MovieChat Forums > Time After Time (1979) Discussion > Ripper's nod to H.G . What could it mean...

Ripper's nod to H.G . What could it mean? (spoilers)

posted 11 years ago by glemay25
8 replies | jump to latest

At the end of the film where John Stevenson was about to steal the time machine again, H.G grabs the crystal that will send him time traveling forever. Before this happens, Stevenson looks at H.G. gives a nod of approval. Why you think he did that? Every time I watch the movie I wonder why he would act like he agreed to his eternal prison. I have come up with some theories

1. His killing women was some addiction that deep down the Ripper wanted to end
(another clue to this was the blonde prostitute who he visited with flowers and after he slit her throat he showed remorse on his face) Was the Ripper happy that he was at last free of his murderous obsession?

2. He was proud of his former friend. He developed a new respect for his long time chess opponent that check mated him at last. Its like life means nothing to the Ripper, its all about how the game is played

3. He felt he got the best revenge on H.G by forcing him to stoop to his level
(murder). This is a common theme in the Batman vs Joker comics. He felt he got the last laugh by making Herbert a killer.

4. The Ripper thought he can somehow comeback (which did happen in a book sequel). He has always escaped and felt this would be no execption. The nod could have been a promise to return

For fun why do you think Ripper/Stevenson gave a seemingly nod of approval before being sent to the time-travel void. Was it one of my theories or do you have a different one?

God's gift of Love
Romans 3:23,6:23,5:8,10:9

[–] sisterdebmac 11 years ago

I thought it was pretty simple, really. To me that gesture just always meant Stevenson was conceding defeat, resigned to his fate. It tracks back to their final conversation, during which you can see Wells getting to him a little bit, almost talking him down. If you look closely, it's pretty much Stevenson's desire to end that conversation that forces him to screw up and land in the machine without the key. He blew it, and he gave up.
________________
there will be snark

[–] turtletommy 11 years ago

What sisterdebmac said.

[–] grapeape67 10 years ago

I totally agree. Stevenson realizes that H.G. HAS finally "won" and he's resigned to his fate.
Almost an acknowledgement that he "respects" H.G. at last. Throughout the movie John is portrayed as thinking he is smarter than Herbert.
As they were both "gentlemen" of the Victorian era, John felt it was "sporting" and he was beaten. Fair and square.
I never thought otherwise.

[–] tomtac 10 years ago

Right.

Wells wants to take him back to the 1890s. Stevenson wants to escape to some other time.

But then Wells grabs the key and that changes the game. It's either "do it Wells way" or "oblivion".

Stevenson does not want to submit to Welles, so he signals that Welles can go ahead and pull the key -- no point in Welles waiting for Stevenson to get out because Stevenson is not going to change his mind.

It also helps that Welles was waiting for a decision or action of some kind from Stevenson. Essentially, Welles stance and then Stevenson's nod is a nonverbal conversation that the audience would understand.

Didn't the movie have a chess game at the beginning? This is like get 'check and mate' and then knocking one's king over to signal acceptance of defeat.

[–] paramitch 10 years ago

Agreed. John was ready for it all to be over, and he knew he could not ever stop on his own. The nod conveyed defeat and acceptance.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I keep thinking I'm a grownup, but I'm not.

[–] hachmom-1 8 years ago

It's finally HG's turn to have checkmate...the nod is John's acknowledgement. By the way, that shot of David Warner is one of my favorites ever. Talk about putting a great deal into a small moment.

It is not our abilities that show who we truly are...it is our choices

[–] paramitch 8 years ago

Thanks for that! Wonderful post. And Warner's been one of my favorite actors since childhood because of that very scene (and many others here). Jack could have been such a cliche, but Warner made him a real and believable (if flawed and terrifying) character.

There is a real sense that Jack loves and cares about Herbert. But he cannot subvert his impulse to kill. There is even a sense that Jack is working for his own destruction. The scenes when we see him kill show -- thanks to Warner -- a conflict, a real flicker of fear and loathing of his own actions. Look at his face in the scene with the girl in the apartment -- he's conflicted the entire time with the actions he is impelled to take.

This is just one of many of the reasons this movie remains a favorite for me. Cheers.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I keep thinking I'm a grownup, but I'm not.

[–] Trax-3 8 years ago

Reminded me of Orson Welles at the end of The Third Man.