I saw this film a few days ago and I thought it was good but after reflecting on it, I am confused on a few things about the ending:
1.) Angelica Huston-was she the character's hallucination/symbolism of the devil or a real person?
2.) Why didn't Liam finish of brosnan's character? He was determined through the movie, yet it ends with a simple "I forgive you."
Last movies seen:
The Philadelphia Story 9/10
Seraphim Falls 7/10
most of the movie was symbolic, but she was also a an actual character; not a mirage. mirages dont give you bullets or guns.
Carver decided that Gideon wasnt the monster he thought he was b/c he spared his life twice. i bought it.
The battle of the bush is being fought and won by team Mackey.
Of course she wasn't an actual character; real people - plus two horses and a wagon - don't suddenly materialise from nowhere in the middle of the desert. She is a surrealistic representation of the devil - hence her name on the back of the wagon, and that whole episode, the whole desert thing, is hallucinatory in nature.
share[deleted]
Like many art house films I've seen, this one switched from realism to symbolism. In the commentary, Brosnan points out the Indian by the pool of water is the first of the "Fellini-esque" characters. Houston is the other -- presumably, the Devil who, naturally, provides the two men with the means to kill each other. However, something inside the two men turns them from killers to pacifists. But exactly what it is is not clear (we're supposed to make something of the "war is over" dialog at the end). This is an anti-war film -- all it lacked was a intelligent lesson on war or humanity.
Huston is the devil offering them each the chance to kill the other, a chance for the devil to gain two more souls for hell. The two seem to realize it, that really they are not enemies to one another. The enemy is the devil, the desire to kill and exact revenge. This realization helps them to mature past it, forgive and move on.
share