I thought the ending was obvious, but apparently no one else thought so.
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Nocturnal Animals
SanityLapse — 9 years ago(February 01, 2017 03:16 AM)
What I mean is that I skimmed the boards and I didn't see anyone else with my interpretation which kind of boggles my mind, because it seemed so obvious to me. But I guess the movie is open to many interpretations.
So it seemed straight forward at first, with the obvious mystery of wondering why Edward sent the story to Susan, and what the story specifically meant. At first the story made it seem like Tony was Edward (and why Susan was envisioning him as being played by Edward). I think this is partially true. Tony is an earlier form of Edward. As the movie progresses and you learn about the abortion, it starts to make things come together. I started to realize that Laura was only an early version of Susan, and India was the aborted child. However, Ray/Lou/Turk were
also
Susan, the later version of what Susan became. It was her who killed off the Susan and child that Edward loved.
This made it suddenly click, and I got chills when I realized that the true main character (Edward himself) of the Nocturnal Animals story that was sent to Susan, was actually Bobby. It started to become apparent that Bobby shared much of the story that a late life Edward did. Susan specifically mentions earlier that Edward never remarried, and Bobby has a conversation with Tony that mirrors a lot of this with Edward's life. It can be interpreted that Edward may in fact have cancer, or that he is just going out in a bang because he doesn't care anymore, but I feel like cancer is the actual reason to trigger this out of the blue after all these years.
The hardened version of EdwardBobby, has now decided to do something about this. He kills Lou and ropes Tony back into the revenge tale, where he gets his final revenge on Ray, dying in the process with the personality of his early self as he remembers his past.
This leads me to the actual real life ending, which blows my mind that nobody seems to assume. Susan finally realized the point of Edward's story, and she felt such an overwhelming guilt combined with the unhappiness of her current life that she accepted her fateto be murdered by Edward. She went to the restaurant at the end expecting to die. The very last frames of the movie show her looking up as she suddenly feels Edward's presence behind her. The credits cut right before he shoots her.
I know what gold does to men's souls. -
tigerfish50 — 9 years ago(February 01, 2017 06:29 AM)
The very last frames of the movie show her looking up as she suddenly feels Edward's presence behind her. The credits cut right before he shoots her.
When I read theories like this, I understand how the country elected Trump as POTUS. -
SanityLapse — 9 years ago(February 01, 2017 07:06 AM)
tigerfish50 posted
When I read theories like this, I understand how the country elected Trump as POTUS.
I don't want to spoil other films, but there have been numerous other popular movies that end in a very similar way.
Also, what do current US politics have to do with this movie and why do you feel a need to insert a personal agenda in a topic that doesn't relate to it? Let's discuss the movie.
I know what gold does to men's souls. -
tigerfish50 — 9 years ago(February 01, 2017 07:39 AM)
. . . there have been numerous other popular movies that end in a very similar way.
A man lures his ex-wife to a public place to pointlessly kill her in order to avenge being dumped 20 years previously? Name one.
SanityLapse is an appropriate pen name - congratulations on your choice. -
ricardox964 — 9 years ago(February 11, 2017 11:48 PM)
No, how about you use your brain a little bit before clicking "Post Reply"?
You think the dumping was the biggest problem? Or was it, MAYBE, the abortion?(as the OP stated)
Again, reading what OP wrote(which one could only hope you did), he mentions Bobby is supposed to represent Edward, who is dying(this is important, try to focus your brain here) so maybe he wouldn't really mind killing in a public place, would he now. Since he is DYING.(by the way, its funny that Bobby actually says this in the novel, isn't it)
Also, even if the dying isn't a good enough reason, you could also argue that by the time she drunk all those drinks, and you saw the restaurant getting emptier and emptier, it would be pretty much without people by the end. So, a public place, but not that public.
So, in the end, I can't name one, because what you wrote makes absolutely no sense in this conversation. I hope you're a bit more enlighted and can now proceed to argument on the point and not twist is around for some reason.
Cheers. -
Steve B1 — 9 years ago(February 08, 2017 07:32 PM)
I'd venture to say that there are NO other popular movies that end that way. I was sailing along through your interpretation until you clunked it up with that nonsense. tigerfish50 is absolutely correct and he/she wasn't referencing politics at all.
"In your opinion?"
"Um, yes your honor, in my opinion." -
DavidVilla — 9 years ago(February 01, 2017 07:52 AM)
Nobody else "assumed" it because it is nonsense.
I mean, it wasn't so bad until you arrived at the paragraph asserting that Susan just turns up to a restaurant to let herself be murdered and that Edward turned up to the restaurant to do just that. Just ludicrous.
I don't know why so many people come on here with these kind of theories or ideas for alternate endings like it can't just be a little but nuanced or just what we got which isn't exactly complicated as it is. Why does it have to be either some wildly obvious thing like that other guy on here's preferred ending in a different thread being that Edward turned up to the restaurant wearing an eye-patch. And then this one. There is no implication that Bobby is some version of Edward and thus Edward himself has cancer.
Just accept the more subtle, less paint by numbers ending that we were given rather than this Hollywood idea you have of "well he turned up to shoot her dead and she knew and accepted it." -
tigerfish50 — 9 years ago(February 01, 2017 08:40 AM)
There is no implication that Bobby is some version of Edward and thus Edward himself has cancer.
There's a very clear implication - confirmed by the writer/director. I guess it flew right over your head. You simply missed it. -
DavidVilla — 9 years ago(February 01, 2017 11:04 AM)
I've looked and found nothing other than people posing the theory. The onus isn't on me to find it either, you're the one saying he confirmed it, not me. But you're apparently refusing to actually point me towards it when it presumably wouldn't be difficult to do.
And as I recall, the only place it could really be inferred from the dialogue is the conversation in the diner, for the sole reason that it mentions a possibly family, and to me that would be pretty tenuous.
TONY
You never told me about the cancer. Do you have a family?
ANDES
The problem with Ray is his Alibi.
TONY
Stop it. Do you have anyone in your life?
ANDES
No. No wife. I have a daughter in Corpus.
TONY
Has she been a help?
ANDES
She doesnt know. What can she do about it?
Basically every other conversation between Tony and Bobby is about the case and doesn't really give a particularly solid implication of Bobby being anything other than a character in Tony's novel. I'm happy to be shown that I'm wrong though if you can ever be bothered to direct me towards this interview with Tom Ford.
RE: The original posters idea about the ending, the script goes against that idea.
Susan Morrow stares straight ahead and into the night. The expression on her face belies her realization that Edward is not coming. -
tigerfish50 — 9 years ago(February 01, 2017 11:41 AM)
I have better things to do than trawl through Tom Ford interviews I've already read for your benefit. It may surprise you, but I haven't archived my research on the film.
Look at the diner scene again. Bobby tells Tony he'd previously told him he had cancer. Tony says 'no', he hadn't. Bobby tells him. This is clearly a reference to denial about the disease - most likely originating with the author of the novel writing about himself - as was his wont.
Shannon himself has referred to Bobby as Tony's angel - there's clearly an otherworldly aspect to this relationship. -
SanityLapse — 9 years ago(February 01, 2017 03:17 PM)
DavidVilla posted
I mean, it wasn't so bad until you arrived at the paragraph asserting that Susan just turns up to a restaurant to let herself be murdered and that Edward turned up to the restaurant to do just that. Just ludicrous.
It's ludicrous that a movie features a character who suffers from guilt and no longer cares if they live?
It's ludicrous that Edward sent a novel that mirrored their lives that ended with her being killed, and that he himself killed her at the end to complete the story?
There is no implication that Bobby is some version of Edward and thus Edward himself has cancer.
Edward most definitely is partly Bobby.
Just accept the more subtle, less paint by numbers ending that we were given rather than this Hollywood idea you have
Your interpretation of the ending isn't exactly subtle though. In fact, it's much more Hollywood than you think. While those kind of endings aren't anything new either, they've become much more Hollywood ever since No Country For Old Men won Best Picture.
I know what gold does to men's souls. -
rudykawa — 9 years ago(February 11, 2017 03:44 PM)
When did you see her looking up at the last frame? Or Edward arriving?
She is looking straight.
Did you watch a pirate version of the movie where it cuts away when she thinks he arrived but it was for another table? -
sjaskew42 — 9 years ago(February 08, 2017 11:34 AM)
You had me nodding and I was with you all the way until
to be murdered by Edward. She went to the restaurant at the end expecting to die. The very last frames of the movie show her looking up as she suddenly feels Edward's presence behind her. The credits cut right before he shoots her.
whilst possible, it's too fanciful and I don't buy it.
i'm tired of dancing here all by myself