Which Ending do you prefer?
-
david_tower — 19 years ago(December 16, 2006 04:59 PM)
There are many problems using the ending in the book.
The Judge dreams of becoming an immortal, the forever elusive, the unknown, Jack the Ripper. The message in the bottle is Christie's concession to the needs of the reader. But it is a betrayal of her character and his air-tight plot.
In the book, the characters are pure stereotypes, pieces of an intellectual puzzle which can be removed from the board without ever engaging the emotions of the reader.
You simply can't do this on stage and hold your audience. In Vera and Lombard, Christie saw an opportunity to inject a healthy dose of sexual tension and humor into the story, bringing it to life. -
hpets11 — 19 years ago(January 23, 2007 02:21 AM)
Whoa, is that how the book ends? I've been meaning to read that
Anyway, to be honest, my favourite ending isn't the book's or the film's, it's the stage play's!
In that one, Vera shoots Lombard, then the judge makes his appearance, swinging a noose, but before he strangles her Lombard gets up (Vera having missed) and shoots the judge Okay, it's hard to explain so simply, but trust me, it's far less anti-climactic than the whole "hey, pretend to shoot me" thing of the film, but you still get a happy, romantic ending. As giraffeblimp pointed out, such a depressing ending as is in the book doesn't tend to work as well when performed visually on stage or film. -
profh-1 — 17 years ago(January 25, 2009 09:59 PM)
I love the 1945 movie, and having read Wikipedia's EXTENSIVE description of the book, and many comments here, I doubt I would ever really enjoy the book's ending.
But I HAVE seen a production of the stage play, and it was as enjoyable (if not more so) than the '45 film!
Yes one notable difference between the '45 film and the stage play, in the movie, "Lombard" tells Vera to fire, and she says, "But I'll miss." But whoever is watching won't know that.
In the stage play, frantic with fear, she simply SHOOTS him! But later, he arrives back at the house, still alive, and utters the BEST line in the play
"Thank God women CAN'T SHOOT STRAIGHT!"
(I about fell out of my chair laughing) -
otrnepodahl — 20 years ago(January 29, 2006 09:21 PM)
I don't really know if this exists, but the book ending should be adapted (if it hasn't already) to a play (or "The") Play ending. This way, when someone goes and sees the stage production, even if they've seen the show before, they won't know what ending this version will have.
-
ismelllikepuppys — 19 years ago(September 21, 2006 06:42 PM)
Kinda woulda prefered a mixture of both. In the book, vera goes from ecstatic for being alive, to hearing a spooky noise, and hanging myself. I woulda prefered an interaction between the judge and vera, to her realizing she woulda took the rap, to her hanging herself.
-
mr_milbury — 16 years ago(April 13, 2009 08:02 AM)
This (interaction between the last two characters alive) is something that totally destroys what the book is trying to do. If you do that, then you might as well show the meeting (to the viewer) between the doctor and the judge. The whole ending works because nobody knows what really happened (the epilogue contains the solution, but you don't even have to read that if you want to remain in the dark).
-
Alorann — 19 years ago(September 26, 2006 09:26 AM)
While I like both versions, I prefer the book. Audiences in 1945 seemed to be more easily shocked, and I think the movie would have failed then with the book's ending. If it were made today, it could do well with the original ending.
-
Cue-ball — 19 years ago(January 18, 2007 07:14 PM)
The only reason to change the ending in the written murder mystery is to make the movie different. The different ending is the only fly in the ointment for this film IMHO.
By the way, when I first read the book,
The Waltons
was very popular in the United States, and I thought Ellen Corby would make a good Emily Brent. But it's hard to top Judith Anderson.
There's something different about you today, Mr. Laurio. -
spydex — 19 years ago(January 22, 2007 12:07 PM)
Having recently reread the book, I can see why the movie's ending was different. Where the book is able to establish a deeper sense of motivation of the characters, movies are basically visual and therefore limited in their ability to explain necessary themes.
For example, in the movie Dune, there is much 'thought' narrative in the book. The moviemakers attempted to replicate that, but it came off as a bit silly. Likewise in And Then There Were None, the dynamics of Vera's crime combined with her desire for Hugo made the suicide by hanging more plausible. It just could not have been explained as well in the movie.
I prefer the book over the movie. I usually do anyway. -
wtl471629 — 19 years ago(January 24, 2007 01:15 PM)
SPOILER WARNING!
I have seen several remakes of this movie and they all have basically the same ending in that the final two people are innocent. I wish they could make one movie that had the same ending as the book and follow the book. I don't guess it will ever happen though. I think Anthony Hopkins would be great as the Judge.
