confused!!!
-
gerrett — 20 years ago(February 19, 2006 07:40 PM)
There was no alternate or extended ending. Moreland died, as did Shaun. I was there from the beginning to the end, working as a background actor and stand-in (for Timothy Hutton). The set was never turned into condos, as the "Bunker Hill" main gate was nothing more than a plastic facade at the end of a practice field at Valley Forge Military Academy in Wayne, PA. Per the terms of the Academy's contract with 20th Century Fox, the "fake" gate was restored to its original condition immediately following the wrap of the movie.
I must admit that, at the time, I never thought of "Taps" as a great movie, but there certainly was a rare combination of actors on that set, ranging from the legendary George C. Scott, who was an incredibly generous icon to the younger actors, to Earl Hindman, a funny guy who would go on to fame in "Home Improvement." Bill Van Zandt, who had recently lost his older brother from Lynrd Skynrd, was a great guy, as was Ronnie Cox ("Deliverence"). The crew was great, too I vividly remember Garrett Brown using his Steadi-Cam (invented for "Rocky") and training the other cameramen on his invention; Mike Looney and Bill Elvin, the second A.D.'s; big-man Kenny Walker, the property master; and diminutive Bobby Porter, the stunt man. I guess I was more fascinated with the crew and the actual making of a movie than I was of the 'stars' in the movie. Years later, I ran into J. Craig Nannos, the technical advisor, when his son was the same age I was when I made the movie.. that was odd.
It was a lot of fun, a little bit of hard work, and a fascinating way to watch $18,000,000 (a whole lot of money in 1981) being spent. I remember approaching Stanley Jaffe, asking for a raise on behalf of the background actors. He was courteous and non-dismissive, although our raise was not forthcoming. Somewhere, I have a pay stub from 20th Century Fox and a cast jacket, the remnants of my brief encounter with the movie business. It was pretty exiting for a 15 y/o. -
squid1524 — 19 years ago(October 20, 2006 10:12 PM)
Actually, the so called "fake gate" was a real gate at the time of the movie. I went to VF for 4 years. The terms that the school set down were that the "main gate" in the movie could be destroyed as long as the company sponsoring the movie would rebuild the wall after destroying it. In essence there are a few maingates at VF. One gate is around 70 yards (near the chapel) up the road from the "main gate" in the movie and the other is around 80 yards down the road (right next to Eisenhower Hall) from the "main gate." The practice field thathas been referred to is literally right where Eisenhower Hall sits. When Timothy Hutton meets with his "father" that is on the parade field, which is not that close to the Main Area or Wheeler Hall.
-
ereinion — 19 years ago(November 05, 2006 06:15 AM)
I saw this movie a long time ago, LONG time. But I seem to remember and I have read that Moreland appears in the end at a procession and that this whole seige thing was just something he had considered and played out in his mind. I dunno, on wikipedia it said so. Now its suddenly gone.
-
Pasttimesla — 20 years ago(February 17, 2006 05:16 PM)
Not sure how you could be confused. Moreland(Timothy Hutton)couldn't walk out of the building because he was obviously dead. as they showed him lying dead next to Shawn(Tom Cruise). Whom did you think was carried out of the building by Dwyer(Sean Penn)?
-
-
sundevil520 — 19 years ago(April 22, 2006 12:29 PM)
Actually there was supposed to be an alternate ending. Per the contract, which I know of because I also attended VFMA shortly after the film was shot, they film was to blow up Washington Hall (the regimental mess hall at the time) and then build the school a new one. They changed their mind which also accounted for the letter to the Citadel which forced the movie "The Lords of Discipline" to be shot elsewhere.
-
elizabethmarsh777 — 19 years ago(August 01, 2006 05:40 PM)
Someone told me the whole movie is just a fantasy being played out in Moreland's head. Makes sense in away. One of my biggest problems with this movie was having to believe the school was that well equipt. Im sure u.s military schools have guns, and the cadets learn to shoot, but are there really enough MK-47's to go around, not to mention all the grenades, mounted machine guns or whatever they're called e.t.c. My only problem with the idea of the story just being a fantasy is why does Moreland fantasize his own death?
-
blue_alien198 — 19 years ago(August 05, 2006 12:21 PM)
I'm not entirly sure what the message even is. The first time I watched it I thought it was a pro military film, but now after hearing other peoples point of views and making note of the certain moments near the end I tend to wonder. On the back of the DVD cover I have it says in the last line, "
in this thought-provoking film that questions the values and morals of today's society." Though what I wonder is if the values put forward by General Basche are being questioned then why do we here his voice from beyond the grave at his funeral scene. When Major Morland says something like "We commend his spirit to eternity in the company of great soldiers." Then you here Goerge C. Scott's voice say "and great souls" I do have to admit is was a weird film . . . -
Komrade_Red_90 — 19 years ago(August 05, 2006 07:22 PM)
"Someone told me the whole movie is just a fantasy being played out in Moreland's head. Makes sense in away. One of my biggest problems with this movie was having to believe the school was that well equipt. Im sure u.s military schools have guns, and the cadets learn to shoot, but are there really enough MK-47's to go around, not to mention all the grenades, mounted machine guns or whatever they're called e.t.c. My only problem with the idea of the story just being a fantasy is why does Moreland fantasize his own death?"
I also wondered why the cadets had access to M-16s (seems you accidentally confused the M-16 for the Soviet AK-47) and M-60 Machine guns.
As for the possible fantasy ending, perhaps Moreland wanted to die a hero, while trying to save a fellow cadet. Not sure why I'm commenting, seeing as how I only caught the last 20 minutes on tv last night. 0:) -
blue_alien198 — 19 years ago(August 06, 2006 03:53 PM)
It has been enough since it was released (1982), too bad the Director or script writer didn't add commentary to the DVD to explain what is really going on and what the movie was intended to do. I guess this ain't a Paul Verhoven movie.
-
sesameleigh — 19 years ago(August 19, 2006 02:19 AM)
You know what confused me? And I could have very well missed the explanation as I was drifting off and on through the second half of the film, but when in the beginning, one of the town boys was shot, allegedly by Basche- the actual footage shows another town boy reaching into the General's holster, pulling out the gun and aiming at his buddy. The very next scene, the gun was in the General's hand whah?? What did I miss? We were visually led to believe this boy did it, but the General took the rap?
And if you watch the scene where little Charlie chases after his pal who runs out and climbs the gate to surrender- The soldiers on the other side shoot Charlie but what happens to the freckle faced cry baby? He disappears into thin air. I understand, the focus was on that beautifully lit scene of the boy on the ground, but the editing was just plain bad here.
This film is wonderful to watch- for the sheer pleasure of watching budding talent (Penn, Hutton) in their earliest roles- and for the film's plain weirdness! -
nineoneonecomputers — 19 years ago(December 04, 2006 05:34 PM)
I just watched this again last night, have not seen it since it was released. I do not buy the "imagination" theory, as some of the things that took place were too random and trivial for Mooreland to think up. Random: Giancarlo getting burned up at the generator, Shawn discharging his rifle in the town. Trivial: The Penn interview scene and various details.
The end scene was a flashback to show us how much things had changed from when the cadets were graduating/advancing. After this parade, Scott makes his speech about the school closing, so seeing them in the parade took place before they even knew any scenario could play out.
Mooreland was dead for sure, he took two rounds at least to the chest, from what could only be an M-60 attatched to that tank?
What I laughed about was the fact that Shawn zeroed in on Cox's neck, gets off two rounds and apparently only hit him in the arm? Being a red beret hard on, wouldnt he have been more deadly with his rifle?
Great movie overall, the only movie I can think of that has more future starpower is The Outsiders. -
bikebryan — 19 years ago(December 07, 2006 06:40 PM)
All the weapons they got hold of were not property of the Academy. The reason they were there was mentioned IN THE FILM (I suggest you watch it, you'll enjoy it more).
Those weapons were a storehouse for the National Guard. The General arranged for them to be stored on the property, and set up permission for the Cadets to use them to train and drill with. This is brought up while they were doing inventory and again on the first newscast the Cadets were watching. -
Erock37 — 19 years ago(December 23, 2006 04:12 PM)
I think you mean AK-47 (WARSAW Pack weapon) these are not in the movie. The weapons both the National Guard and cadets use are M-16 (NATO). Also the movie is not a Fantasy in anyones head. The last scene of the movie does show all the cadats at a parade however thats a flashback (I guess to a better time). Moreland is killed by gun fire to the window that Shawn is shooting from. Sean Penn carrys him out of the building crying. Also about the gate, I do beive the young man that says he was an extra in the movie, he did know that the Front gate was a FAKE!! I am not sure what the guy that said it wasn't is thinking if he want to VFMA he would have know that. Anyone this is a great movie and aside from a few flaws it falls into the rehlm of a crazy distance possibility. ( I mean common people, we all watches Rambo)