In the end, does the original bus come back to fill in daniel's space like how daniel filled his? And are people just not going to notice Jennifer is gone?
And also, the end scene with the mom and at first it's the dad and then it's the hamburger/art guy? Did she have a similar conversation with both men or was she imagining talking to the dad when she was talking to the hamburger/art guy or vice versa?
Keep Calm and Gatsby On
...does the original bus come back to fill...
Do you mean "boy"? And did you mean David?
Regarding the last scene on the bench, keep firmly in mind no one in Pleasantville was actually married to anyone else. In fact they weren't real people, just characters. That is why David and Jennifer could go into Pleasantville to become Bud and his sister without anyone in Pleasantville noticing. Pleasantville and the characters were just states of mind. That last scene was just to illustrate in the writer/director's way that now the people of Pleasantville no longer were constrained by the TV series scripts, but now had the ability to exercise free will, to make choices.
TxMike
Make a choice, to take a chance, to make a difference.
That's why I didn't like this film myself. The stepmother isn't going to know where Jennifer is? She isn't going to worry? And I didn't get why the repairman complained to David about the color and at the end he is smiling, like David did a good thing.
shareThere's no reason to think that his sister won't be back home latr that night. Time can move forward at great speeds on a TV show simply by having it say "4 years later" or something like that. David lived at there at least a week but he returned the same night that he originally left. About get smiling repair man. It could simply mean that it was his plan to help David all along and that his anger at the changes was all an act to motivate David. That could be the reason for his satisfied smile at the end.
He's taking the knife out of the Cheese!
Do you think he wants some cheese?
Good point about the time difference, notice too that at the end, David says to his mother, I had a good day. When watching the movie, it seems that at least a week has passed in Pleasantville but it must have been a day in the "real world".
shareIn was only an hour in the real world, not a day. When David returns to the real world the narrator on the TV announces the first hour of the Pleasantville marathon had just concluded.
shareExactly. But it doesn't seem like anyone can explain the ending bus scene. It's lost on me for sure.
Don't like what I'm saying? Then call 1800-Ima-CryBaby and ask for Waaaaaa.
Well, that is a good point. Since he was only gone an hour (according to the announcer when he gets back into the real world) maybe the time Jennifer spends there would just be a few more hours, since their time is faster.
As to the TV repairman, I guess it was good that David didn't listen to his ass when he was yelling at him, but I'm not so sure I would not listen and just leave and let him turn everything back to the way it was.
yeah i have no idea what the end with the dad and the hamburger guy meant.
And the original Bud should have appeared again. the movie was great but i dont think they paid too much attention to the ending because it made no sense.
I came here hoping someone had an idea to explain but i guess no one knows
When the 1950's Pleasantville turned to color it represented Bud having comes to terms with his past. His mother in the 1990's made herself miserable by her own self imposed standards like the black & white 1950's had started off as, Bud realized that regardless of the era, people made their own choices for themselves.
Comedy is not pretty
*~* 👽 *~*
I would have been so much more happy if he took his real mom back there. That's where I thought it was heading. Great movie though, didn't think it would be that solid. Slowed down a bit towards the end, and not much of an ending.
shareI thought that it meant that she left George for the soda shop guy (Jeff Daniels). Gee, that is nice, isn't it? Piece of *beep* film anyway.
shareIt was all just a Technicolor dream! LOL This is my second favorite movie - right after Dirty Dancing.
Reality is Nothing - Perception is Everything!
I just saw this movie again on Netflix after many years away from it. I had forgotten about the ambiguous ending so I thought I'd check in. Here's my interpretation of the park bench scene.
Remember, the central theme of the movie is reconciliation between who a person is supposed to be and the person they truly are on the inside. As each character comes to terms with who they truly are, they change from black/white to color. When David (Maguire) defends Betty (Allen) he is no longer a self-conscious nerd, but a self-actualized young man who stands up for what's right. Therefore he goes from b/w to color. When Jennifer takes an interest in reading, she is no longer a slut, but a young woman who is developing her own intellectual identity. Therefore she goes from b/w to color.
The Pleasantville TV show characters were created by writers to be simple one dimensional characters. George (Macy) is the steadfast head of the Parker household. That's just how the writers wrote him. That's who he is SUPPOSED to be. Betty is his loving wife and happy homemaker. That's just how the writers wrote her. That's who she is SUPPOSED to be. Bill (Daniels) is the guy who works at the diner. That's just how the writers wrote him. That's who he is SUPPOSED to be. However, when David and Betty enter Pleasantville, that all begins to change as each character realizes who they are SUPPOSED to be isn't entirely who they are.
Betty isn't just a loving wife and happy homemaker. She's a woman with a sexual identity.
Bill isn't just a guy who makes cheeseburgers at the diner. He's an artist who desperately wishes to express himself through painting.
George isn't just the head of the Parker household. He's a man who truly does love Betty.
Now, up until the moment in the courtroom when George has his personal epiphany, we the Pleasantville movie audience are somewhat led to believe that a romantic relationship has formed between Betty and Bill. However, this is all insinuated. There is no real proof that anything ever happened between those two. A naked painting on the diner window could be just that. Note, Betty's is naked in Bill's first portrait of her even though she was clothed when he painted it. In any case, nothing explicitly happens that definitely tells the us, the Pleasantville movie audience, that there was or wasn't an affair.
In the courtroom, when George realizes his feelings for Betty, there is a reconciliation within himself, but not necessarily with Betty. The "Hollywood" reaction, the "feel good" reaction to this moment would be for George to look lovingly up at Betty, she would dash down to him, they would embrace, say "I love you", kiss and their relationship would be restored. But that doesn't happen. Just because George realizes he loves his wife, doesn't necessarily mean Betty's love for him is realized.
At this moment, the Pleasantville movie audience could be divided into various factions. Some might believe Betty will end up with George. Some might believe Betty will end up with Bill. Some might believe Betty doesn't end up with either of them. At this point it's still up in the air. Nobody in the audience would be wrong or right.
But here's the rub, whatever you the audience member believed would/should happen with any of the characters, then YOU are determining for the characters what they are SUPPOSED to do.
George realizes he loves Betty, so they're SUPPOSED to be together, right? But that's not how it works. Love has to be reciprocated for them to be together and there's no real evidence that Betty has those feelings for George.
Bill painted a naked picture of Betty so there must have been something going on there, right? Not necessarily. It could just be he painted a naked portrait of her.
The Pleasantville filmmakers are playing on our pre-conceived notions of how relationships work in the movies. But that's not what this movie is about. Remember, the central theme of the movie is reconciliation between who a person is supposed to be and the person they truly are on the inside. The characters are just characters to you and me. To them, they are people who now decide for themselves their future.
So, at the end, when Betty and George are seen on the park bench together, there is an immediate "Aha! Betty's with George!" moment. It's validation to those who believed they would end up together. But wait. What does George say? "So what's going to happen now?". Betty replies "I don't know. Do you know what's going to happen now?". George replies "No, I don't". The camera pans a couple times and suddenly Bill is there. He says "I guess I don't, either."
They don't know what's going to happen. I don't know what's going to happen. You don't know what's going to happen. The movie producers don't know what's going to happen. Nobody knows what's going to happen because it's up to those characters to decided for themselves. Anything else would be us determining for them what they SHOULD do.
That utterly confusing and ambiguous park bench scene is necessary because it calls in to question everything we the audience members thought would/should happen between those characters. It's frustrating because we want that closure. We want to know. But in order to attain that closure, we the audience and the movie producers would have to take that away from the characters which is completely contrary to the main theme of the film. Ultimately, we all must be content with the knowledge that Bill, Betty, and George will figure out for themselves what will happen next in the world of Pleasantville.
I actually totally agreed with your theory until I rewatched the movie. For years I thought the final scene was Betty, George & Bill. And I read the final scene as you did as a three person scene with all three uncertain what would happen next.
But the way the scene was shot, which I think was not accidental, its not a three way scene. George is sitting to one side as Betty when he acknowledges he doesn't know what will happen next. After a moment she turns in the same exact direction and Bill is there saying he doesn't know what will happen next. He's also no longer in his soda shop uniform-indicating his role in the show had changed.
I think as several other posters have suggested what it shows is that Bill replaced George. Just like Bud got the cookies because of the changes, so to George got short changed.
That's my sense of what the filmmakers were suggesting. I think that's probably a little high concept and hence why it confuses and divides opinions among viewers.
[deleted]
Interesting.
shareThat's actually a very good theory. Well done. :)
shareI too wondered if Jennifer is missed if she stayed in Pleasantville, but it occurred to me that even though it shows she went to college, and maybe lived out an entire lifetime, she must have came back with David, perhaps materializing on the university campus, or wherever she is when she decides to go back. Otherwise, she would have indeed been missing from the real timeline, and David would have to go back to get her to prevent his mother from panicking.
And speaking of ambiguous timelines, as far as Betty talking to George and then Bill on the bench, who's to say that it wasn't really days or weeks apart between those two interactions, in both cases, talking about the same subject: the Future. The messages is essentially that their lives are no longer scripted. Cinematically, it's a well used sight gag where you have a continuous shot, and do a quick swap, unnoticed, off-camera, to create a visually surprising or jarring effect.
"No Coloreds allowed" That lines sums up this liberal trash of a movie.