Proof Of Life (Movie) Question

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
1

I know I’m late - I just saw this on video last night.

Here’s my question (There’s a spoiler ahead, so if, like me, you’re way behind, stop reading now):

In a nutshell, Alice Bowman (Meg Ryan) gets Terry Thorne (Crowe) to rescue her husdand, Peter (David Morse). Along the way, before the rescue, Alice and Terry sort of fall for each other. But, once Peter returns, Alice realizes the love she feels for him and happily leaves Terry behind. Terry is, luckily, man enough to understand.

Here’s my question: The movie doesn’t really get cooking until about 35 minutes in, when Terry returns to Alice in South America. The 35 previous minutes serve only to show us what jerks these main characters really are: Peter puts his work before his wife, Alice can’t forgive him for that, their marriage suffers for it and is breaking up and Peter’s sister, Pamela, is no more functional then the rest.

Once the running and fighting and shooting and yelling are over, Peter returns and all is well.

Except this: The movie has given us no real reason to like him. He’s still the same turd he was before, just now he is a turd who has been put through hell.

How am I supposed to feel good about Alice’s choice at the movie’s end?

2

What makes you think you were supposed to feel good about it? You were supposed to fall asleep mid-way through and not care about the end. At least that’s what I did. Admittedly, the Benedryl probably had some effect…

3

Because it means more Russell Crowe for the rest of us!

Okay, no, seriously, I don’t think we were ever supposed to hate Peter Bowman. He and Alice were going through a tough time in their relationshiop, and they were both acting like jerks to some extent. She was still suffering due to her miscarriage, and he was having a hard time understanding that. She wanted him to give up on his Project of a Lifetime and go back to the States, which was not very understanding on her part.

Their marriage was on the rocks, but that doesn’t mean that they didn’t still love each other. I think Peter proved that by clinging to Alice’s photograph. Remember the scene were he stared down the guy who was shooting at him because he wanted his shirt (with the photo in the pocket) and his spoon. And when his fellow prisoner, the Legionarre-turned-missionary, escaped, he told us how Peter was always thinking of Alice and talking about her.

What are the alternatives to the movie’s ending? David Caruso’s characater had it right: Terry saves Peter, brings him home, Alice rejects Peter and she and Terry live happily ever after? No way. Even worse, Terry fails to save Peter, and what then, he and Alice shack up? What about, Terry dies while saving Peter? That’d be the pat ending, now, wouldn’t it? Tie up all the loose ends.

I think the ambivalent ending was great. Alice and Terry went through this incredibly intense experience together, but it was all focused on bringing Peter home. Then Terry had to go his way, and Alice and Peter theirs. They got their happy ending, but only by avoiding the unhappier alternatives, which is sometimes the best you can get out of life.

Oh, and, by the way, Russell Crowe is one fine hunk of man. After seeing this movie, I told my husband that if he wanted to do any traveling in Columbia, I would be very supportive of his decision. :wink: