MovieChat Forums > Professione: reporter (1975) Discussion > the last scene-I didn't see what you all...

the last scene-I didn't see what you all saw

posted 18 years ago by lakealice
13 replies | jump to latest

Wow, did I misunderstand the final scene--according to all the posts on this board. I am an ordinary viewer and this is what I thought: "The girl" is seen through the window out on the street. She is standing around as if she is waiting for someone-otherwise why is she out in the hot sun like that? She does not have her bags with her that I could see. After a while various cars arrive. She has interaction with some of the people in at least two of the cars. I recognized the people. There is coming and going. Later, the Nicholson character is found dead in the room. I did not hear a gun shot, nor did I see shadows or reflections on the window. If there was a gun shot, the girl and others on the square show no reaction even though the window is open. She also does not look concerned or go to warn Jack when the bad guys arrive even though she has said she knows Nicholson is in danger.
I thought that the girl had alerted some of these people that he was there, and that she was probably working for the bad guys, something I had suspected all along. Either that, or she had called the wife and friend for some reason, and when they arrive she points out the hotel.
Something else: how did the girl know that Nicholson would be going to that hotel? He was surprised to find her there. In any case, I thought she had something to do with his bad end, and that is why the movie is called, "The Passenger". She is never given a name, and there must be a reason for that. I also thought she might be Fate or Death personified, the "passenger" we all carry with us. I must say I was happy with my interpretation until I read these comments and found out that I am apparently way off.

[–] NickScale 18 years ago

I think you have a good point there...

Yes those things everyone else has mentioned are visible in the DVD, and the second assassin out in the square actually pulls the girl away from the hotel just before the gunshot after the girl noticed the first assassin entering Locke's room. The second assassin also responds to the gunshot (which is muffled and obscured by a passing vehicle) by immediately running/jogging towards the hotel.

But I suspect you are right the girl is involved with the bad guys, for the reasons you gave but also because she is there in London when he walks past her, but they don't meet until they get to Barcelona, so maybe she's tailing him.

Secondly, she agrees to take the ferry to north Africa and meet Locke there in three days, but then she turns up at the hotel anyway, surprising Locke. (They had discussed the name of the hotel earlier, saying something like "I bet there's a beautiful view there", so she did know its name.) So in that time she could easily have tipped off the bad guys, and for that matter the local police which would account for their arrival (with Rachel) at the hotel literally seconds after Locke has been shot.

The girl is certainly a passenger in this film, but is she "The Passenger"...? Very probably, just as enigmatic as Antonioni himself.

[–] jgoodfriend 18 years ago

I think you guys both make interesting points. It's a very vague ending, which of course is Antonioni's intention - he wants the audience to have it's own interpretation of the events which he presents in such an obtuse way.

It never occurred to me that Maria's character would have set him up, although it's certainly possible. I guess I like to think more romantically. Still, she didn't strike me as someone who would betray him. That's just my interpretation. But keep in mind, "The Passenger" is the American title. They decided not to do a direct translation from the original title in Italian. The films actual title is Profession: Reporter. So your questions about who the actual passenger is may be completely irrelevant.

[–] Byzantine15 18 years ago

Maria's character was Mrs. Robertson (if we can take anything at face value in this film). I wasn't convinced that Jack was surprised that she was there, but was very surprised to learn who she was.

[–] alexbrownson 15 years ago

This needs some correcting I believe. The film's actual title is The Passenger. In Europe Antonioni couldn't use this title because of another film by the same name, and so for the Euro release they went with Profession: Reporter. But the screenplay is title The Passenger, and it was known as The Passenger by everyone during the shoot. The Passenger is the correct title.

[–] scharnbergmax-se 17 years ago

O kay, there are things I have also misunderstood. And I am not sure of everything I shall say now.

David Locke MIGHT just have feared that he would be exposed in a few hours, but I do not think this is so. It seems clear to me that he expect to be murdered. There is a strange parallel. After David and the girl have escaped the police, the girl says that it is beautiful here. I cannot imagine that this would not have reminded David Locke about the identical words said by David Robertson just before he died.

The black man of the couple who met David Locke in the church, and who thought that he was David Robertson, warned him that the government has agents who might try to murder him. He said: “You have taken enormous risks for our sake.”

David Locke must have understood that Robertson had been murdered by the government. And he must have understood that he would soon be the next victim.

Moreover, I think that David would not have the girl in his room or in the adjacent room, because he realised that then she would be murdered too.

As I understood the scene, the aim of the white man of the murder team was to prevent the girl from looking in the direction of the window.

However much the girl may have understood, she cannot have had any idea about how the dangerous persons looked.

I will not comment the suggestion that the girl was “Fate” – just say that this is not my view.

But we should not feel ashamed by misunderstanding the movie. The most absurd interpretation I have listened to was presented by a teacher at the Swedish Film Institute.

He meant that the girl was actually allied with the real Robertson. The place where David sees her in London was allegedly in the neighbourhood of Robertson’s house. And the mission of the girl was to persuade David Locke to take over David Robertson’s job.

Therefore she says to him, just before she goes with the buss: “You mustn’t give up. Robertson believed in something”.

David Locke did not have a single address where he could buy weapons. And if the sellers saw him, they would immediately see that he was not the right person.

I do not have any idea about how David Locke was murdered. My hearing is too poor for detecting a shot.
______________________________________

Next a few of my own thoughts, whatever their value.

We do hear every word of the conversation between the girl and Martin Knight outside Hotel Oriente. But on the following morning the girl tells David that the TV would just like to talk to Robertson about a friend. However, Martin Knight did not anything of the kind.

And now comes something I myself have not understood.

From the conversation in the church it is clear that the black man of the guerilla couple had not met Robertson before.

Nevertheless, when Robertson comes near the couple in the waiting hall at the air port, it is the black man who signalises to the white man that this is Robertson.

How could he know that?

I can make up a lot of hypotheses, but I do not think any of them is reasonable. Could a third person have been another passenger in the same airplane, and have noticed who was sitting at a place with a certain number? Well, wouldn't such use of a further person increase the risk of exposure?

[–] au_fond 15 years ago

I just saw this last night and was very confused. For one, when Maria Schneider is getting Locke's things earlier on, his old friend (the TV producer) runs out and asks her about Robertson, which she replies that she knows and is going to see, so he can follow her. I guess she sped away or something? Then when the ending came, I didn't hear the gunshot everyone is talking about. The way I saw it, Locke tells her to go, then lays down to sleep. That's when the cops and his old friends gather outside, burst in his room and find him apparently dead. I guess I need to watch the end sequence again..

Beautiful movie, but very ambiguous.

[–] sanjuniban 15 years ago

Locke is shot to death. You can hear the gunshot, muffled, but clearly a gunshot, when a noisy car outside the hotel window starts up and begins to pull away. Also, the image of the assassin is clearly visible in the reflection of the opened glass window to the right of the bars. Just before the camera begins to zoom in past the bars (and right before you hear the gunshot), you can see the assassin reach into his coat to grab something (a gun).

[–] tebor79 15 years ago

Maria is Mrs. Robertson. The hotel owner confirms this by saying Mrs. Robertson already checked in and showed us her passport, we don't need to see yours.

[–] rexamillion 15 years ago

At first I took this as her just saying that, to get an adjoining room and wait for him.
BUT, the hotel owner mentioned that she had a passport. ("One passport is good enough.")

So, she is the real Mrs. Robinson-OR, had a fake passport, meaning she was working w/one side or the other.

[–] Noir-It-All 14 years ago

/At first I took this as her just saying that, to get an adjoining room and wait for him./

Me, too. Now, I will consider.....

/BUT, the hotel owner mentioned that she had a passport. ("One passport is good enough.")

So, she is the real Mrs. Robinson-OR, had a fake passport, meaning she was working w/one side or the other./

"Two more swords and I'll be Queen of the Monkey People." Roseanne

[–] udippel 10 years ago

****** Spoilers ******

Totally spot on! - I was tempting to write the same, since nobody (whose posts I saw, at least) pointed out the same. This is for once an obvious clue here: She booked the room(s), showed a Robertson passport. From the type she was, she wouldn't get a fake one; and why should she!?
This is why she was in London, and later able to run into the impostor, since she knew at least some of his contacts.
From here on, much more is speculation, I agree. She clearly talks to the bad guys, and suddenly - so it looked to me - actually and really leave him, while she never did before, must have hopped off the bus, and so forth. Though suddenly, she takes leave, but doesn't go away (even stranger), but seems to wait. Not for her husband, but ...?
This is why my assumption is that she knew more than meets the eye.

[–] pop-1280 14 years ago

I have absolutely nothing to add to all of the theories on the ending of this movie (or even the whole plot for that matter...)

I will address the signally by the black dude to his white partner at the airport. I believe the men were not looking for a particular person, but in fact watching the locker. Whoever had the key must be Robertson, they at least thought.

That's it from me, for now. Talk about a movie that I will need to watch several more times!
Lee

[–] cpuller-642-329716 14 years ago

I didnt hear a gunshot or anything, I just guessed that he was killed and how ironic they find him dead in his hotel room just like the guy whose identity he stole.

I even watched the whole damn credits to see if there is something that explains it more.