Film ending that are open to interpretation? Good? Bad?

I thought of this topic after watching 2001: A Space Odyssey.

After being left confused (and sadly, not dazed) I did some research online to see if I could find an explanation on its ending. The most common answer I found was "its open to interpretation" or "whatever YOU think it meant".

This did not satisfy me at all...so my interpretation is "dissatisfaction"...even though I absolutely loved the movie, even during long drawn out landscape scenes that, I bet, were much appreciated during the 1960's!

What are some other movies that have endings that are open to interpretation? And how did that ending make you feel?

I love stories that allow for some interp, or give you room to figure out what happened. Mullholland Drive comes to mind - I've seen hours and hours of discussion about that movie, and it's always interesting to me to see what different people see in it.

__________________
Review: Cabin in the Woods 8/10

Broken Flowers is this way and the execution of it is very solid. Although I didn't care much for A History of Violence, I liked the way it was ended, and enjoyed the general public's (irrational) upset response. JB, is there a reason you don't like movies to be open-ended?

__________________
"Like all dreamers, Steven mistook disenchantment for truth."

Endings that are open for interpretation disappoint me, alot. The only times I will appreciate an ending like that is if it fits the movie and actually is a logical and relevant apporach to end the film. If a movie has an open for interpretation ending and it doesn't fit with the film, than it, to me, is either a poor movie or an excuse for the filmmakers' lack of ability to think of a good and true ending.

__________________
"All the confusion of my life... has been a reflection of myself! Myself as I am, not as I'd like to be." - Guido, 8 1/2

I can't say I disslike them all, because as of right now I can only think of 2001 with such an ending...maybe Kubrick's The Shining is another, but I thought the ending was somewhat clear...

On furhter thought, I'd agree with that criteria. There are some that don't tell the story well enough to make it worth sitting through - so you're really mostly watching to find out what happens. If they don't tell you, then it's pretty irritating.

When it's a fun watch anyway, and an open-ended finish supports the philosophy of the film, that's cool in my book. Those are the ones that generate interesting discussion.

I agree completely. Certain films build to a resolution, and if they don't deliver, it's quite annoying. Other films aren't necessarily building to one (at least not overtly), but are bad or dull enough in some regards that finding out what happens is your only reason to pay attention. In those instances, an ambiguous ending is bad.

Certain films, however, are more about the journey to the the conclusion itself.

So I'd say that ambiguous endings can work, but they are contingent on the movie being good in its own right (not merely creating contrived situations which pique curiousity in cheap ways), and how the story unfolds.

I always feel like the best movies end because they have to, and not because they simply reached the end. I want to feel as if the ending was inevitable, whether that ending wraps everything up, or whether it is simply the point in the story in which they decided to stop filming.

I totally agree with what Delilah and Yoda said. Well said guys.

So the concensus so far is: "sometimes".
I don't think JB is going to exactly treasure such an ambiguous ending to his thread.

haha

one might say its the journey, not the destination

like Yoda!

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

Ay, seconded.

So long as the subject matter's good, it can be refreshing when a filmmaker is able to examine it without having to shove a single definitive conclusion down our throats.

As much as our story-telling/pattern-seeking brains get a kick out of artificially neat resolutions, there can be something nourishing about films which show us certain truths that we identify with, but then leave us with another (slightly less comfortable truth) - that there's plenty out there that's still a mystery. The future, the unknown, the unknowable. Etc.

Kubrick took on all three of those things in 2001, and so the ending is ideal, i reckon

Anyways, i'm off to watch The 400 Blows now - i'm told it's got an annoyingly open ending



S'ok - i've just found the alternative ending to 2001

__________________
Virtual Reality chatter on a movie site? Got endless amounts of it here. Reviews over here

Eeehehe!
The end of The 400 Blows is one of the best, philosophically. Looking forward to seeing what you think.

Yi, liked the film, felt the ending was perfick for it. It's on old standby and that... ...but works just right for this tale.

Feeling kind of annoyingly smug that it fits into my nastily reductionist theory as well - IE the first epoch of this kids life has been told, and told well, and we leave him at a point where only time will tell how his life will evolve next. [Altho we've got some ideas, from what we've seen so far - but nothing that doesn't rule out his life going 'either way' ]

Actually there is a point to Mulholland Dr., mostly everyone on the IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes boards know the film inside-out, and there's a website somewhere that answers a lot of questions...

Anyway, I love endings like this. I think that ambiguous endings (and films) are the best kind. I think I'll go with Barton Fink, my favourite Coen Brothers movie...

I love Mulholland Drive, and was about to mention it as a film left open to interpretation that is clearly a great film, IMO. Barton Fink, as Nexus mentioned, also comes to mind, and I love that film, as well. Hmmm, two of my top three favorite films of all time, Mulholland Drive and Blade Runner, leave much open at the end. I guess I prefer stuff like that to more traditional narratives, although I love both!

__________________

"Things To Do in Denver When You're Dead". If someone could explain that ending, I'd appreciate it.

If you think about it, most endings are open to interpretation, as are most films. That is what is so beautiful about movies, we can interpret what is going on at any given moment the way that we wish to, and none of us would be wrong. The very best movies are the ones that come along and offer us the chance to view it in our own unique way. Just a thought. Does anyone agree?

My sister actually gets annoyed at Hitchcock's 'The Birds'. She just doesn't like open-ended films she prefers having at least some sort of completion and answer. So she would hate any open-ended conclusion to a film. Personaly for me 'The Birds' doesn't need a reason to why the birds attacked in the first place. I think it would ruin the film by adding an answer to everything, it is not why the birds attack it is about how people react.

It really depends on the film, some work with a little mystery to them, it allows us the viewers to get more involved in the movie to interpret it to our own satisfaction. It doesn't always work, I too had a bit of trouble understanding the meaning behind 2001, but that is an exception in that I still love the film even if I don't 'get it' entirely.

__________________