I have two interpretations of the ending.
Interpretation 1: The events in the film never actually took place but were just a part of a play Helga Ten Dorp wrote.
OR
Interpretation 2: Helga stole the idea cliff and sidney had lived and written together.
ideas?
[deleted]
I agree, I perceived it as being the second. This is primarily from the apparent fact that, in the final scene in the theater, the events on stage vary somewhat from those seen momentarily before, probably because a fake axe is a little hard to make convincing...
shareIt is #2. One thing escapes me, was she a psychic? and was she egging on the characters so that she could write a play herself?
sharethe answer is #2. it's just a terrible ending either way. completely unsatisfying. the *beep* stupid Helga character drags the whole play/film down, as a matter of fact. weakens the whole enterprise. and what a shame, after opening up so suspensefully.
share"the answer is #2. it's just a terrible ending either way. completely unsatisfying. the *beep* stupid Helga character drags the whole play/film down, as a matter of fact. weakens the whole enterprise. and what a shame, after opening up so suspensefully."
I disagree.
I saw the theatrical production, and actually find the film's ending better.
Go figure.
i'm assuming that you just have terrible taste but i'll ask anyway: how does the theatre production end?
SPOILERS OF THE PLAY'S ENDING BELOW!!!!!
I read Ira Levin's book (play) and I, too, think the film's ending is much better. Here's how the play ends: Sidney shoots Clifford with the arrow and, believing Clifford to be dead, begins to call the cops. Clifford pulls the arrow out of his chest, sneaks up behind Sidney while he's on the phone and stabs him several times. Both fall dead to the floor. Helga isn't in the scene at all. The next day, Helga and the lawyer discover the bodies and put the pieces of the puzzle together. They deduce that the play must be of great value for the two men to have killed each other over it. Helga and the lawyer begin arguing over which one of them should get to produce the play. Helga threatens to blackmail the lawyer if he doesn't let her have sole rights to the production. She tells the lawyer that, becuase she's psychic, she knows all about his nasty doings. This infuriates the lawyer, apparently because he's guilty as charged. The curtain falls as they're circling the desks, verbally assaulting each other and preparing for a physical battle. The outcome is left to the audience's imagination. I think the film's ending works better because it's more simple, ironic and uses its ability to disorient the film viewer by cutting from the "actual" murders to the "staged" murders of the finished play....I think Helga's Broadway success is a great ending.
I too thought that the ending to the film wasnt that good dont you think that the cut between the murders could have been much better??
When life gives you lemons clone them and make super lemons:)
Do you mean in terms of continuity of the weapons used? IMO, the rough cut between "reality" and the stage action is very intentional and works to the film's advantage. Eventually we're going to find out we're watching a play with different people anyway, so why not make it confusing for a moment? I look at it as the second-to-last in a series of unexpected twists: we learn the play was produced and, finally, who actually produced it....a sort of one-two punch to end the film.
shareyeah i guess.. maybe they could of let cliff kill the other guy in real life before the cut to the play was made
When life gives you lemons clone them and make super lemons
[deleted]
I loved the ending, but the funny thing is...
To me, the ending of Deathtrap the film is GREAT. However, the supposed ending to Helga's play (which is supposed to be such a huge success, and which ends with them both kiling each other) is kinda lame, don't you think? It's like the twist in the actual film rocks but the twist (actually the truth - it's what is supposed to have happened that Helga was witness to) isn't nearly as satisfying - makes the fact it was supposed to be such a "huge hit" kind of a stretch.
Thoughts?
------
Wait a minute... who am I here?
The ending is good but I would have changed one thing. I would have made Helga's character a little more serious throughout the movie... give her some edge rather than make her seem like a bumbling old woman continually butting in like a nosy next-door neighbor. After all, she is a great crime solver in her native Holland having seen her fair share of crime and being involved with the criminal justice system. That way, in the end right after her play ends, the camera could have zoomed out of her steely face in her hands as she opens her eyes and throws a sly smile before being congratulated in a more serious manner instead of jumping all about in a silly fashion. This would have made it seem like Helga herself is a hardened person who stole the show while lending more doubt as to how the whole story REALLY ended.
shareActually I thought Helga was played as a bumbling woman for a reason--nobody would suspect her of helping or doing the killings. As it is you can see the ending of the movie two different ways and her character fits either one.
shareThe film is great apart from the ending with Helga, that character brings the film down from a 9 to a 7...
shareI have been fond of this since it was first released but I find all I remember is the MAD spoof of it.
share[deleted]