MovieChat Forums > Harper (1966) Discussion > the very end (spoilers)

the very end (spoilers)

posted 17 years ago by mbruckner
14 replies | jump to latest

I DVR'd this movie recently and it stopped recording just
as Paul Newman is walking out of the car and his buddy
has the gun pointed at him.. what happens next?

[–] rmax304823 17 years ago

Hill drops the muzzle of the gun and says, "Oh, hell." Newman drops the bag and says, "Oh, hell."

What happens after that is anybody's guess.

[–] mbruckner 17 years ago

thanks.

[–] Ripshin 12 years ago

Neither heard the other's response, so I assume that neither can go through with his plan. Whether Hill turns himself in, is left unanswered. But I don't think Newman's character ever turned him in, if Hill didn't confess.

[–] thbryn 16 years ago

"My guess is" that it was a little bit more intense than that. I think Harper really was going to turn in his best friend. He murdered SAmpson and who was to say he didn't leave some evidence behind? Albert wasn't exactly a professional killer.
Harper would have had to be questioned. What was he supposed to do, lie about everything? For that reason Albert had to consider--though not seriously-- killing Harper too.

"The Albino" whom Albert was trying to frame as the killer, may have had an alibi. Anyway Harper maybe felt he had to turn him in even if he didn't want to.
He may of thought it was a absolute cinch Albert would be implicated. But the "oh hell" statement indicates he was going to roll with it, at least for the time being.

[–] endymion9 14 years ago

I took Harper's "Oh, hell" comment as he was kind of hoping Albert would shoot him and was dissapppointed he didn't. Being the ultimate cynic, he wasn't getting much enjoyment out of life.

[–] mvpx7 14 years ago

I've always believed they split the money.

[–] cvalance 14 years ago

I don't think Harper had larceny in his heart, particularly when it involved murder. He was too smart to put himself potentially on death row if the scheme were uncovered.

[–] WarpedRecord 13 years ago

It's a terrific ending because it's a bit ambiguous for both characters. I assume "The Drowning Pool," which I plan to watch next, answers this and other questions.

[–] grandcosmo 13 years ago

In the book that the film was based on, "The Moving Target," Graves can't shoot Archer (Harper) and turns himself in.

[–] thbryn 12 years ago

nd turns himself in.
--------------------
Sorry to hear that about Albert. I wish he got away and got Tiffin too.

Left early. Please come with the money...

[–] edestci 8 years ago

Really, I don't understand those endings in movies...they piss me off.
Paul Newman repeats it on "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid".

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

This is the ending to "The Sopranos"...41 years early!

But seriously, in 1966 the Hays Code was hanging on by a thread. The Code required that "crime does not pay" so you'd have to think that Albert would be arrested somehow.

But the Hays Code WAS hanging by a thread...

Nobody was going to miss Sampson -- not his second wife certainly(her only goal was to outlive him and get all his money), not his daughter. He was reportedly a very cruel man.

So: why not just everybody keep quiet. The killing could even be blamed on the dead Troy, maybe (he had another gun..)

After all, Albert DID save Harper's life(by shooting Alan.)

.Harper would turn in the $500,000 though. Too many questions otherwise.

[–] Speeed (195) 2 years ago

Exactly. This was what was running through my mind when they showed both of the them saying, "Oh, hell." This was their middle finger and goodbye to the Hay's code, which they were now free to do.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]