Anyone else disappointed by the ending?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Jackie Brown
cartesianthought — 10 years ago(August 15, 2015 09:44 AM)
I loved almost the entire movie but the ending was a let down. The shot of Ordell (Samuel Jackson) dying was powerful. Why extend the movie 3 minutes further and dilute that with a cliche ending? It should have ended with the death, leaving the viewer to interpret the relationship between the protagonist and the bondsman.
-
Ace_Spade — 10 years ago(August 15, 2015 10:16 PM)
Nah, I liked the ending. I don't think it is cliche, as it ends bittersweet and exploring a romance between two characters who, in most movies, we don't get to see in romances. A middle-aged interracial love angle? Who has done that before or since?
-
Robbmonster — 10 years ago(August 25, 2015 06:34 AM)
What was 'cliche' about the ending? Please elaborate a bit.
Never defend crap with 'It's just a movie'
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigGreenProds -
Ace_Spade — 10 years ago(September 08, 2015 08:00 PM)
I think that's a cliche because most stories have to end and, in most cases, the best way to do that is to have closure to the story. It is a rare tale that benefits from total ambiguity in its ending.
My two cents are that Jackie Brown needs the story to end. It's not a story that needs to be left with major, unanswered questions. It's a crime thriller.
It's just how story structure works. It's like chords in a song. Throwing in oddball chords at the end doesn't (usually) work with (rare) exceptions. -
!!!deleted!!! (55817158) — 9 years ago(June 06, 2016 08:12 PM)
The fact that it ended with the two almost falling for each other but having to part ways makes it not cliche. If it was cliche they would have lived together happily ever after.
If the movie simply ended on the death it would have been an abrupt ending to an otherwise very developed, very involving story. -
Just_Jenna — 10 years ago(September 07, 2015 05:56 PM)
I absolutely loved the ending. I thought the movie was perfect.
I happen to enjoy ambiguous endings, though; maybe it's the book lover in me. I love it when movies don't wrap up every last story line, and leave some things to our imagination.
www.jennamoquin.com
https://twitter.com/jennamoquin -
-
Just_Jenna — 10 years ago(September 10, 2015 07:15 PM)
It doesn't just stop in the middle. The major plot of the movie was resolved - Ordell was dead and Jackie got the money. She left to go to Spain. That's the ending, that's her riding off into the sunset.
Just because the relationship between Max and Jackie had an ambiguous ending, doesn't mean the story did. Their relationship wasn't the focus of the movie; it's not like it was a love story.
www.jennamoquin.com
https://twitter.com/jennamoquin -
Just_Jenna — 10 years ago(September 11, 2015 02:24 PM)
It's my favorite Tarantino film.
www.jennamoquin.com
https://twitter.com/jennamoquin -
-
Just_Jenna — 10 years ago(September 12, 2015 03:27 PM)
For me, it was one of those rare movies where every part was done well. The acting (from the main characters to the minor ones), the directing, the story, the music and the placement of music (perfect in each scene, especially when he used the same songs for different moments like the Delfonics and Grassroots songs). That doesn't always happen with music that isn't the score of the film, because it can be repetitive, but he did it very well. It sort of adds to the realistic aspect of this film, and that's another thing I loved about it - something like this could actually happen. Unlike his over-the-top movies like Kill Bill and Inglourious Basterds (fun movies, of course, but suspension of disbelief required).
I love movies that rely on the acting, directing and story to make it good, not so much special effects and explosions. Other movies like this that come to mind are Gran Turino and Shawshank Redemption, and Reservoir Dogs, which is probably my second-favorite Tarantino movie.
www.jennamoquin.com
https://twitter.com/jennamoquin -
Ace_Spade — 10 years ago(September 12, 2015 09:09 PM)
It's definitely one of his more "grounded" films (I'd say along with Reservoir Dogs). I think it's Elmore Leonard's book that kept this film more "realistic" than some of Tarantino's other work. Because it was Leonard's brainchild, it's Leonard's reality, so there's less of Tarantino's indulgences.
My favourite Tarantino is Inglourious Basterds, fantasy though it may be (it certainly isn't striving for perfect accuracy - by no means). In addition to having the riveting Hans Landa for a villain, I find it to have the strongest "point" of any of Tarantino's films, commenting on violence, ends vs. means, justice, and the moral ambiguities of war (and war as entertainment - a ballsy subject for Tarantino, master of entertaining violence). Unlike some of his other films, Inglourious Basterds just has more to say, in my opinion.
That's not to say that his other films aren't excellent, with or without "points" to make. I still love Kill Bill dearly even though the point seems to be, "Revenge + Samurai Swords = Awesome!" -
Just_Jenna — 10 years ago(September 15, 2015 06:28 PM)
I still love Kill Bill dearly even though the point seems to be, "Revenge + Samurai Swords = Awesome!"
I thought one of the reasons he did Kill Bill was to prove that he could do a movie with strong female characters, since he got so much grief for not having any in Reservoir Dogs or Pulp fiction.
www.jennamoquin.com
https://twitter.com/jennamoquin -
franzkabuki — 10 years ago(September 19, 2015 08:22 AM)
The Max/Jackie relationship was the heart of the movie, so it would have been quite wrong to end the film with Ordell being blown away. A little bit of closure was called for and the final minutes played out rather gracefully as well.
"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan -
There's really no need for an ambiguous ending.