MovieChat Forums > Hardcore (1979) Discussion > Thoughts on the ending, anyone? SPOILERS

Thoughts on the ending, anyone? SPOILERS

posted 18 years ago by fentress
42 replies | jump to latest

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD

I understand that Schrader wanted Kristen to have turned out to be killed in a car crash and then George C. Scott goes home. According to IMDB, Schrader regrets that he caved in to studio pressure to end it this way.

I have mixed feelings about the ending. Usually I would root for a courageous bleak ending over a studio-favored "happy ending". But in this case, I think the ending that is actually used in Hardcore is more interesting than Schrader's desired ending would have been. The fact that George C. Scott finds his daughter and at first she doesn't want to go back with him was quite interesting.

That being said, however, there are some problems with this ending. It left me wanting more. I wanted to know more about the characters of Jake and Kristen, and of what their father-daughter relationship was like, to understand why this previously nice midwestern girl would have wanted to leave all that for a sleazy life as an underage porn actress. Maybe Jake as a father was inattentive and distant or overly strict. But how bad could that be? He wasn't portrayed as being abusive. Would the street porn life really be more attractive to Kristen?

Then on top of that, Kristen hated her father enough to initially prefer the sleazy street life. But then after a short period of reconsidering she changes her mind? What is up with that?

But even so, this is still more interesting than Schrader's ending would have been. Here we've watched an entire movie of this man searching for his daughter. Then, under Shrader's ending, it would have turned out her fate had no direct connection to all the searching through the sleazy porn world we had to watch George C. Scott do. Sounds pretty anti-climatic to me.

Thoughts, anyone?

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] preppy-3 18 years ago

Interesting thoughts but I would have preferred a more downbeat ending. I didn't believe it for one second that Kristen went back to her father. It actually ruined the movie for me! Up till then it was a bleak, very dark but believable view of the porn industry--I just couldn't buy the happy ending at all. It's far from a terrible movie but I personally never liked the ending. I wish she had refused to go home with him and walk away leaving him. THAT I would have believed.

[–] jrs-8 18 years ago

Yes the ending is the only down side to this superior film. It makes no sense because Schrader never once indicates there is a problem between Scott and his daughter. Even in the opening scene when she is leaving do we sense even the slightest bit of tension.

[–] Risselada 17 years ago

There doesn't have to be any kind of tension for this kind of thing to happen.

VanDorn was a very loving man, but that doesn't mean that he knew how to show it. The culture he came from was very loving but very reserved in many ways. And sometimes it's hard to say what is lacking, but it's subliminal. It's really hard to say you feel like you aren't loved by someone who you know loves you, but when they just cant express it the way you would like there is hurt inside. Contrast that with the total freedom and free physical love and sex of the porn world. I've seen this kind of thing happen a lot. Maybe not to as such an extreme extent, but I think it's hard for many people to understand. Whether the ending was intended or not, I found an incredible amount of truth in it.

"People should get beat up for stating their beliefs"
--They Might Be Giants

[–] kat_savage 18 years ago

The problem with the ending is that it wraps everything up into a neat little unrealistic package in what seems like the last minute.

First off, Peter Boyle shoots Ratan in the back. Now, while the audience isn't really going to cry over that since Ratan is such an evil guy, it doesn't seem right. A PI shoots a guy for running away from HIM on a busy downtown street? I'm pretty sure that's illegal, even back then. Like when movies defy the law of physics just to fit the preverbial triangle in the round hole. Bad writing. But you can't have a shoot out with the police because it had to be Boyle. It links the whole tale together. Still, it seems almost desperately tacked on.

Why the girl ran away isn't the point. You can infer a number of reasons why she would. He's a jerk. She's a kid. It's easy. Their home life obviously wasn't the serene sort of place that they mask by appearances. His wife left him after all.

From there, it's easy for a girl to get swept up into something she can't control. And for every bad thing that happens to her throughout the five months, one thing remains steady is that it's her father's fault. At least from her point of view. "Drama..." The hallmark of every teenaged girl ;P

Don't think though, that she chose the life knowing everything up front. It's a slow spiral into hell. Each step is horrible but tolerable. And as you decend, the cumilitive effect is balanced by the hardness one gains. You aren't Hardcore the moment you step off the bus.

So I thought the resolution was too quick. She vents and then everything's hunky dory. Even though her life is hell, it would actually make more sense if she chose hell over her father. That's the way it works. Pride n' all that muckity muck.

About the alternative ending, I understand the director's point in principal. A happy ending isn't necessarily required in all movies. If it's a morality tale, than the car accident he envisioned would have a purpose. I can't really think of one, though maybe Ratan ran her over her trying to flee. So we learn that the means don't justify the ends or that stomping towards the goal kills the pretty flower or whatever. Or maybe Niki does it. In some psychotic or perverted way to replace her own father with Jake by replacing his daughter. Or by accident trying to live up to what she viewed as trying to turn her life around. Oh look at that, I can think of a few :)

Or maybe, after reading your comment again, that she dies without ever having entered this world. That it was a pointless excercise. That it's almost like a dream in that Jake is searching for a poltergeist that never existed. "A dime a dozen" Boyle calls them. And the fact that many people couldn't tell if it was his daughter snuffed can be done on purpose in this sort of scenario. Imagine if she's already dead, nothing changes the leads he follows. His daughter died innocuously and happenstances led him down this road. It's hard to go this route because she did do a porn with some college kids. And how messed up is that? That it's easier to buy into that she did one mistake and that she can easily fall into this depraved world, than that she makes a mistake and dies unrelated to it. It would really be about him and his warped view of the world.

Overall though it was a great movie. I can't believe it came out almost 10 years before I was even born. I think my favorite scene was during Jake's initial viewing of his daughters movie. He screams for Boyle to turn it off. Boyle does, and with his eyes shut tight he is still screaming for someone to turn it off. The images burned into his brain. That was awesome! One of the best sort of set-off moments I've ever seen in a film.

From there it's just a slow decent through purgatory.

[–] jrs-8 18 years ago

I just happen to come across an old review from when the film came out (as a kid I used to cut them out and save them) and the review indicates that Paul Schrader's ending (whatever it may have been) was tossed out in favor of the studio's more upbeat ending. You can imagine with the works of Schrader it must have been quite downbeat. My guess is either Scott never found his daughter or she was so far gone he left her behind or she was dead. Apparently the ending we see went against the wishes of both Schrader and George C. Scott. Just another example of a studio with their head up their you know what and not allowing the creator to see his vision completely through. Funny but the same problem befell Schrader's superb film "Blue Collar." It was a great film with a much too abrupt ending. I wonder if the studio interfered with that one as well.

[–] fentress 18 years ago

Good thoughts. The slow spiral into depravity is very insightful, and an idea that hadn't occurred to me. Good insight too about the daughter's pride leading her not to want to go back with her father.

[–] jumper_31 18 years ago

One point i would make is that this is a fairly unrealistic view of the porn industry. No snuff film has ever been found and the suggestion that they were ever made is one really on the level of urban myth. The porn industry may be depraved to some but in fact it is little more than people having sex on film. The vast majority of porno stars are not prostitutes in the common sense of the word and coersion to perform is probably nonexistent in mainstream western pornography which is heavily regulated. If anything this portrayal of the industry is a paranoid one of a conservative midwesterner , the fact that people immediately assume that this film accurately portrays the workings of the porno industry then or now is fairly bizarre.

[–] kat_savage 18 years ago

Yeah, I've heard the whole thing about the myth of snuff films. And I'll bend to your point on that.

However, as for the rest, I think you're off the mark. This film was made in 1979. Now, this is way before my time, but I've heard tremendously weird stories about the way things used to be. A friend of mine used to visit New York City like 10 years ago before Rudy Guiliani cleaned it up. He would talk about blocks and blocks of just the strangest porn shops with every fetish you can think of (and a whole bunch you couldn't ever concieve). Also strip joints and hookers of all stripes and just a small city full of depravity that would've made Sodom and Gamora blush.

I figure back before the million dollar porn actresses, and long before a woman could actually make a living off of filming herself naked and sticking it on a website, that girls who did porn who also be prostitutes. At some point, it was probably the same thing. 1979 was also long before all the stringent regulations like age and such. And way before manditory condom use and testing for STDs and all that jazz.

If the film was remade today, it wouldn't be believable unless you left the country. Even then it might be a bit of a stretch. Though I'm not all THAT worldly. lol

[–] sonny_1963 18 years ago

The daughter never felt loved by her father. She told him at the end that he never told her he loved her.

[–] shannonphoenix 16 years ago

I have something to add regarding "snuff films." I do not believe that they are an urban legend because in order to have one made, someone has got to pay a whole hell of a lot of money, and who in this society has that? Wall street people, Politicians, The rich "elite." Even some greedy ministers would have that kind of money. People get this idea that the only ones that can get those kind of films look like low life's.

I have some insight into the porn industry because I have treated people who were once apart of it and you are right, porn stars are not prostitutes and most times there is no coercion, but there is a lot of drug abuse within the porn industry. I agree, at least this is what I think what you are also trying to say, that those who are involved in the porn industry are not bad people like society wants to believe. Most are probably very descent people. But there are many aspects to the porn industry.

You should also remember that this movie was made in the 1970s and things were different then. There were no regulations on the porn industry and the supreme court cannot not define it. Also, not everyone plays by the "rules."

[–] TachoX2 18 years ago

I remember seeing this on HBO around 1981 and just watched it again. I didn't recall the ending (except that he does find her). As I was watching it again, I was surprised that Ratan was shot and thinking by what authority does this PI have to shoot him?

I was also surprised that the daughter went home with her father after the brief blurb about him not paying attention to her (completely out of the blue).

And why did he place his daughter in the cop car? She wasn't injured or a victim.

It should have ended with the daughter telling him to leave and he goes away in tears...

[–] James_Bond_007_218 18 years ago

I didn't mind the ending, and I actually thought the film was excellent. George C. Scott is one of my favourite actors and with this film, it certainly ranks amongst his finest achievements. I don't think the ending was as happy as everyone thinks it's was, I think that there was a lot of underlying doubt in the girls choice to come home. The downbeat ending would have been a good idea, but I don't know if they could have executed it very well. There was a great episode of Without a Trace, the first season's 4th or 5th episode which dealt with the same runaway daughter situation. The ending was bleak and unforgettable. Had they done this for Hardcore, it could have ranked a lot higher and gained more critical attention for it's uncompromising look at the tragedy that a lot of young people face when they are trapped in the seedy underworld of the porn industry.

[–] wmlopez 10 years ago

I never got why she left in the first place.
If they would have kidnapped her and drugged her I would have bought that.

[–] jhartman-7 18 years ago

Everyone asks why the PI/Peter Boyle was able to shoot the guy and get away with it and i think i have the answer.

There's a brief line towards the end of the movie at about the same time as when they find the daughter where someone makes mention to Boyle being a cop and toward the end when he finally shoots Ratan, look on his lapel and there is a badge.

Why if he was a cop though, was he able to take Van Dorn's money or Dick Sargent's money? Why was he with the hoochie when Van Dorn found came to find him? Maybe just a semi-dirty cop??

[–] joshua_carpino 17 years ago

i like schrader's idea for the ending.it's not "anti-climactic".no more than real life.of course,real life IS pretty boring,and this is supposed to be a movie,blah blah blah,but i think schrader's idea would have been very challenging and original.however,i think the ending is riveting as it is(particularly ratan's death)and i can say that in some cases studio interference doesn't always ruin a film.

[–] freudified_n_funkified 17 years ago

Peter Boyle's character is definitely well connected, but not a cop. The thing on his lapel looks to me more like a button than a badge and he's sporting it when he first shows up at the motel in San Francisco. He also says the cops know about Ratan's activities and I'm sure someone will create an avenue for him to skate on shooting him in the back if it ever even gets to that point. His interaction with the actual LAPD indicates he's not on their payroll, but likely once was.

As for people seeing gaps in logic in Kristen agreeing so easily to go home with Jake, consider that she has nothing left. As much as she claims the things she did were voluntary, her little diatribe against Jake reeks of her repeating things people have told her about how nobody understands her, only her new friends really know and love her, etc. The things she did were still pretty harrowing and she's got her dad there offering her an out. It's entirely feasible that she go with him, that she does genuinely love him and want to be with him, and that her behavior to a point was a cry for help that's been answered. Just like Jake, she was way in over her head. But their ending is in no way going to be a completely happy one - the emotional repercussions of what they both went through are going to ripple though the rest of their lives. There's a lot of stuff they're going to have work through following their ride off into the sunset.

[–] ClockworkKarma 17 years ago

Endings are nothing to be messed with.
(Someone tell the suits)
I feel 'The Cooler' has an even worse ending as far as dialogue (and action, for that matter).

[–] TalosIV 17 years ago

I had a slight problem with Boyle shooting Ratan. However, I think even Boyle was disgusted by this waste of skin and knew the cops wouldn't do anything to him if he did shoot him.

To be honest, the daughter ALWAYS creeped me out. She seemed strange from the get go. Not enough development in that area, really.

Tonight I'm gonna party like it's 2011

[–] Creepy-Suzie 16 years ago

She said "don't touch me" as though he had inapropriately previously. They should have just went with that. She could flatly say that she's getting paid to do what he's always made her do for free. The audience gasps collectively and he turns silently and walks away.

[–] shannonphoenix 16 years ago

I have a couple of theories about some of the issues:

PETER BOYLE'S CHARACTER SHOOTING RATAN: Boyle's character was a private investigator, not a police officer. PI's do not have to live by the same rules as the police do, maybe in a fundamental way, but a PI is not as restricted. PI's can also carry a gun as long as they are qualified and have a license. I don't know why everyone is upset for shooting Ratan, he did try to slice his face off with a knife and he did tell him to stop and was going to attempt to arrest him, PIs can do that too.

THE ENDING: I do not know what the original idea was for the ending, but the ending was not necessarily "happy." She goes somewhere with some people she does not know and she is free, but too young to handle it. Most likely, she was drugged up and made choices and "BELONGED" to Ratan, he was her leader and master. For a young, naive girl, it would be easy to do. She probably did feel that her dad expected too much and felt that she could not go to him or talk to him. That is typical, he was a single parent and there was little to no mention of the mother, which could have been another aspect to all of this. Parents can do things to make their kids feel that way.

I don't see the "happy" part of it. After she tells her dad off, and lets remember that she was found and probably embarrassed that her father saw what she did, was ashamed and all the things she said were things that were built up and she finally let it out. Someone said that she wanted a way out and I agree with that. The movie did not indicate anything about what was going on with her and it is likely. The ending was open as far as I am concerned. She goes with her dad and a police car because she is a runaway and a witness and I was left with the feeling that she and her dad had a lot they had to work through before things were alright again. So, there was no happy ending.

THE SEXUAL ABUSE ANGEL: That may have been a way to go, but American audiences would have refused to believe it. Remember, this is 1979 and people were in denial about everything. However, I don't believe it would have been appropriate in this because I don't think this movie wanted to make a statement about sexual abuse but about the dark side of the Hardcore porn industry and how a young, naive, unworldly girl could be taken in.

THE TIME IN WHICH IT WAS MADE: Let's face it, it was a reflection of the 1970s and that was a weird decade, I remember it. There was a lot of friction in the air, the civil rights movement was going on carried over from the 60s, there were a lot of young men and women who were damaged by the Vietnam war, PTSD was just beginning to come about. It was a time of change. Unlike what some one said, the porn industry was, and still is in some ways, allowed to do whatever it wants though I would agree that most are regulating or are regulated. At the time, the porn industry could have children performing sex acts, getting diseases, etc. That movie was about Hardcore porn, which is different than what you see on playboy channel.

THE SNUFF FILM ISSUE: Anyone who believes that snuff films do not exist is very mislead. Just because no one has turned one in does not prove anything, except that they are smart enough not to get caught. These movies are made in all kinds of places usually for specific clients, wealthy clients that can afford to have one made. Average people can't afford them. It takes a certain type of mind to want these films, usually controllers.

[–] jobla 15 years ago

All of these comments are quite interesting. The film could be remade once a decade, and have a slightly different ending each time. For example, a nineties film would have a different orientation than a seventies film, etc. Porn in the seventies was quite different from porn in the nineties, below the surface level.

About Boyle's shooting Ratan: remember that Boyle earlier commented to Scott that the police didn't really care about a *beep* hustler" (the Jissum Jim character that Scott brutalized during his phony casting call). That was Boyle's view of the fact that the LAPD weren't going to be looking to arrest Scott for the assault and battery. Later, Boyle is able to shoot Ratan, and he would probably justify it in the same way, saying something like "nobody cares about a snuff film killer."

In the nineties, the Boyle characer might find himself up on charges for murder, manslaughter, or "violating Ratan's civil rights."

I agree that there is no hint that Scott ever abused his daughter. However, shortly before her departure on the Calvinist bus trip, she is standing in the Van Dorn house. Scott and his daughter see each other across the room; neither one smiles, and they look very distant from one another, emotionally as well as physically. A girl like that might well fall for a sleazeball like Ratan, who could easily (and histrionically) offer her a "love" that she hadn't received at home from her reserved father. After all, we know that her mother chose to leave Scott (I wonder how the girl ended up with her father, anyhow? Was the mother unfit?).

One more small thought, since I just re-watched the DVD yesterday: the porno film of his daughter that Scott is forced to watch begins with the daughter having her breasts touched by Jissum Jim. Ironically, that is essentially a more adult version of the "Chicken" game that was described to her by her blonde female cousin on the retreat. That is a coincidence, I'm sure, but there's some irony there too.

[–] keith66-1 15 years ago

Reading through the comments I couldn't believe that nobody ever thought that the daughter's rant on her father was the effect of her being brainwashed and embarrassed. I was relieved to see that Dr Freud Funkenstein finally offered that up. I never thought of a possibility other than that.

As far as the PI shooting Ratan, well obviously the guy was a scumbag and he did the world a favor.

[–] BoogieKnight 15 years ago

"THE SNUFF FILM ISSUE: Anyone who believes that snuff films do not exist is very mislead. Just because no one has turned one in does not prove anything, except that they are smart enough not to get caught. These movies are made in all kinds of places usually for specific clients, wealthy clients that can afford to have one made. Average people can't afford them. It takes a certain type of mind to want these films, usually controllers."

Yeah, okay......

[–] jmgindiana 14 years ago

A very good movie. Just watched it last night for the first time. Scott was a great actor, and Boyle is awesome as the slimy but good-hearted P.I. He is also quite efficient, something you don't usually see in P.I. secondary characters.

As for the ending, yeah, it was a bit abrupt. However, I agree with a previous poster that the daughter's refusal was more a cry for help than a genuine rejection. Ratan was dead, she was involved in porno and -presumably- prostitution and drugs. Perhaps she felt those guys "understood" her, but she knew it wasn't her place. Remember what the blonde guy who "starred" with her in the porno film said about her, the way she behaved. It wasn't normal, and it wasn't just a matter of lack of experience.

There was something else in the ending, though. I think Van Dorn convinces his daughter asking her to "take ME home", or something like that. It's just a short phrase, but I felt it meant Van Dorn was finally acknowledging his role as a father, or meaning he would give it a try.

[–] Dylan-o 13 years ago

This crossed my mind. It's a stretch (is there anything else in the film that explicitly makes reference to anything of the sort?) but even the slight ambiguity of that one line adds another dark question mark to the whole film.

I take roles that are fried chicken and turn them into filet mignon.
- Viola Davis.

[–] Hazelrigg 15 years ago

I didn't find this a happy ending at all.
Think about it, Ratan fled and left Kristen, she hears the police surrounding the place, even if she doesn't want to go back to her father he is the only thing she can support herself with now. If he had come without the police and Ratan wouldn't have ditched her, she would've definatly stayed with Ratan and not comed back home.
When he says "Do you really want me to go?" and she's sitting vulnerable crouched down in the corner, the cops going to arrest the majority of the place, of course for this she wants someone she knows beside her, so she wants him to stay. But as soon as this all clears up I'm sure she'll runaway again, because the lifestile her dad and the town has, suffocates her.

Hon darrar och ängslar som ett löv i stormen. För det hon vet, och för det hon inte vet.

[–] horrorshowmovie 13 years ago

I really disliked the ending--it was a third rate conclusion to an otherwise first rate movie

I think a downbeat ending was pretty much necessary. I would have ended the movie right when George C. Scott starts crying after his daughter tells him that she hates him, and prefers life as a prostitute. Her change of heart is totally unconvincing

the actual ending is ridiculous, and is clearly tacked on

[–] franzkabuki 13 years ago

American Gigolo has a similarly idiotic upbeat ending... and at the end of Affliction there´s a long preachy voiceover... so I´m kinda beginning to doubt someone was forcing that stuff on Schrader.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]