I saw this in many movies. The hero really wants something, for instance, to become an FBI agent. First, he proves himself through the movie by completing it.
In the end, it looks like his wish will come true. The FBI agents ask him to finally join them. But the hero refuses. He says he is happy now. It's always a no, always a refusal of this initial desire of his. What does it mean? Why does this happen?
2 people like this
I think it relates to the character arc. The character begins the story one way (identity) and ends the story another way (re-creation), transformed by the experience of the story. In Act 1 of Can't Buy Me Love, Ronald Miller wants to be popular so he can be a part of the in crowd. In Act 3, Ronald Miller wants to be himself so Cindy can like him for who he really is... As the character transforms, desire transforms as well.
I think it is a form of self awareness. A person believes that obtaining a "Thing" will make them happy. Then during the film they learn something about themselves that patches the hole in their life and the thing isn't important anymore.
You can also thread the idea that once they see the 'Thing' in detail they believe that are better than the 'Thing'. The FBI is incompetent, I am better off being away from it etc.. You could even project their old problems on the Thing, so joining it would be a step backwards.
3 people like this
Victor - you've seen this in many movies and you ask why it happens. It's basically known as the elegant refusal and has become so common among current day screenwriters that it's become a cliche.- It happens because many new screenwriters blindly travel a common road. My personal pov is that we all need to explore new story weaving paths.
2 people like this
To expand a little on what Anita Heise said....Nora Ephron once said "sometimes to get to your true destiny, you have to go through many false destinies." That's called a True Ending, in that context, and can reflect the ironies or delusions/illusions of the situation. So if that's what you're talking about, then there's your answer.
That's a beautiful and profound path for a film. It can keep the audience guessing all along as to the outcome. Or the audience can see the flaws of the protag in ways that the protag can't, until the end, when the protag transforms, and hopefully in a type of epiphany with new realizations, and maybe even a series of mini-epiphanies that are the consequences of earlier (ironic) actions.
Isn't that what happens at times in life? But that's a great way to play out a film. - when you start down one path, and realize you "had it all wrong". I've never seen that type of story line play out in an unbelievable way, so I don't really know what films you are referring to comment specifically towards them. So - what specific films are you referring to that seemed to play out like you describe - when the protag's original goal changed by the end, and it played out in unbelievable ways?
BEST HOPES, PRAYERS AND WISHES TO THE VICTIMS, FAMILIES, AND FIREFIGHTERS IN CALIFORNIA
MAY THE HEAVENS HELP THE FAMILIES OF THE MERCY HOSPITAL SHOOTING.
1 person likes this
Bill, this question came to me after watching "Codename:The Cleaner" on TV. The same happened in "Rush Hour". There were other movies I saw years ago, I couldn't remember their name, but I clearly remembered this refusal in each ending.. :)
1 person likes this
Victor: I'd agree with Owen's explanation of Rush Hour, and how that would be the True Ending. That ties into the verisimilitude of a film, and what happened along the way to make a character change their mind as to their original intentions. I've seen about 60 new films this year, and have never seen a single one where the ending doesn't ring true in that regard. It's very rare for a new film to have a totally contrived ending - one that doesn't ring true with the story line - these days. I never saw The Cleaner, so I can't comment on that one.
BEST HOPES, PRAYERS AND WISHES TO THE VICTIMS, FAMILIES, AND FIREFIGHTERS IN CALIFORNIA
MAY THE HEAVENS HELP THE FAMILIES OF THE MERCY HOSPITAL SHOOTING.
1 person likes this
Another thing to consider is this: in the context of this conversation, you can divide stories into three categories - those where the goals/realizations of the main character change by the end; those where they somewhat change; and those where they don't change at all. The journey of the story affects that outcome a lot, somewhat, or not at all, and that's what the middle of the story is all about, and how that affects the main character psychologically, in that context. The important thing is this: that the ending is believable,. If it isn't, then the story fails in that regard, and that role lies with the artist.
Take a film like The Equalizer, Scarface, Die Hard or John Wick. Do the goals/realizations of those characters change by the end?
Then take a film like The Maltese Falcon, Serpico, Midnight Run or Rush Hour. Do the goals/realizations of those characters change by the end?
Great writers usually figure this out before they start writing. It gets incorporated into their theme/themes. Idealizations can become shattered, and myths can become realities. Or reality stays the same. On the surface of the story, the battle is underway. Underneath the surface, the main character may also face somewhat of an existential crisis. They usually pinpoint these changes in the veneer of the B-Story, and most of the time, that's the real purpose of the B-Story, and the Reflection Character. But whichever way the artist goes, the ending needs to be believable. If it's not, the artist failed, at least in my eyes, and in the eyes of people that I know.
A writer should also figure out this: is the essence of the main character altered by his/her existence throughout the story? Yes? To what degree? No, not at all? That's one of the differences in philosophy between existentialists and non-existentialists. Those are questions that many great writers probe before they even start writing. That's why building a character profile is pretty important before writing a story, at least to me and to others that I know - it helps us be consistent and credible, and especially if a character is transforming throughout a story. It helps for the human nature of our characters to be true and genuine - and at all times, and even/especially while they are undergoing change, and ultimately transform. .
For further reading, and if you don't already know this, you should check out a bit about Hard-Boiled characters/hard-boiled writing, too.
Best of luck, and best fortunes to you all.