Huh.... the ending is weak, isn't it?

Yeah, It's funny that I was watching it on Turner last night and I had a somewhat similar reaction. I probably hadn't seen it in 25 years.

It's like Michael does that live show and then everybody's shocked and then everybody disappears and then they cut to the scene of him in Central Park walking around. Then there's that scene with Durning, then the final scene with Lange. Basically the last ten minutes are just Hoffman, Durning and Lange.

Actually Terri Garr and Bill Murray basically don't appear in the last 20 minutes of the film. All we get are 2 quick funny reaction shots of them watching Michael on t.v. Sidney Pollack's character doesn't appear in the last 15 minutes of the film. We never see the cast and crew after the shock of the live show so we don't really know what happened or what was the fallout. In some ways it's odd that Charles Durning's character gets such a conclusive scene when he was a relatively minor character in the film and doesn't even appear until the 1 hour mark.

There's a scene where we see Jeff's play is being staged in Syracuse with Sandy so we kind of assume that Michael and Sandy are back to being friends because they're both in the play.

Film studios generally don't like to have comedies run that long and 2 hour comedies are considered to be very long. I'm guessing that the ending was abrupt for these time constraints. In retrospect I think they should have dropped the subplot of Les & Dorothy . It's funny but it seems implausible that his guy would want to get engaged after just meeting her. They could have filled that time with the other supporting characters. It's also and odd film in that Bill Murray is barely used. I would have rather they used Bill Murray more and edited out the Charles Durning part. Bill Murray's role in the this film was always odd, like they didn't even promote that he was in the movie and then they barely use him in the film.

It's a bit of an odd movie because it's basically Dustin Hoffman and 6-7 relationships with 6-7 supporting characters.

Just one conversation outside the building at the end and, bam, he turns her around from being disillusioned and betrayed, to digging him. And it wasn't even a particularly good or memorable scene --

Yeah, it's seems a bit unlikely that this woman would just turn around and fall in love with this nut that pretended to be a woman for 3 months and deceive her. And you're right in that he doesn't even sound or feel that persuasive. It should have ben "her" going to see him, wanting to get together with him, that would have been more plausible. But then you go back to the problem of time constraints.

It's not the end of the world or anything, but it is a surprisingly weak ending for such a celebrated movie. (I'd also say that the movie is overrated as a whole, but that's another conversation.)

I don't know if it's overrated. It's a very funny movie but yeah as a film overall it has flaws. It probably has too many sub plots for the 2 hour time limit and Bill Murray is terribly underutilized. There was an odd pretentiousness about comedies back then. There was middle brow/high brow comedies for middle aged people and low brow somewhat more raunchy comedies that Bill Murray would make that appealed to teenagers and people in there 20's. They purposefully didn't want to promote that Murray was in film so people wouldn't think this was another Stripes or Caddyshack. It all seems rather dumb now and waste of his talents.

I think Jessica Lange's performance was overrated. No way did she deserve an oscar, I don't even think she should have been nominated. She should have won the oscar for Frances but she was up against Meryl Streep that year so I always thought they gave it her in this film as a consolation. Terri Garr was better, I don't see how you give it to Lange instead of Garr, no way.

The one thing I'd say though is that Dustin Hoffman should have won the oscar for this. He's the whole movie, it was an outstanding performance.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

I tend to agree with you including the final sentence. Just had my first watch. Hoffman makes the film. A class apart. One or two others help things along. But I cannot see why some commentators are fawning over it as much as they are. I was was frankly staggered that Lange was awarded an oscar for her contribution. Murray was more deserving as a supporting act. Enjoyable but hardly a world beater.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

It's not the end of the world or anything, but it is a surprisingly weak ending for such a celebrated movie. (I'd also say that the movie is overrated as a whole, but that's another conversation.)

I think it's implied that some time has passed and he has been trying to contact her before the street meetup. But I agree that there should have been a little more loose end tying up prior to that for the ending to be truly satisfying. However, I always found the conversation before they walk away to be very emotionally satisfying, and I believed that Julie would have been missing someone who had become a best friend prior to the big reveal, so I do think the 'end' end works well, there just needed to be a slightly better close down leading up to it.

I was was frankly staggered that Lange was awarded an oscar for her contribution. Murray was more deserving as a supporting act. Enjoyable but hardly a world beater.

Neither deserved a supporting actor nom (Murray was great, but he didn't do much). This was a nod to Lange from the Academy to compensate her for not winning for Frances. Garr should have won it.

The movie gets the props it does because it's not just a good film, it's one the stands up to repeat viewings. Whenever someone says on a movie board "I just watched this and..." I always think, so you have only first impressions. Nothing wrong with that at all, but some movies that seem good at first don't wear well over time, and others that seem bad get better over time. Watch Tootsie again in a year or so, and then again a couple of years after that, then ask yourself how you feel about it.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Yeah, I think the creation and termination of Dorothy are both weak points. I would have liked a scene where Michael and Jeff are talking and Michael explains the idea that he should dress as a woman, and try to audition for the part. I don't remember that the possibility of him dressing up were ever even alluded to, before he actually was.

And then in the end, I'd have liked to have seen some of the fallout from the revelation. Other than cutting to weeks or months later, when most of it has already been dealt with, and everyone are moving on.



I think, because it is a great movie, these kind of, what I personally consider to be "holes" in the narration, stands out.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

I don't think so. The climactic scene is the staircase scene, nothing could top that, and it's good that they don't try. Everything after that is really just "epilogue".

reply share

add reply

formatting help

No, it's good.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Yeah pretty weak at the end. It kind of makes the entire movie seem like a thin joke that would be better for a single sit-com episode. The "best side of me" thing just doesn't cover it.

Pity because it's very entertaining and enjoyable movie that prompts you to expect a more satisfying epiphany for all the characters involved.

reply share

add reply

formatting help