MovieChat Forums > The Ox-Bow Incident (1943) Discussion > Spoiler (The door starts to open?)

Spoiler (The door starts to open?)


Hi.

Spoiler.......... Do not read if you have not seen the movie. This contains question about the ending.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
IMHO, this is an excellent movie in regards to telling a story, presentation of characters and excellent use of camera. I have a question for anyone that has seen it and/or can explain it. At the end when a character walks into a room, shuts the door behind him and commits suicide, the door starts to open again and the the scene is cut off at that moment. I thought I saw this years ago and now I see it on the CD. What is this? For such a fine movie, I do not understand this?

reply

I watched the DVD last night. I think it was an accident.

Despite the tightly adapted script by Lamar Trotti, terrific acting by everyone, beautiful camera work by Arthur Miller and superb direction by William Wellman, "The Ox-Bow Incident" was also a very low-budget movie that Darryl Zannuck thought had no commercial potential (he was more or less right). The settings, as you probably noticed, while theatrically effective, were rather sparse. The scene of the hanging, for example, is almost expressionistic in its simplicity. Also, I think there was little time or money for retakes. The scene to which you're referring is the end of a reasonably long take of the Major reacting to his son's accusations, his realization of what he has done that night and throughout his life, then the cross to the door, the silence after his entrance, than the shot. I believe that following the action, the door began to drift open by accident. Rather than reshoot, they opted to cut at the last possible moment. I'm sure Wellman would have preferred to linger for just another half-beat on that closed door but...

Come read the site: http://www.FeralFiction.com

reply

Actually, it was a mistake---a member of the crew opened the door too soon but, being low budget, etc. they didn't reshoot.

reply

This movie may be beyond the average movie viewer today. You have to understand, concience, pride and a loss of face. The person most responsible for the crime of hanging inocent men, kills himself when faced with a son who is not what the father wants, and the major is not the sort of man to face his "inferiors". I would have been surprised if he hadn't killed himself. Re the door, could it be the symbol for the rest of the son's life opening without the overbearing parent? If it was an accident, it probably was left in because somebody thougt the same reference to a new life. It was the only glimmer of something good that happens in the movie. Except I was also left with Henry Fonda moving in on the young widow and the kids.

reply

QUOTE : Except I was also left with Henry Fonda moving in on the young widow and the kids.

I don't understand what you mean here - it sounds as though you are intimating Gill is taking advantage of a very bad situation (but I know THAT can't be right :-) ). Would did you mean?

reply

QUOTE : Except I was also left with Henry Fonda moving in on the young widow and the kids.

I don't understand what you mean here - it sounds as though you are intimating Gill is taking advantage of a very bad situation (but I know THAT can't be right :-) )



You need to remember that it was established early on that Fonda's character was that of a short-tempered drifter with bad habits. I assumed he intended to take advantage of that new widow, thereby connecting his persona at the beginning of the movie to what he remained to be in the end.

reply

That is probably the most cynical thing I've ever heard in my life. Just...wow.


I'm glad you're in two years ago and not now...



Same old walls closing in

reply

According to the commentary on the dvd, by William Wellman Jr., the film was probably beyond the average movie viewer in the early forties, also. Wellman mentioned that there wasn't too much of a favorable response after the pre-screening for all of the studio mucky-mucks. However, he did say that Harry Morgan talked with Orson Welles after the screening and Welles made the statement " They don't realize what they just saw ", to him. I'm not so sure that it isn't beyond me, or perhaps a better way of putting it would be to say that it might be too deep for me. I say this because I'm not picking up all of the symbolism that has been pointed out by other posters. That all being said, I've seen between 1,500 and 2,000 films over the years and this is one my absolute favorites. It's the only western that ever made me cry, and still does. That's probably because it's a whole lot more than just a western.

reply

As I just said to someone else here, what's meant by this film being "beyond the average movie viewer", anyway? It's just a movie, and the opening door was probably just a production error.

~~
Jim Hutton: talented gorgeous hot hunk; adorable as ElleryQueen; SEXIEST ACTOR EVER

reply

[deleted]

Oh brother. What do you mean by "beyond the average movie viewer today"? It's only a movie. The open door was probably just a production error, nothing more.

(Geez, I must have missed this precious thread when I last visited this board a few weeks ago....ha ha...)

~~
Jim Hutton: talented gorgeous hot hunk; adorable as ElleryQueen; SEXIEST ACTOR EVER

reply

I went to the ox bow incident page to start a thread about this little-known blooper, only to find that you're all way ahead of me. If you listen close enough, you can even the doorknob click before the door opens! This startled the s--- out of me when I first noticed it a couple of years ago. I half-expected the Major to re-emerge and say, "I missed."

reply

I half-expected the Major to re-emerge and say, "I missed."
I realize I'm four years too late here, but that is hilarious.

reply

Thanks. I think I plagiarized it from Kurt Vonnegut's play Happy Birthday, Wanda June.

reply

It's true. I just watched the movie on dvd from netflix, and the door does open. I agree with the earlier post that the door was mistakenly open too soon.

reply

Wellman was a great director, but anybody can make a mistake. I still believe it was a blooper. By the way, TCM has no showings of Ox Bow scheduled through October, but AMC shows it from time to time. Or better yet, get the DVD, which is well worth owning, warts and all.

reply

I do not believe this was a mistake. Wellman was far too careful a director to allow a mistake of that magnitude. And to think that there would be only one take of this crucial scene is beyond belief.

The door opened. A new beginning.

Fonda's presence in the scene: if it was an accident, Fonda would have been his dressing room getting ready for the wrap party, not centered in the frame still in character.

reply

Ren, it sounds like you are just rehashing the post made by denscul. With all due respect, it sounds like you are offering an opinion on a scene that you've never viewed. (You're biggest slip-up: your allusion to Henry Fonda's "presence" in a scene that he is not even in!)

reply

It's only a door opening...nothing more and nothing less.

I have no intention of reading anything into it.

~~
Jim Hutton: talented gorgeous hot hunk; adorable as ElleryQueen; SEXIEST ACTOR EVER

reply

Wow, that was a loooong time ago. :)

reply

What was a long time ago? The movie or the post I responded to?

Doesn't matter. This thread is one of the most bizarre threads I've seen on IMDb, and I just had to comment. I seem to remember seeing a similar discussion on another internet forum some years ago.

~~
Jim Hutton: talented gorgeous hot hunk; adorable as ElleryQueen; SEXIEST ACTOR EVER

reply

My post you responded to. I mean, I don't even use this account anymore. Surprised was I when I saw an IMDb notice in my email.

I saw your comment and your comment on another thread in this board. Sure, it's a door, sure it's a painting. But sometimes it's ok to question these things.

reply

I have no way of knowing who is still using their accounts and who is not. I don't pay too much attention to the day/year the post was written. I read the post and if I have something to say, I say it.

These boards are public. Even if someone isn't posting anymore, others might see my reply and comment on it. As long as the other person's post is there, I have the right to respond to it.

Of course it's okay to question these things (door, painting). They have the right to question it, and I have the right to say that there's nothing to it. My personal view is that there is a lot more to this movie than just a door opening and a painting in the bar.

~~
Jim Hutton: talented gorgeous hot hunk; adorable as ElleryQueen; SEXIEST ACTOR EVER

reply

Hey now, I wasn't reprimanding you. I was making an observation (just as you were)... I found it amusing to get a reply to an old post, that's all. I didn't have to say anything (or even reply), but I chose to, just for fun.

And of course there's more to the movie than the door or the painting

reply

I double checked, and I didn't reply to an old post of yours. I was on this thread before you. I replied to someone calling him/herself ren or ram or something like that.

~~
Jim Hutton: talented gorgeous hot hunk; adorable as ElleryQueen; SEXIEST ACTOR EVER

reply

True. But you replied to me here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0036244/board/nest/16050972?d=209700629#20 9700629, which is farther down in this thread.

I made the error of replying to a different post of yours (but same thread).

So, in fact, I was on this thread before you

reply

Oh, there you are!

I usually don't pay much attention to these things. If I see a post I want to comment on, I'll just do so.

~~
Jim Hutton: talented gorgeous hot hunk; adorable as ElleryQueen; SEXIEST ACTOR EVER

reply

My apologies for the confusion, that's what happens when I go through someone's profile and start clicking randomly on their other responses.

reply

Some good points all around. Mistake or intentional? Or both? Here's a thought... perhaps it was a mistake, that a stagehand opened the door too soon as shilo_arcata points out (incidentally, it sounds as if you have evidence to this effect... why not present it?). But then during the editing process it would have been amazing for Wellman (and others) to completely overlook this fact (although indeed, since it was low budget, perhaps it was). However, perhaps Wellman thought "OK... that was a slip, but I'll leave it in as a door opening for the son's future idea." I don't know if we will ever know the answer. Myself, when I first saw it happen thought "maybe the gun shot affected the room pressure and caused the door to unlatch." It is definitely an odd moment in the movie.

As I point out in my other post, Wellman does do some interesting things with the camera. If you doubt this, take a look again at the final letter reading scene. It was *definitely intentional* for Morgan's hat to cover Fonda's eyes during the reading, to give the "justice is blind" motif its effect. So... was Wellman doing something intentional with the door? All we have left now are our own speculations.

Final note... wow... look at all the people in this movie!

reply

Isn't the answer a little simpler than that? Maybe it was just the Major's body touching the door as he dropped to the floor. Or some object that he might have overturned on his way down.

reply

Party-pooper! I was havin' so much fun reading this discussion!

reply

It is listed as a "Goof" on this film's main IMDB page.

reply

posted by ren-28:

Fonda's presence in the scene: if it was an accident, Fonda would have been his dressing room getting ready for the wrap party, not centered in the frame still in character.
Well, nocomputer1962 already pointed out that Fonda wasn't in that scene. But also, films aren't usually shot in sequence; so the Major's suicide could have been one of the first scenes filmed. If that were the case, there would have been no wrap party at that point. But if things were done differently in the early 1940s, or if Wellman was the kind of director who did shoot in sequence, then I stand corrected.

reply

It looked to me like there was another door gaffe that occurred at the beginning of that scene. The Major enters his house then locks the front door. His son, following, can't get in and rattles the door knob a bit. The Major simply turns around, and there in the very next shot is his son standing in the open doorway! I didn't see this listed on the "Goofs" page. Was there a transitioning shot of the son picking the lock with a pen knife or something, or a shot of the Major unlocking the door? If there was, I didn't see it. I found the discontinuity glaring because there was no sound of the knob turning or the door opening on its hinges.

... unless the son acquired the power to enter locked rooms noiselessly .

Since a crew member goofed by opening the other door after the Major's suicide, do you think they edited out the shot of the Major unlocking the door for his son so that it would appear that these were not goofs, but deliberate symbolic statements (e.g., such as doors opening for the son's new life)?

reply

[deleted]

Well, since we are unable to ask William Wellman, I wonder if his son, William Wellman, Jr., knows anything about this? Not like he would post an answer on this site or anything, but maybe some reporter could find out. Anyone know of any interviews he may have given? Also, I wonder if Harry Morgan knows? I think he's the last major actor alive from this film.

reply

>>It looked to me like there was another door gaffe that occurred at the beginning of that scene. The Major enters his house then locks the front door. His son, following, can't get in and rattles the door knob a bit. The Major simply turns around, and there in the very next shot is his son standing in the open doorway! <<

I just watched the scene a few times. As another poster answered, the door remained closed and locked.

When the son is heard but the Major is shown, the son's voice is slightly muffled, to show that it is being heard through a closed door.

He even says, at the end of the speech "Open the door, Major -- I want to see your face. I want to know how you feel now."

But I also understand why it wasn't clear to you. What you thought you saw may have been due to the way the son was filmed -- head-on, fairly close, giving the impression that we are looking at him from the Major's POV. It even cuts back and forth between them, which is pretty common for editing a conversation between people in the same room.

It might have worked better to film him from the side at first, showing that he was standing at the closed and locked door, or have him rattle the doorknob or pound on the door again.

As for the original topic, the mysteriously opening interior door after the gunshot, I think it's purely a gaffe or re-edit that didn't get cut properly.

I find it hard to imagine a crew member accidentally opening that door, from the side where the actor was, so soon after the actor went through it. I also have a hard time imagining the director calling "cut" that soon. But I guess either is possible.

For anyone who hasn't watched it, theories that the door drifted open or opened from the Major's body falling against it are not valid -- the door opens toward the room he is in, we hear the doorknob/latch sound of it closing firmly, then being re-opened, and it starts to open quite quickly, clearly being pulled.

The typical suicide-in-film moment is there -- distraught person goes into a room, we are left staring at the closed door. But it is awfully short.

I'm wondering if the original scene was much longer. The son's monologue starts as if in the middle of a conversation, and the scene ends a bit choppily.

Perhaps the original edit showed the Major coming right back out for some reason, maybe to have a further confrontation with his son, brandishing a gun to chase him off (or something else he got from that room, to make his point or shame his son).

Maybe they planned to keep in the son's suicide after that confrontation, then have the Major finding him and committing suicide later. That would agree more with the book, and the son's suicide was in early versions of the script, according to the trivia section here.

Or maybe it was cut from a scene in which we would have seen the Major come out to the foyer with a gun, then go to the POV of the son on the doorstep again, so we and the son would hear the suicide shot through the exterior door.

Or even that the Major would respond to his son's last challenge, and let him see exactly how he felt now, by opening the exterior door and committing suicide in his son's view (hidden from us by camera angle, as in the lynching scene).

Maybe I'm talking out of my hat.

The idea that the opening door was deliberate/left in as some sort of symbolism is really far-fetched, to me -- it is a split-second, not nearly long enough for the "see? get it?" symbolism used in films. However it happened, the fact that it is left in is clearly a gaffe.

What is strange, to me, is that it would have been really easy to make the wait before the gunshot, and the time after it, longer, and never see that door opening.

After the Major closes the door, there is not one moving object in the shot. There is no pan in or out. It seems to me that few seconds of a freeze frame or slowing it down would have worked just fine, without the viewer noticing a thing (unless I'm missing something about the technology involved).

I think they just flat-out missed it, at least until it was too late to fix it.

And now I've spent way too much time thinking about it!

Here is the scene:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=s0ZzPo86_-k#t=4151s

reply

That's exactly what it is. A goof. Nothing else.

I wonder how many film profs would disagree with me?

~~
💕 JimHutton (1934-79) and ElleryQueen 👍

reply

As for the door opening, I can't see that as a blooper as it would be a very simple edit to cut just before the door opened and have the superimposed sound of the shot fade over into the next scene.
It must have been done on purpose and for a reason. Perhaps to get people to ask each other if they picked up on it?

reply