MovieChat Forums > Murder on the Orient Express (1974) Discussion > The toast at the end SPOILERS

The toast at the end SPOILERS

posted 14 years ago by macgirl66
16 replies | jump to latest

I thought the toast at the end was just too much. The first group who toasted looked solemn, like they were toasting the memory of the people they had lost. I was cool enough with that. But then more people started walking by, winking, smiling and laughing, obviously over having gotten away with murder. I'm sorry, but I would have rather seen these people hugging and crying then toasting and laughing. I don't know what happens in the book, but I thought this was very bad form.

To each their own...opinion

[–] Jimmy-128 14 years ago

We don't actually see what happens in the book after Bouc/Bianchi and Dr. Constantine accept Poirot's first solution.

It's been suggested that the toasts are supposed to serve as "curtain calls" for the actors--this is an all-star cast, after all. In-story, I guess the hug between Mrs. Hubbard and the Countess (or rather, Linda Arden and her daughter Helena) is supposed to get the somber part out of the way.

[–] LesterFester 13 years ago

I don't agree... I think the varied reactions are quite justified. The reaction of the individual is a product of their thought process. I think you'd expect those that lost a daughter, potential wife or close loved one would be brought to tears. At the same time it is justified for Colonel Arbuthnot (Sean Connery) to smile as he raises his glass because he knows justice has been done.

To give another example:
If a mother witnessed her child hit by a car you'd expect her to run to her child hystericaly crying. Now if the mother were also a doctor would you'd expect the same reaction? I think not. I think you'd expect her to grab for her cell phone call for an ambulance, grab a blanket to cover her child to protect against shock... and do all those thigns her medical training taught her.

" Three can keep a secret, if two are dead "

[–] macgirl66 13 years ago

Disagree, not the same. Apples and oranges.

To each their own...opinion

[–] LesterFester 13 years ago

i'm interested why you think they should all be in tears or remorseful or somber. i think some of those involved did it out of revenge while others did it for justice. i would not in the least expect the same response from all involved. have you ever been to a 'wake'? if you put yourself in the back of the room this is what you might observe: up front near the departed you might find those that were closest to him/her in tears greeting newcomers who have come to pay their respects. then as you look around the room you will find reactions from a-z. some sitting quietly, others in convrsation and still others may be telling humorous stories about the departed.

each reaction to death is different depending on a multitude of things. how close they were to the departed ... the kind of relationship etc.

i guess the point i'm really trying to make is that i think you'd expect the emotional response of the 12 to be different because of their reasons for joining the group, how close they were to those that died etc

" Three can keep a secret, if two are dead "

[–] BlubBlob 13 years ago

completely agree.

[–] markedjuan 13 years ago

I agree with Jimmy. The toast was nothing else but a curtain call. It gave a chance for each star to make one final appearance.

The critic of TIME magazine couldn't help but take note of the scene in which Poirot gathers all the passengers/suspects in the dining room, with every star seated on chairs forming a circle around him. They looked as if they were waiting to audition for some Hall of Fame honor, he wrote.

[–] codyhoskins 13 years ago

I do agree the reactions of each character made a difference. Some of them would simply nod and raise their glasses and others expressed more cheer and warmth to Hubbard and the Countess. Least of all, the most distinguished reaction is the very last one given by Ingrid Bergman. Her look is very glum and regretful because she's a God-fearing woman who believes killing is wrong no matter who it's done to. Vanessa Redgrave' more cheerful reaction was another big difference just the way she smiles and kisses Hubbard on the cheek to show how sweet their method of justice was. Not everyone could be joyous if killing was not in their nature and others were just more determined to see the bastard get what he deserved that they showed no remorse.

[–] Jimmy-128 13 years ago

Well, if we follow the book, Redgrave's character did the bulk of the planning, so she might be pleased with herself for coming up with the whole thing.

[–] sanddragon939 13 years ago

The OP might want to check out the 2010 David Suchet version where the reaction in the end is far more sombre.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ghostfan 13 years ago

I loved the end -- it was a curtain call in this very theatrical movie, and I thought it fit -- as well as the different way everyone made his bow.

Sidney Lumet said, in one of the features on the DVD, that he wanted to give all the actors one chance to look relaxed and satisfied -- so he invented the toast ending. I really loved it and accepted it for what it was -- and I don't feel sorry for the Rachet character at all!

[–] elisedfr 12 years ago

I think it was more of a salute to the actors themselves. This is an all-star cast, some of the actors were still young but others had seen decades of filming. I think it was a nice way to end the great interactions they had in the course of the film. A specially touching moment is when Ingrid Bergman and Lauren Bacall clink their glasses. The two ladies were so much part of Classic Hollywood - and had both shared the screen (and life for Lauren) with Humphrey Bogart.

" You ain't running this place, Bert, WILLIAMS is!" Sgt Harris

[–] Clothes-Off 11 years ago

The cheerful music at the end made me laugh. The tone was "Wasn't that a fun little romp?" when they'd all just killed someone.

I think if the film were remade (not that I would want a remake), the ending of the score would be darker, to show that attaining the vengeance wasn't what they'd hoped, and had changed them. But probably AC's original notion was that they were not at peace until they had done something.

"Well, for once the rich white man is in control!" C. M. Burns

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Harold_Robbins 11 years ago

I've always loved the toasts, and it's hard for me to watch them now without my eyes tearing up more than just a little - so many of the cast-members gone.

Imagine trying to assemble such a cast today. Impossible.

"In my case, self-absorption is completely justified."

[–] Harold_Robbins 11 years ago

With the passing of Lauren Bacall, the 'toasts' will be even more meaningful.

"In my case, self-absorption is completely justified."