Hi,
I heard that Hitchcock wanted a different ending for "Torn Curtain". But the ending he wanted was never used.
I think Hitchcock's ending is available in the book "Its only a movie". I will write it soon.
Here is the ending. This is from the Book "Its only a movie", page 285
"THERE WAS AN ENDING written for Torn Curtain", Hitchcock said "which wasn't used , but I rather liked it. No one agreed with me except my colleague at home (Alma). Everyone told me that you couldn't have a letdown ending after all that. "Newman would have thrown the formula away. After what he has gone through, after everything we have endured with him, he just tosses it. It speaks to the futility of all, and its in keeping with the kind of naivete of the character, who is no professional spy and who will certainly retire from that nefarious business."
Ummm..."Torn Curtain" is ultimately too unsuccessful a movie for any change in the ending to affect it much, but I think it was better for Newman to succeed in his mission. It was to create a "block" to all nuclear weapons, after all.
This does sound like another example of Universal (and its studio chief, Lew Wasserman) stopping Hitchcock from doing what he wanted to do with a movie ("everyone told me that you couldn't have a letdown ending after that.") Universal would mess with the ending to "Topaz" one movie later, as well.
SPOILERS
Torn Curtain's story was quite different compared to the released. Hitchcock wanted Paul Newman to feel guilty throughout the movie, because of the death of Gromek.
But Of Course, Universal insisted to make the film their way. This is why I didn't like Universal after Marnie.