Speaking of LOTR, the animated Bakshi version ended very abruptly and without resolving a bunch of things.
Making matters worse is that over the years they seem to have modified the ending a bit - first ending with a 'All evil iz kilt!" while Gandalf tosses his swor din the air, to a freeze frame of a dying orc with a bad voice over “here ends the first part”.
Messy, even by that movies low standards.
What movie are you talking about? Ridley Scott directed American Gangster. What did he have to do with American Psycho?
But, yeah, the director of American Psycho, Mary Harron, has stated that in her movie all of the murders occured. But I believe she intended the movie to be vague on that point.
I’ve never been sure. And at the apartment, when he returns and it’s all cleaned up and the real estate agent is there, my initial assumption was that the apartment owner’s just cleaned it up in order to cover up the murders and avoid the bad publicity so they could sell/lease the apartment. I’ve always thought that fit in well with the over-the-top materialistic 80’s theme of the movie. And the whole confusion at the end is all about people being so obsessed with themselves that they really don’t know who anyone else is. Or something like that. But, I think the movie is intentional vague on that point.
That’s not quite what I intended. Movies that hit blockbuster status rarely lack “one from column A through Z” construction, and it’s certainly a production trope that a movie has to have those elements to sufficiently broaden its appeal.
I don’t mean to say that all movies have that mulligan-stew composition, or even that popular movies don’t sometimes have a very selective mix. I also don’t mean in any way to insult Gravity’s detractors.
But I’ll stand by my last sentence - I think modern-day audiences expect that a hugely popular movie will play to them, and are unnecessarily disappointed when it lacks components they expected. Gravity will become a classic, and Cuaron has joined the gods with this one… but those who come away complaining consistently express the opinion that they were expecting “something to happen” - which I interpret as “thought it was a Bay/Bruckheimer action-'splosioner.”
Blade Runner. I’m a firm believer in the “Deckard is not a replicant” theory and I think Scott insisting he was is just idiotic.
Spoiler for American Psycho:
[spoiler]
It seemed to me that when he ran into his work building, is greeted by the guard with “Burning the midnight oil, Mr. Smith?” and Christian Bale shoots him, that seals it that it’s all in his head. He runs out, runs around the building, runs back in and there’s someone else at the desk, and he pointedly signs in.
That and the fact that he shot up what, four cops and their cars blow up in a massive fireball and nobody notices … pretty convincing that he’s imagining his murder spree.
Why the lawyer insists he’s someone else at the end, though; you got me. Maybe the lawyer is the killer. :p[/spoiler]
At what level do you make this argument? From the novel, or the story? I don’t think you can make it from the film as it was shot. The glowing-eye effect was 100% deliberate and 100% an accurate predictor of replicants (down to editing the line about the owl). In Ridley’s vision, Deckard WAS a replicant. You can’t argue that, based on the film; you are free, however, to call RS a dipshit for doing it.
Yeah, I agree. I think Ridley Scott is. . . deteriorating before our eyes. Prometheus was such a huge disappointment, and really sucked.
I was confused about above where you said “BULL. SHIT.” concerning a comment about American Psycho and you mentioned Ridley Scott.
Yeah, it could be both, he could be having strange delusions AND killing people. . . I believe the two go together most of the time. 
The glowing eye effect wasn’t added until the Director’s Cut. Basically, I think Ridley Scott Lucas-ed it and changed things years later claiming “That’s what I always intended.”
NO! It’s not!
I’ll take the word of a lot of people that it’s good, and i’ll see it someday, but man…those trailers did nothing to pique my interest. I’m very interested in astronauts in space danger (see Apollo 13). Sandra Bullock and George Clooney in space isn’t quite as interesting.
Hopefully the meaning of that came across.
But there’s still the bit about the dreams, and the origami, and “You’ve done a man’s job sir!”
But I also prefer him not to be a replicant. It makes Batty’s rescue more profound. And the point about ‘you people’ better.
Sorry, that’s not true. I recall discussing it over frame-by-frame of a prior DVD release. The effect is not as clear until the film was re-digitized and presented in HD, but it’s there.
It required a huge reflector behind the camera to achieve. It’s not an accidental artifact of the lighting. Human eyes basically don’t reflect, at least, not anywhere as much as animal eyes.
I deeply disagree. I think his “Prophets of Science Fiction” series, where they wrap a TV half-hour* of vaguely historical reenactment around Ridley sitting at a desk mumbling and drawing Ridleygrams is…
…never mind.
*about 18 minutes
Harrison Ford says it was an accident:
The last two seconds of Polanski’s The Ghost Writer had me sitting in my chair in a state of absolute shock. Totally did not see that coming at all.
'Kay.
Dream sequence; unicorn? A half-dozen bits of cryptic comments aimed at Deckard? No. For good or bad, I take RS’s word that he intended Deckard to be a replicant. Whatever tweaks he put in the Director’s Cut, all that material was scripted and shot at the time and much of it appears in the original cuts.
I don’t remember the name of the movie. It was very low budget. Some guy worked night shift in a factory but wanted to be a private eye. His partner at the factory and he start a case where they try to rescue some old girlfriend who’s caught up in drugs . They end up having to steal a purse from the bad guys. They get the purse… and then the movie just ends. No resolution. Just over. I wondered if the filmmaker just ran out of money or something. Anyone else see this?
I am stunned no one has mentioned Being John Malkovich. Yes the movie was whacked, but the end was totally out of left field.
Martha, Marcy, May, Marlene.
I think:
Her sister and husband are killed and Martha goes back to live on the kooky commune. Like nothing happened.
I disagree - my problem with Gravity was that it was too much like a Bay/Bruckheimer movie, from the unnecessary and melodramatic Sandra Bullock backstory to the platitudes voiced by ghost Clooney about “finding the strength to go on” to the predictably Hollywood ending. Basically it was a formulaic blockbuster movie with better than average effects.