MovieChat Forums > Gone Baby Gone (2007) Discussion > What a sad ending.

What a sad ending.

posted 10 years ago by deer1
23 replies | jump to latest

Just watched this film... The ending left me speechless. I just feel utterly sad and depressed. That sanctimonious bastard basicly sacrificied one child's happiness just so that he could sleep better.

The ending of this film was just heartbreakingly grim and cruel. The poor girl would have no doubt had a better and safer life with Doyle and his wife in the countryside.
I cannot accept that anyone with common sense would choose to bring any little child back to that hellhole. She had a rare chance for a better life and Kenzie just robbed it away from her for selfish reasons.

[–] Roy_Munson2014 10 years ago

I don't consider him a sanctimonious bastard for turning in the kidnappers, but many do and that's what makes it a great film/ending - it inspires debate

"Bltch, what you DON'T know about me -- I can just about squeeze into the Grand xxxxing Canyon!"

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] nancy-mitrione 9 years ago

He was a hypocrite. I could understand him having a dilemma with not turning Doyle into the Police if he was "by the book" in all situations. However, he had no problem murdering the pedophile. It would have probably made more sense with his character being consistent. You don't break the law in any circumstances. (If it was me, I would have shot the pedophile and left the girl with Doyle!)

[–] jezfernandez 8 years ago

That's the whole point. When Remy tells Patrick about planting evidence, the whole debate was around whether breaking the law is very morally acceptable. Patrick was still feeling tremendous guilt for killing the paedophile. No doubt he still carried that guilt when he debated whether to return Amanda to her mother.

This film - which weirdly is a lot like Gone Girl - doesn't present comfortable scenarios or easy answers. That's what makes it such a troubling watch.

[–] FangsFirst 8 years ago

If you think he didn't have a problem murdering the pedophile, you should probably never comment on movies again, because you didn't pay any attention to this one.

[–] nancy-mitrione 8 years ago

Off-hand I don't remember since the comment was close to a year. However, thank your for your polite response.

[–] cgc668 9 years ago

[–] outsideartist 9 years ago

In the last scene, it looked to me as though Kenzie was thinking 'Oh my god, what have I done?' He sees Helena caring more about her stupid date that her kid. She made no arrangements for a babysitter, and was back to her old ways. Kenzie was finally realizing that what he did was maybe not so right after all.

[–] wyldeone2 9 years ago

In the last scene, it looked to me as though Kenzie was thinking 'Oh my god, what have I done?' He sees Helena caring more about her stupid date that her kid. She made no arrangements for a babysitter, and was back to her old ways. Kenzie was finally realizing that what he did was maybe not so right after all.

I hope that was what he was thinking and more. He deserved to lose his girl friend for his choice to give the child back to the crack mama. He deserves to be made to marry Helene and be Amanda's baby sitter until she is grown. I say that because he already made the decision to kill the child perv who had been in and out of prison for molesting children and deserved to die. If it was ok to go outside the law for one thing then it must be for another.
_____

There is a difference in keeping the peace and enforcing the law.

[–] FangsFirst 8 years ago

Holy crap. How many people didn't notice his blatantly, explicitly stated discomfort with killing Corwin?

Note: if you pay no attention whatsoever to a movie, you should probably not comment on it.

[–] kokane7 9 years ago

Not to mention, she didn't even know her daughter's doll name. She kept calling it Mirabelle, and it was Annabelle, and I guess that's when he was questioning whether he did the right thing or not...

[–] Cuddlebunny909 (71) 7 years ago

I didnt even catch this. Wow that makes this scene even more grim

[–] Semi_Sweet 9 years ago

It wasn't their kid to take. It was kidnap, even if for the greater good. I honestly think he believed that Helene would change and be a better mother, there is a part when she breaks down about wanting her child back, and it feels honest. Maybe at the time it was, but people break their promises. Affleck didn't know she would go back on what she said.

Mariella, Mariella
Happy in her own little world

[–] Robert_222 9 years ago

Not sure why so many people think she would have been better off...

Those freaks kidnapped her. And God only knows what they were doing with her while she was there.

Sure she got snacks, toys and a clean house, but I'm assuming they were just going to keep her locked up there for the rest of her life. It's not like they could ever take her in public which means no school.

It seems obvious to me at least that he did the right thing.

[–] geearf 8 years ago

They were going on a trip at the end, maybe to move to some other state or country.
If other country, it would have been easy to start fresh and have her live freely.

[–] mollekake 9 years ago

Would she? No school or kindergarten. Most likely fleeing from authorities if they got suspicious if she got into school. Finding out the truth when she got older would probably lead to a hatred towards her kidnappers and unravel it all.
Justifying a kidnapping is kinda messed up man.

[–] lostn 9 years ago

The thing is, there's due process. What the cops did was extreme. They had good intentions, but they didn't follow due process.

As Patrick said, if the mother was neglecting the child, he could have called child protection services. He didn't have to resort to kidnapping to give a child a better life.

And how was he really going to be able to keep her hidden? She'd eventually have to go to school or be seen by someone who knows her. How long could they keep that secret? Even if they change her name, there will be records. It was a bit idealistic.

Was the decision Patrick made at the end the best for the child? Maybe not. But it was the right thing to do. Sometimes what's right isn't what's best. The police had no right to abduct a child, regardless. If they want to go after someone and save the child from being a failure, they should have gone after the mother.

[–] JellyFish19 9 years ago

What I didn't get was how the kid could have lived with her anyway. I thought child services were pretty harsh in the USA like they are in Norway and the kid would be instantly taking away (to someone like Freeman probably).