What did you think of it?
I am not quite sure the message the writer wanted to send by having Staples stay.
He is working with a man that 'murdered' his friend. And based on the 'jaw' line, he seems to be staying for revenge.
What exactly is the message of the story? Hatred/Revenge is an appropriate motivating force? Even good men can be corrupted by the allure of big business (or money)? Never quit? Everything is negotiable?
I think the ending is stronger than just a "message." Staples walked into Ramsie's office with all the moral indignation that the audience feels for the inhumanity of corporations that seek profits at the expense of human dignity. It would have been easy for Staples to make a speech and walk away from the job. But Staples is a realist and he heard the truth in what Ramsie said to him, that the company belongs to the people who are strong enough to control it, and that he'll never find a position as rewarding anywhere else. And I think that Staples saw that Ramsie does have values; they're competetive and cold values, but there's truth in them. So they renegotiated, and Staples accepted a new deal that allowed him to keep his success and still live with himself. It wasn't a morally pristine choice, but it was wiser and more realistic than quitting altogether. A very mature, subtle way to end the story.
shareYes, that's the message. I was headhunted into a corporate job once. I'm really outspoken to the point that I won't back down when people get in my face and scream - and I can dish as well as take. The guys at the old job warned me it would be a political nightmare for me to work there. Sure enough, it didn't take long for me to start doing things my own way and strongly arguing about it when questioned. Don't know how many times I went home thinking I would be fired the next day. I saw double digit salary increases and got bonuses that were 25% of my salary during '07 and '08. It can wear on you though, told them several times I would have fired me. So glad to leave and the only job I've had since 1976 that I don't really think about. Doesn't matter what a corporation sells or produces it only has one job, make money. The arguments they showed in this movie were my experience, except they kind of fluffed over the blowback and they have an office called HR that does the dirty work. Yes, money is a great motivator.
shareThis was just on TCM.
My cynical take as of 2016: In the end Staples was just negotiating. He had a price.
And he was codependent in his relationship with the boss. Why would anyone become business partners with someone whose guts they hate on day one? That's pretty twisted. He chooses to partner with someone who doesn't share his values, just so he can spend the next 20 or 30 years arguing with the guy? Sick.
Staples is the least self-aware person in the movie. His wife understands what's up from the start. The boss knows what he wants. Even Briggs knows the score, even if he won't admit it.
Staples is the only character who doesn't have a clue all picture long, and in the end doesn't even realize that all his high and mighty morality was just a negotiating stance.
I don't think the film intends that interpretation though. I think we're supposed to take this all at face value, that Staples held his values and made a good but tough deal. On the contrary, he's setting himself up for a life of strife and anger because he's drawn to it.
And really, how could he be so ignorant all along about his role as Briggs's replacement? He's only fooling himself.
I fully agree with Amplituhedron above. Except for the fact that in the end Staples has consciously surrendered to the cold reality of running a successful corporate business and he is now just finding excuses to justify this surrender.
shareI thought that Staples would eventually be worn down himself - and he probably suspected that. He would become more like Ramsey and less like Briggs. Ramsey would coddle him by taking it on the chin from time to time but Staples would have learned to love his new lifestyle, salary, and perks.
Ultimately, Ramsey won over Staples handily. He felt free to browbeat someone who would allow himself to be browbeaten (Briggs) and wouldn't resign because of limited options. It is just a matter of time before Staples became that.
Kind of a tragedy, this movie. Really, evil winning over good (not even profit winning, just plain old vanilla evil). Bullying winning over teamwork. The only person who probably made a choice that felt good in her soul was Staples' secretary, packing up her stuff and walking out of the job. She probably had fewer options than anyone for finding as good pay elsewhere.
@Amplithuhedron-
I agree with your post in it's every detail, pretty much. Especially the part about the wife- pretty well drawn character. Excellent movie- just finished it and it'll be hard to stop thinking about it tonight.
I thought it was pretty clear that Staples was going to be devoted to doing to Ramsey what Ramsey had done to Briggs, on some level anyway. Staples could surely win over the rest of the board and force Ramsey out.
It seems that Staples had every strength and ambition that Ramsey had PLUS the decency and people skills of Briggs.
Having read all the comments, I'd say that Ramsey represented one extreme. Briggs represented the other. Staples represented the mid-point between the two. That's one way to see it. (Of course the other ways to see it are that Staples had his price, and also that one day he would be another Briggs, and be forced out or worn down and destroyed.)
Having thought about it, I think that it shows Staples being willing to 'make a deal with the Devil', while the secretary will not make any deals and remains true to her inner principles.
In any case, I think Serling was aware of the ambiguity and wasn't going for any clear or pat messages.