If they are indeed two seperate people are there is evidence claiming so. How come Ninny never appears in any of the flashbacks? If Ninny was such a party to all the events in the film, and she is a serpate person from Idgie, how come we never see her at the cafe? During the trial? The other characters having a conversaion with her? How would she know all the "intimate" details of Idgie and Ruths relationship?
share[deleted]
It's not exactly clear in the film, but in the book, Ninny is there all the time with the Threadgoodes, and at the cafe. But, the book is told via Mrs. Threadgoode's stories, newspaper clippings, and third person narrative of what was actually happening in the 1930s, in order to gain more than one perspective. It'd be hard to portray this in film, so the filmmakers just implied that Idgie was Ninny so people wouldn't question how Ninny knew so much about Idgie's life.
The biggest case against Ninny being Idgie is the fact that if she really was Idgie, she would have married her own brother and had a child with him. I think that just speaks for itself.
You're just a bee charmer, Idgie Threadgoode. That's what you are, a bee charmer.
I think I saw Ninny very briefly getting the door in Frank's house, when someone was looking for Ruth. At least it was someone that looks a lot like Jessica Tandy except younger. I also ask myself how could someone who was not Idge know every little detail int he story, specially when Idge (or Ruth for that matter) didn't tell anyone about it.
I believe you're thinking of Ruth's mother in the scene where Idgie goes to visit Ruth after she had married Frank. It was Ruth's mother that answered the door and called out to Ruth that 'some bee person' was there to see her.
shareYou only saw Idgies brother in the beginning of the movie and then when they went to rescue Ruth from her abusive husband. After that you never saw him so why would we see his wife. they did that on purpose so we would be talking about this 22 years later.
share[deleted]
LOL Yes.
In my opinion, this is not something up for debate. Idgie and Ninny are separate. That's just fact.
That was not one question. It was five.
Why would she lie about who she was. She was very clear and emotional about the love of Cleo and the love of her son. She married Idgies brother. It adds nothing and takes away much that she is any one else other than who she says she is. Ninny has many tales of her own and told some of them.
Idge at the end of the film is still around somewhere still charming bees. Isn't that a better conclusion to the film in that the tale is still to be finished.
Exactly! Well said, ohsoso.
shareWell if Idgie and Ninnie are two separate people and also sisters in law, then why do they never meet during their later life?
In my opinion they are the same person in the movie. Ninny's stories about marrying into the Threadgoode family etc were fabricated by Ninny because she wanted to tell Evelyn the story from a 3rd person perspective. Or maybe she was simply senile.
There is no way Ninny could have known every aspect of Ruth and Idgie's personal life together. She would have had be with them at all times. I think Ninny just didn't want Evelyn to catch on that she was actually Idgie.
And what was the point of the whole final scene if they were separate people? Ninny's tell-tale smile and quote "sometimes I think I still catch a glimpse of her" meaning she still sees parts of her old self. And Evelyn quoting "maybe we'll see her today" while giving a look as though she was catching Ninny on her own lie.
You are VERY correct hissy_fit. Trust me. Mr. Avnet did a very good job bringing the story to life. Many people are upset they did not show the close/love between Ruth and Idgy.....I think they did. You do not need to see sex or kissing to show when two people love each other. Which, they did. This is a remarkable film that shows the true value of love and friendship. The one thing I can hope for is to find that, and every other person on the planet.
shareWhat a lot of people do is they compare a book to it's movie, and they think that the movie shows the story exactly like it was written in the book. What they fail to understand is when the story is recreated for the big screen it needs to he changed and hacked around a bit so it can have the right effect. You will notice that a lot of movies are "based on the novel".
Just because Idgie and Ninny were the same character in the book, doesn't mean that the same applies to the movie. I watched the movie recently and the tell tale signs of the final scene are all there. Not just the look Ninny gives, but also the look that Evelyn gives indicating that she realises that Ninny is Idgie. If they were separate characters these facial expressions would not have happened. There would have been no need for them. A movie always finishes with a twist - Ninny's true identity being the twist.
How about the scene where Idgie and Ruth are on the train throwing food to the homeless. How did Ninny know about this? She wasn't there on the train with them.
No one will ever convince me that Ninny wasn't really Idgie in the movie.
I still don't buy them being the same person. Plus, I think it is easy to explain how Ninny knew all of this. She was there at the time! She was friends with them, so Idgie or Ruth probably told stories. Idgie probably rattled off about the time she took Ruth on a train and threw food to people, about the time she got honey for Ruth, etc. I don't think that is completely implausible. Plus we have to remember that the way she told Evelyn was probably not exactly as it was shown. For instance, she may mention how Idgie and Ruth argued about who murdered Frank. Ruth suspected Idgie did it but Idgie denied it. Ruth said she would be doing everyone a favor by leaving and Idgie convinced her to stay. It is doubtful Ninny would be reciting full on lines of conversation to Evelyn so I think it is very possible she had knowledge of all these stories.
Plus, there are some stories described where Idgie was not present. Is the implication that because Idgie wasn't there, she can't know what happened? If we can buy that someone told her what happened, why can't we do the same for Ninny? Plus we already know Sipsey told Ninny about the night she was murdered. Sipsey didn't tell many people about that, so it could be implied she and Ninny were very close.
I honestly think if they are the same person in the film, that just makes Ninny look senile mentioning marrying her brother among other inconsistencies. I know the implication is there in the film, but there are too many other contradictions in the film for everyone to just accept that as a fact. The filmmakers wanted to add an extra air of mystery at the end and it looks like they succeeded as this is still one of the most talked about topics in regards to this film.
When you read the book you discover, as often happens when books are converted into screenplays, several characters were combined into one and of course some were omitted altogether.
What we have with the Ninny that is telling the story is really ONLY her version. She's the story teller and Evelyn is the rapt audience. We have no one in the present day to call Ninny out. The stories Ninny weaves are so powerful you can't help but believe they are true but Ninny could very well be Idgie. Idgie, we know from Ninny, is a story teller herself. So, was Buddy.
I can see how Ninny could actually be Idgie enjoying telling her new friend all about the lives that have long past without making herself front and center in the stories. Modesty of the Southern woman.
this is what I think too, in fact it's my favorite part of the entire movie, that smile at the end and the knowing look from Evelyn when she realizes it.....
the beauty of it is that everyone can conclude what they want...like a lot of other movies I know, when the ending is left up in the air. My ending is with Evelyn finding out Ninny is Idgie and Idgie tickled with herself to have pulled it off.
Idgie always did tell tall tales :) This is my rationalization for her to be lying the whole time as she tells the story.
I just remembered the part where ninny said that these people will live on as long as we remember them or something like that.. so, I take it that her putting the honey at the grave and talking about Idgie was her way of making the point of keeping the memory of Idgie alive, not that she was Idgie.. I take it she was not since it was clear in the book that she was not and that Ninnys life was different than Idgies...
share
FrannyFine, I agree. :)
Well if Idgie and Ninnie are two separate people and also sisters in law, then why do they never meet during their later life?
In my opinion they are the same person in the movie. Ninny's stories about marrying into the Threadgoode family etc were fabricated by Ninny because she wanted to tell Evelyn the story from a 3rd person perspective. Or maybe she was simply senile.
There is no way Ninny could have known every aspect of Ruth and Idgie's personal life together. She would have had be with them at all times. I think Ninny just didn't want Evelyn to catch on that she was actually Idgie.
And what was the point of the whole final scene if they were separate people? Ninny's tell-tale smile and quote "sometimes I think I still catch a glimpse of her" meaning she still sees parts of her old self. And Evelyn quoting "maybe we'll see her today" while giving a look as though she was catching Ninny on her own lie.
In the book they aren't the same person. In the movie they are the same person.
There is no way Ninny would know that much about Idgie and Ruth. Plus if you remember there is a scene in Ninny's room in the nursing home and there are pictures of Idgie and Ruth together. Why in God's name would their be pictures of the two of them and not her own husband and her child?
Also as someone else said, what's the point of the final scene if they aren't the same person?
People are just intentionally dense on this one. Again, in the book...no they aren't...in the movie, yes they are.
If you love someone, set them free. If they come back, nobody else wanted them either.
How are people intentionally dense on this when it is intentionally stated that Ninny married Idgie's brother? I wouldn't call people dense because they accepted what the movie stated.
shareWe could say the same of the people insisting that Ninny and Idgie aren't the same person. Intentionally dense. They are the same person in the film. We have no one to contradict or correct the stories that Ninny tells Evelyn. We only have Ninny, a very good story teller. Every thing we learn about the past comes soley from Ninny and no other.
OK, if you watch the director's cut and listen to the director's commentary...
He arranged for brown contact lenses to be worn by both Nancy Atchison/young Idgie and Jessica Tandy/Ninny to hide their blue eyes and so that their eyes matched Mary Stuart Masterson's brown eyes.
Here is a paraphrasing from the director's commentary:
"Originally I had wanted it to be a bit ambiguous as to whether Idgnie and Ninny were the same person but Jessica had such a hard time with it because she couldn't figure out how to play it both ways; so she quit. Twice. So I had to rework it and make a decision. When the film came out Jessica called me up all excited and pleased with how all the performances turned out. Then she asked, why didn't you tell me I was Idgie? I said, "I did, twice".
[scene at the end when we see Ninny sitting on her suit case in front of Ruth and Idgie's now knocked-down-because-it-was-condemned house.]
Director: This is when we really walk into the land of the myth because in the recapitulation of the plot zone and so forth, it's fine. Essentially it's 'where did that honey get in that cemetery on that tombstone'? Who put it there? It doesn't matter. The story is always larger than life and you want it to be. I mean, it's one of those things that you just sort of feel out. The audience will reject it or not... the critics will reject it or not, I thought it was true to the story.
Then, again, that line: Bee Charmer. It's just such a wonderful description of Idgie. Past or present. [Evelyn reads the note on Ruth's stone] Now we sort of step off the map. Where are we. Or yeah, she's still around. Now Kathy's getting wise...
The final scene is Kathy and Jessica, but it's really about the café. A ten year old said after she saw it, "The movie's about how we tell stories to replace those people we lost in life. How it makes us feel better."
Fried green tomatoes served hot at the Whistle Stop Café.
~ As commentary's go I have to say Jon Avnet did a great job. He talked nearly the entire time. No really long pauses. He filled in a whole lot of side trivia that was really fun. The only thing he had trouble with at times was separating the actor from the character in the exposition of some of the scenes. ~
They are seperate people. In the beginning ninny tells Cathy bates that she had a big crush on idgys brother buddy n that he was such a flirt, but that he only had eyes for Ruth. I doubt she would've had a crush on her own brother and that her brother would've been flirting with her
shareHow are people intentionally dense on this when it is intentionally stated that Ninny married Idgie's brother? I wouldn't call people dense because they accepted what the movie stated.
Here is a paraphrasing from the director's commentary:
"Originally I had wanted it to be a bit ambiguous as to whether Idgnie and Ninny were the same person but Jessica had such a hard time with it because she couldn't figure out how to play it both ways; so she quit. Twice. So I had to rework it and make a decision. When the film came out Jessica called me up all excited and pleased with how all the performances turned out. Then she asked, why didn't you tell me I was Idgie? I said, "I did. Twice".
Wow, I've never had a chance to listen to the commentary, but pretty much sounds like he intended them to be the same person. Thankfully there never was that debate in my own mind.
And thank you for bringing this forward!
Life ain't easy when you're a Froot Loop in a world full of Cheerios.
Yet in the film they still say Ninny married Idgie's brother. In the book they most definitely are not the same person.
share
For me, it´s clear Avnet changed the book and IDGIE AND NINNY ARE THE SAME PERSON.
The whole thing about her crush on Buddy, Frank´s death and more are a hoax.
The smile Ninny gives to Evelyn is more elucidating than anything.
FrannyFine, this ponts are really great:
"Ninny was never around with Idgie and Ruth yet she knew every detail of their life together. That would not be possible if she was a different person. Another factor is that Ninny married and had a child at around the same age as Evelyn was at the time (in her 40's). Ruth died at 37 and that's where the story ended. Idgie was still single when Ruth died which means Idgie must have married around 40. And back in those days not many women married at such a late age. So is it just a coincidence that both Ninny and Idgie weren't married yet at 40?"
Ninny married Idgies brother, you see her and Cleo at the start when they are getting ready for the wedding.
Ninny says everyone including her were in love with Buddy, not in a sisterly way...
Ninny didn't marry at 40, she had a child then, she married Cleo before that.
Idgie wouldn't have married or had a child after Ruth died, she was clearly gay and had turned down advances of men before. She also had Stump to raise.
Also if Ninny was Idgie, why didn't Stump visit her in the home?