MovieChat Forums > Outlaw (2007) Discussion > The end of the film...

The end of the film...

posted 17 years ago by Favri
5 replies | jump to latest

Was it just me, or was the ending of this movie incoherent with the rest of the plot, the characters and the general sense of the film?
First they start firing away at the police, which I don't think was in line with what they set out to do from the start but maybe they realised it was a set up and this was their only way out alive. Then Sean Bean pointlessly walks into the line of fire and gets drilled, for no reason whatsoever, but ok... Then the barrister guy gives up, which would have been fine considering their "leader" died, but I thought was completely incoherent with what had just happened. Why would he surrender when he knows it was a set up and they'll kill him anyway? And then, just to messily tie things up, Danny Dyer manages to escape the cops, hide out long enough to get all cleaned up, find the Mob boss (I'm guessing by interrogating his colleague? That would have been nice to see no? A nice triple crossing by Dyer's work mate? But nooo....) and just pop him with no one else around to protect the guy.
I thought this movie had great potential, a great idea behind it, something many people think but no one does anything about, the power and danger that can come with an idea, it had great performances from Bean, Dyer and the rest of the leading/supporting cast. I also feel forced to say that the last third of the film seems to have been rushed and not given much thought. After a great build up the climax of the movie breaks up into too many good ideas (the crazy security guy getting shot, the good cop getting killed, the bad guy left alive...) none of which are dealt with properly. What we are left with is an unsatisfactory chaotic round up of all the events following their decision to become improvised vigilantes, and no proper ending. A cliff hanger ending would have been better than that.

A question that sometimes drives me hazy: am I or the others crazy? - A.Einstein

[–] mask_or_face 17 years ago

I personally think that they realised that a) it was a setup, b) their friend (bob hoskins) was murdered, and c) the only way for the mobsters house to be used in the trap/setup would be if he was working WITH the police. I think, thus they figured that the police were corrupt and working for, or with, the mobster. So turning and shooting at the police in the end was, in a way, a symbol of them turning their backs on the government which no longer serves the public with justice. When the guy is shot in the forest in cold blood by the police officer, that is just further re-iteration of how corrupt these police have become, and how perverted the government's sense of 'justice' is.

Danny Dyer, I am assuming, realised that the only person who could make the tape (that tape playing upstairs in the house at the end) was someone who was AT the meeting. And the only person missing, who was AT the meeting (apart from the guy Sean Bean shot in the kneecap) was his work mate. So I think he associated those two and realised that he was sold out. So he followed his workmate, who led him to the Mobster.

In a way, it is poor storytelling, but I think the movie did not fail in it's aim to show how the course of justice can be so perverted that sometimes justice must be dealt personally.

[–] jrfsy 17 years ago

''I personally think that they realised that a) it was a setup, b) their friend (bob hoskins) was murdered, and c) the only way for the mobsters house to be used in the trap/setup would be if he was working WITH the police.''

They already knew about Hoskins being murdered, due to the tv screen, so one has to assume the news was spread. This is an interesting take on the film. I also wondered why there was a tape playing. There would have been no need to set them up in this way, so as you said, bad storytelling.

''When the guy is shot in the forest in cold blood by the police officer, that is just further re-iteration of how corrupt these police have become, and how perverted the government's sense of 'justice' is.''

Yes, but another take on this is that the alternative to justice is yet another form of corruption, that is, the 'Outlaws; not getting on and having different verions of the truth.

SPOILER (as if the subject didn't imply this):

The ending, as Hollywood-like as it was, did seem to work for me, although on a far more symbolic level,. which was to do with Dyer overcoming his inner demons. I would personally have preferred the film to have finished on the three guys walking in different directions, which would have suggested there is no suitable alternative to the current system of justice. Or at least after the car scene where Dyer relived the part of his dream where the chavs pulled up to him. This would have reinforced the inner demon motto without rubbing it patronisingly in the viewer's face in an ending which is quite frankly hard to swallow (why wasn't he chased down in the woods - he's hardly a trained assassin...)

[–] ryankent1984 16 years ago

mask_or_face: Danny Dyer's workmate didn't make the tape. Bob Hoskins was recording the conversations as he had a wire on Munroe at that time. I'm assuming he didn't get rid of the tapes before he was killed so they were either taken by the police or by Furlong after he'd assassinated him (and then given to Manning who gave it to Sgt. Grieves).

[–] Hazzer_99 16 years ago

I've just written like three other long-assed replies on three other posts against people being totaly muppets so I can't be bothered to go into length here, I just want to basically say that I think you've hit the nail on the head. The ending totally failed it.

Go to the loo, 'cause all the *beep*'s coming out your mouth instead of your a-hole...

[–] CaptRhodes666 13 years ago

I was really enjoying the movie till the ending came on plus why didnt sean bean confront the wife or at least the guy she was cheating on,kinnda annoyed me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkpbSD5sOj8 I'm running this monkey farm now frankenstein