Re: Storylines you wish you could change when thinking back.
 

I know someone has already posted but the point of Michael taking out Fredo is to show how despicable he has become, cruel, selfish, paranoid beyond belief and mad with power. This is the final nail in the coffin and should have ended the saga....bring him back in Godfather Part III and trying to get us to root for him was massive mistake and one of the major reasons I dislike that film.

Re: Storylines you wish you could change when thinking back.
 

OOPS...and I will add in one of the changes I'd like to see.

Just recently watched Marriage Story and I surprisingly liked it...for anyone who hasn't seen it, there is a spoiler below!

The scene where Nicole arrives in Charles apartment to talk but they end up having a massive row should not have ended in Charles wishing her dead, then breaking down and crying at her feet. It is completely out of line for his character, even though I understand how these arguments can turn out, it just seems so out of place. In fact, any scene where the two are overly friendly yet Nicole is willing to take so much from Charles just seems odd and makes for an imbalanced movie.

Re: Storylines you wish you could change when thinking back.
 

⬆️ Totally disagree. The scene was powerful & true. Two nice people who turned into monsters & hurt each other. That’s what happens in a divorce, which many people will say is the worst experience they ever went through.

I always wished the had left the end of Frailty more ambiguous, letting us decide if the whole thing had been the work of Angels or if it was insanity on the part of both the Father and Son.

You seem like someone that appreciates the art of openendedness. Many do. My film history instructor in college always did, explaining as we went frame by frame through scenes. Personally, I don't. It always makes me feel uncomfortable and like the movie pulled a "fast one" on me by leaving me with unresolved feelings.

For instance, I'm still a little irked when in Brokeback Mountain, they never made it clear which of these 3 scenarios were true:

1. That Jack's wife was relaying what she wanted to tell others about what happened to him but that she knew the truth (beaten to death). The scenes were then what was in Ennis's mind as she relayed it.

2. That the story was indeed what really happened (tire explosion), and the scenes were (again) in Ennis's mind.

3. That it really happened that he was beaten to death and that the wife was only told the tire story by kind authorities.

The actress playing the wife said in an interview that they still didn't know, and that the wife was to play it multiple ways. The script didn't change, just the feelings shown between versions.

I'm still irked by it.

I'm not always a fan of ambiguous/open-ended movies as sometimes it just seems that the filmmaker doesn't want to make a decision, where as with the end of Frailty it was more that the movie was leaving an air of ambiguity through right up until the end where they just go "no they definitely had Angels tell them to do this".

I don't it might just be I don't like the end going with religion is real

Re: Storylines you wish you could change when thinking back.
 

I guess Breaking Bad comes to mind off the top of my head. Everyone feels it has the perfect ending but I think the ending could have been improved though, and felt it could have had even more dramatic consequences, than what they had. I also felt that

Re: Storylines you wish you could change when thinking back.
 

Speaking of ambiguous endings, the most ambiguous ever must be the final scene of The Sopranos.

I Am Legend.

Oh for it to be possible to axe these 3 things. Let's call the creatures "zombies" for short.

1. The knuckleheaded idea that the woman would be stupid enough to "find bacon" and assume it was free to just grab and cook during a zombie apocalypse.

PS. Side reference to a fun movie with characters playing themselves and poking fun at themselves the entire time: This is the End. If you saw This is the End, you'll probably guess the scene.

2. The entire idea that a zombie-leader would have a zombie-mate, when it's completely antithetical to the unthinking nature of these things? They could have made a different attack motive.

3. The ending bothers me. I didn't see a clear-cut need for him to choose death; it truly wouldn't stop them all from following the girl. It wasn't about him either, it was about the "mate". Unless they fleshed out more that he was just sick of life, it was something that didn't "follow".


Titanic.

I'm reticent to mention this, because it's so ubiquitous a complaint that it's become an international meme. Did Jack really have to try only once to get on that stupid "raft"?

Re: Storylines you wish you could change when thinking back.
 

Everyone mentions the raft in Titanic but Jack tried to get on, didn't work, so he didn't want to increase her hypothermia. Why do so many have a hard time wrapping their heads around that, but then all these other potential plot holes in other movies are just fine with others?

They're not zombies, they're vampires. In the source novel and previous film adaptations they were even capable of speech and other displays of intelligence. The 2007 version makes them more animalistic but they're not completely mindless either (such as when they manage to rig one of his own traps against him).

The ending, though, I'll grant is stupid, especially since it totally ruins what made the book so good.

I saw that alternate ending you mentioned. I felt that it was better, slightly, but not great.

Thanks: I had no clue at all that they were vampires.

Because she risked her life (passing up a lifeboat?) to save him, and this was certain death for him making her life-risk in vain. Why would there not be more than one attempt? "Increasing her hypothermia" seems.....odd.....they might be keeping each other warm, at least to a degree. And at least would need them both up there to assess how bad it was first.

Re: Storylines you wish you could change when thinking back.
 

thank u

Speaking of ambiguous endings - it's what hurt the otherwise excellent No Country For Old Men (2007) for me...

I don't know I bought so that him attempting to get on and it sinking was enough to sell me that it was going to sink if he tried again.

No kidding huh?

Ermagerhd. That scene bothered me soooooo much. Especially after I felt like HBO had yanked my chain endlessly by pushing off season after season. I should have cancelled and then binge-watched everything.

Just remembered now. That final @#$%ing scene of Castaway totally irked me too. For the love of Mike, go and get the girl!

In the Departed:

Re: Storylines you wish you could change when thinking back.
 

Passengers (2016)...


Instead of starting the movie meeting Chris Pratt... start the movie with Jennifer Lawrence waking up.


You then follow her into the ship, and you meet Chris Pratt who says he's been awake for a year, and you learn there's something wrong alongside Jennifer Lawrence.


Then, the scene when the barman drops the bombshell... would turn the movie into a psychological thriller, even pushing into the horror genre, and get the viewer thinking whether Chris Pratt is a psycho or not.


You'd be watching the movie from Lawrence's point of view, rather than Pratt's. Only after all the psychological stuff would you see a kinda of flashback showing Pratt's torment during the year he was alone, and have Fishburn's character appear and give the viewer and Lawrence the backstory.
It'd be a totally different movie.

I agree, I think it's one of the movie's best scenes. It reinforces my belief that as hurtful as the behavior between Charlie and Nicole becomes, they are still in love with each other, despite being in deep denial about it.