Most Supprising Ending Ever!
-
manelens — 19 years ago(May 15, 2006 03:35 AM)
You know, that is exactly what i thought! I was like, "wow this is a bit of a long movie" and actually it wasnt..i can never really get the hang of reading the durations of movies lol
But i reckon it was great, both actors did an awesome job and i agree, Sidney Poitier does rock! =] He has many great movies. -
LoveFest1969 — 19 years ago(July 01, 2006 11:37 PM)
This movie was really great Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier gave amazing performances and the ending of the movie was shocking.
99% of the time a hero is someone who is too cold, tired & hungry to give a damn. -
-
firehazard17 — 19 years ago(November 12, 2006 11:40 PM)
couldn't agree more! this film deserves to be rereleased or rediscovered my a new generation of people I mean come on people wake up and start watching movies that leave a mark on your mental outlook on life other than watching some pointless movie that you forget the next day. this movie rocks big time and the ending is pure cinema greatness Stanley Kramer I salute you for a hell of a job on this masterpiece of a movie!
-
aitch-10 — 19 years ago(November 30, 2006 04:43 AM)
Great beginning,,,Great end,,,,,Great film..Well done all.
Aitch,
http://web.ask.co.uk/web?q="Harry+Fielder" -
pogostiks — 18 years ago(March 07, 2008 02:39 PM)
For those here old enough to remember the fifties, the ending isn't so surprising. It was part of the Hollywood Code that you never made a film in which the "bad guys" got off scot free. So, even from the beginning, it was obligatory that escaped cons either be killed or captured by the end of the film. Nevertheless, it would have been interesting to see what they would do with it if it had been made after the Code was put to rest. Then again - I doubt that a better ending would have ensued.
-
cluvonj — 15 years ago(October 11, 2010 12:15 PM)
I know they were considered "Bad guys" because of the fact they were arrested for crimes they committed, Tony's being that he committed robbery and Sidney for assault & Battery. However their character development in the film shows they werent really bad guys for they grew to care about one another and helped each other as time went on. IT really showed underneath they werent so bad. Of course Sidney's character only committed the assault because he took the gun away from the man who was trying to take his land away from him I believe it was. He had wife and child but of course being a black man he was not treated right during that time. So in reality he was probably not a bad guy and had circumstances been differnet he would not have beat up a man. It seems his character if he did get away would be more justified for getting away had the conclusion came to that but of course it would not have seemed right if one had escaped and the other had not.
-
ariamne — 15 years ago(November 07, 2010 11:43 AM)
My mother went to the theater to see this movie when it first came outshe lived in Peekskill, which is upstate NY, which had a large black community for the times for upstate. When Tony Curtis was running to catch the train, and Poiter already on it, the black audience was screaming, "don't jump off, don't do it!" and when he did leap off to stay with Curtis, the entire audience (the black portion that is) booed and hissed! My mother sympathized with their reaction, but she and my dad felt more than a little conspicious leaving the theatre!
-
frank-gibbard — 19 years ago(March 01, 2007 05:43 PM)
May I throw into the ending mix those featured in "The Bridge On The River Kwai" and The Third Man" for their similar surprise value. I agree it is a great climax to "The Defiant Ones" as others have implied here. Good subject, I watched again today on British TV. Frank
-
Nic_hse — 18 years ago(April 25, 2007 11:48 AM)
I didn't think the ending was suprising at all. The whole movie was building up to an ending like this. The bond between the two of them was growing throughout the movie. The ending was good but not suprising.
Now if Joker would have ran off with that woman and child and Poitier got caught/killed OR if Poitier's character would have stayed on the train and left Joker behind to get caught, OR if after all the bonding they end up getting each other killed because of their hatred then these would have been more suprising plot twists. They would have been more of a suprise if not more satisfying. -
raiserroofer — 16 years ago(February 21, 2010 07:19 AM)
The ending was moreover well executed above anything else, and was the best part of the film. What a satisfying last shot really leaves the film kind of hanging with you. Like a previous poster stated, they really don't really end films like that anymore.