CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Don't Look Now (1973)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Don't Look Now (1973)

post #1 of 22
8/8/08 at 9:11pm
Thread Starter 
I love this film. It's probably my second favorite Roeg behind Bad Timing. The ending really shouldn't work but it does somehow. I think its because of the cinematography and the editing that pulls it off. The use of the zoom lens is also exceptional.
Reply
post #2 of 22
8/8/08 at 9:33pm
One of the reasons the ending worked so well for me is because of the way the reveal was handled. Knowing that it's coming makes it about the dread, and about the way his obsession led him down the wrong path. The dwarf is creepy, rather than funny, because it's such a strong symbol of the way his grief and guilt twisted his psyche.
Reply
post #3 of 22
8/8/08 at 9:35pm
Why shouldn't the ending work? Theres no reason it shouldn't, its really an amazing ending, completely scary, and completely brilliant.
Reply
post #4 of 22
8/8/08 at 9:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post
One of the reasons the ending worked so well for me is because of the way the reveal was handled. Knowing that it's coming makes it about the dread, and about the way his obsession led him down the wrong path. The dwarf is creepy, rather than funny, because it's such a strong symbol of the way his grief and guilt twisted his psyche.
I think its exactly the opposite, the reveal of the dwarf completely catches everybody of guard, the shock is what makes it so compelling.
Reply
post #5 of 22
8/8/08 at 9:42pm
No, because the film tells you he's going to die when you realize he's watching his own funeral on the canal.
Reply
post #6 of 22
8/8/08 at 9:45pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nabster View Post
Why shouldn't the ending work? Theres no reason it shouldn't, its really an amazing ending, completely scary, and completely brilliant.
It shouldn't work because its Donald Sutherland being stabbed to death by a dwarf.
Reply
post #7 of 22
8/8/08 at 9:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post
No, because the film tells you he's going to die when you realize he's watching his own funeral on the canal.
You honestly weren't caught of guard by the ending?

You only realize he was seeing his own funeral after he dies, not before.
Reply
post #8 of 22
8/8/08 at 10:03pm
Thread Starter 
He's been warned something horrible will happen if he doesn't leave Venice. He sees his own funeral. He has had a near death experience before in the Church, and when he leaves the Hotel at the end the blind lady starts screaming for him to come back. How did you not see something horrible happening to him?
Reply
post #9 of 22
8/8/08 at 10:04pm
It's possible to figure it out beforehand. As such, it was one of the most chilling things I've ever seen in a movie. I don't want to go so far as to say you should figure it out if you're paying attention... but it seems that way to me.
Reply
post #10 of 22
8/8/08 at 10:12pm
Yes but the near death experience is what one believes to be the something horrible.

When did he see his own funeral? All he saw was his wife with the two sisters, only in retrospect does one realize it was a funeral.

I remember the blind lady screaming but not for him to return(you may be right about it), however, even considering, as the audience there is no reason to believe the blind lady at all.

We already know there is a killer out on the loose. So one assumes Sutherlands character is trying to save the child from the killer. Theres simply no way in hell one could have expected what the audience believed to be a little girl, to turn out to be a dwarf killer.
Reply
post #11 of 22
8/8/08 at 10:15pm
Thread Starter 
I agree with you not expecting it to be a dwarf killer. However, I thought it was rather obvious he was going to die somehow. I'm not faulting the movie for this because as I said I do love it and I think that last scene works. I just think the audience is supposed to know something horrific is about to happen.
Reply
post #12 of 22
8/8/08 at 10:16pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nabster View Post

I remember the blind lady screaming but not for him to return(you may be right about it), however, even considering, as the audience there is no reason to believe the blind lady at all.
Why shouldn't the audience believe her? Everything we have seen beforehand proves she does have the gift of sight.
Reply
post #13 of 22
8/8/08 at 10:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by woodsy View Post
Why shouldn't the audience believe her? Everything we have seen beforehand proves she does have the gift of sight.
Asides from the church incident, it would be? And if she had the gift of sight, wouldn't she have avoided the whole incident with the police? I really think as the audience we are meant to be unsure of or in disbelief of the blind womans power. Its meant to be a symptom of the wifes loss of a child. I think the ending, and the verification of the old ladys sight is just the director playing with the audiences expectations.
Reply
post #14 of 22
8/8/08 at 10:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by woodsy View Post
I agree with you not expecting it to be a dwarf killer. However, I thought it was rather obvious he was going to die somehow. I'm not faulting the movie for this because as I said I do love it and I think that last scene works. I just think the audience is supposed to know something horrific is about to happen.
Well thats what we are talking about the killer dwarf ending, its not shocking or surprising that he dies, but that he gets killed by a dwarf we thought to be a child. My original comment was how that moment catches the audience completely of guard. I suppose its possible to guess he is going to die, but not at that moment.
Reply
post #15 of 22
8/8/08 at 10:24pm
I'm not saying you know it's going to be a dwarf. I'm saying you know he's going to die, and the way the child "becomes" the killer is like watching a nightmare unfold. It could be comical, but not only is it well handled in its own right, it also has a strong symbolic foundation that makes it more than just a random thing meant to freak you out.

Quote:
When did he see his own funeral? All he saw was his wife with the two sisters, only in retrospect does one realize it was a funeral.
The old women say he has the sight, we know something terrible is supposed to happen to him, and then he sees them on a boat when Christie is not supposed to be in Venice. So you ask yourself why was she wearing black on the boat? And the answer is obvious.
Reply
post #16 of 22
8/8/08 at 10:41pm
Yea the old lady did say he had the sight didn't she? Forgot about that part, I read the novella as well, but I am not sure if it was in it. There are a few differences here and there, but its pretty much the same.

At the end in the short story, you believe the killer is chasing Sutherland and the child. Which makes it more believable for Sutherland to be chasing after the little girl. As she turns around with the knife you realize its the police chasing the killer.

In the movie its not established as clearly, and it seems a little odd for a grown man to be chasing a little girl to such lengths, although I suppose you pass it off to his recent loss.
Reply
post #17 of 22
8/9/08 at 1:31am
Thread Starter 
Its the red coat. The running motif throughout the film is his attraction to the same red coat his daughter was wearing when she drowned. Not only the red coat but the color red is visible throughout. Plus, there is the still from the beginning of the film where the same red coat is visible.
Reply
post #18 of 22
8/9/08 at 6:34am
Well he didn't want the little girl to drown, and he thought the killer was after her, that is why he chased her, its pretty obvious the red coat from the beginning and the dwarfs coat are meant to resemble each other, this is what caught his attention which is why I said you pass it off to his recent loss, the coat may be a motif, but that doesn't explain the great lengths he goes to chase the girl at the end, no its because he fears for her life.
Reply
post #19 of 22
8/9/08 at 7:17am
I wish I'd seen the movie more recently so I could have everything a little clearer in my mind. Basically I think you're looking at it too literally. Whether or not the killer's ruse is cunning, it's more of a dream-like device than an ingenious plot twist. I can't remember exactly how much reason he has to suspect a little girl's life could actually be in danger, but I suspect it's not too much. He sees "her" running. Obviously nobody is chasing. Maybe he hears a cry or two? In any case, the idea is he is warned, even given precognitive ability, to drive the point home that he could see what was coming if he so chose. He is leading himself on a ruinous path. The evil dwarf represents the way his guilt and despair has transformed his love for his child into something destructive.
Reply
post #20 of 22
8/9/08 at 7:38am
Another little bit- One of the reasons I think the sex scene is so effective is because it mirrors that idea of two seemingly opposing things being closely connected. In that case, a frank depiction of physical intimacy juxtaposed with with the dissolution of a marriage. There's desperation there, and death in the silences. Great scene.
Reply
post #21 of 22
8/10/08 at 7:23am
Thats interesting, in terms of the sex scene. A lot of these art, and indie films tended to have frank, realistic, or unflaterring sex scenes.

I think its meant to portray reconciliation between the two, apparently they hadn't had sex in a long time, at least according to the short story. And its a big deal that she is able to have sex, it means they are getting on with their lives, that she is starting to get over the daughters death. It was definetly a little strange, I thought.

Well Bailey thats an interesting point about nobody chasing, in the film there kinda is somebody chasing, its not 100% clear, but both times he sees the dwarf girl, there is somebody in the background. I guess I wouldn't look at it so literally if we weren't already told there was a killer on the loose. In any case, in the short story its quite clear that someone is chasing the little girl, although it ends up being the police. I guess it was atleast partly metaphorical, maybe she only existed in his mind.
Reply
post #22 of 22
3/24/11 at 12:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post

Another little bit- One of the reasons I think the sex scene is so effective is because it mirrors that idea of two seemingly opposing things being closely connected. In that case, a frank depiction of physical intimacy juxtaposed with with the dissolution of a marriage. There's desperation there, and death in the silences. Great scene.


And also because, apparently, they were actually fucking.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Films in Release or On Video
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Don't Look Now (1973)