MovieChat Forums > John Dies at the End (2012) Discussion > So what's the point of the title? (SPOIL...

So what's the point of the title? (SPOILERS)

posted 12 years ago by maxwieseler
8 replies | jump to latest

After seeing the movie...what was the point of the title? He obviously didn't die :-) What a letdown haha

[–] dementa42 12 years ago

The point of the title is the irony (in the book) that comes of it at the end in a huge plot twist, but they completely removed it from the movie hence ruining the effect of the name. It was also one of the biggest plot points of the book and was completely omitted from the film. Basically by cutting out the mind blowing ending they completely ruined cleverness of the name.

Here's an explanation, but be warned, it includes spoilers from the book.

In the book people are being killed and replaced by this alien invasion. The entire book Dave has a body in his shed and doesn't know who's it is. At the end he finally sees the body and realizes it's his, so basically Dave has been replaced and is not really Dave anymore, hence the irony of the title. John doesn't die at the end, Dave does, and is replaced by a monster with his memories that looks and acts identical to him.

[–] hiperactivo_dg 12 years ago

Well, he doesn't exactly acts like him, one of the points John makes is that he's actually a nicer person than the original Dave. Which was cool because reading the book you do notice the change in attitude.

[–] Lunchbox-3 11 years ago

Saying that John dies and then having Dave die is not irony, it's misdirection. If John had been alive at the end but then reveal that the real John died and was replaced by an alien would be more fitting. Then the title would be a true statement.

[–] no_springs 12 years ago

Originally the book was released online as a short story, then expanded every year and then edited into a novel. It was available for free online for a few years before it was released as a hardback.

When the author started calling the series "John Dies at the End" only about a third of the current story was written. At that point the ending was when John died at the police station (and was later resuscitated.)

and no redemption, by the way..

[–] mattjasb37 12 years ago

my take from the film only, is that there is no "End" 'end', so in the "ENDE" he, and anyone will be dead, but that does not occur in real realty. so its a point to the 2013+ age audience that only the film ends, but the characters never do, or stay in that or any position. the movie has a lot of philosophical stuff on parallel worlds, past and future interferring with the present, what you expect tinges your perceptions, etc, so it is a purposeful way of screwing with your expectations in a cliche'd medium. i'd say that the source material is just a means at exploiting this aspect that the(any) film takes on by default.

[–] masterthes 11 years ago

I was thinking when the series is over, maybe John will die

[–] bagpiper-onnen 11 years ago

It makes a little bit more sense if you read the book.

So, John dies near the beginning of the story. There are supposedly several Johns in several universes, one of which was talking to Dave on the bratwurst. Another version of John replaces him. In the book

(spoilers)

It's DAVID that dies halfway through the book, only to be replaced by a perfect clone of him created by Korrok. The point of the title is that the otherworldly forces could write you out of existence at any moment, or replace you with an exact copy of yourself without your knowledge. John as we know him could have stopped existing on the last page and nobody would ever know. That's what the replacement axe metaphor at the beginning was alluding to, a scene that serves no purpose in the movie because there's no clone of Dave, meaning Dave's clone never kills his original.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]