris go "Oh noooo it can't be! It must have been left here by the people who moved out". Why would she be saying that if suddenly they realized he was real and the attorney's skill is not what got him off? She says "oh no" as if she realized something bad, not good, as maybe he must be nuts and that he is meddling in other people's affairs to try to prove he's Santa.
And then his reply: "Well, maybe, and maybe I didn't do such a wonderful thing after all". That does not sound to me like he was thinking Kris got off because he really was Santa. If he meant that, he would have said something like "Maybe I didn't do such a good JOB as I thought".
Don't get me wrong, I love the movie, but those two lines spoken by those two characters have to be among the worst dialog clinkers I can think of.
To me, it made the whole ending a little off. Not to rain on anyone's parade, but watch it again. You can find the end on youtube. -
viaggio1 — 15 years ago(January 18, 2011 04:01 PM)
Another possible take on the line Fred realized that because he freed Kris, Kris was then able to "find" Susan's house and thus set up the eventual marriage and housekeeping of Fred, Doris, and Susan. Despite the facts that Fred clearly loves Doris and Susan, and marriage with Doris is "in the cards," no one likes to feel that they are being pushed or "manipulated" into taking such a huge step as matrimony even if the manipulator is Kris Kringle !
"A bride without a head !"
"A wolf without a foot !" -
Nemesis7293-1 — 14 years ago(July 20, 2011 07:27 AM)
Wow.just, Wow. Really??? Your profound and ludicrous misinterpretation of those lines and their delivery beggars my imagination. The tone is OBVIOUSLY one of shock as they are jarred out their complacency by the realization that Kris really is Santa Claus. That is the correct and ONLY interpretation.which should be abundantly clear even to the intellectually challenged. Justwow.
-
viaggio1 — 14 years ago(July 22, 2011 05:17 PM)
"Maybe I didn't do such a wonderful thing after all"
"The tone is OBVIOUSLY one of shock as they are jarred out their complacency by the realization that Kris really is Santa Claus. That is the correct and ONLY interpretation."
So, Nemesis7293-1 You're suggesting that Fred should have left him to rot in the insane asylum BECAUSE he was Santa !
"A bride without a head !"
"A wolf without a foot !" -
PillowRock — 14 years ago(November 14, 2011 03:17 PM)
No, they're not suggesting that at all.
In this usage "wonderful" is not being used by Fred as a synonym for "good".
It is being used to mean "amazing", "herculean", "unbelievable". He's saying: "Maybe I didn't really do something that was impossible, but just the run-of-the-mill proving that somebody is who they are." -
viaggio1 — 14 years ago(November 18, 2011 09:34 PM)
Hi Pillowrock
Thanks for your interesting take on Fred's comment.
My statement was in response to Nemesis' July 20th attempt at trolling.
Have you had a chance to read his posting ?
"A bride without a head !"
"A wolf without a foot !" -