MovieChat Forums > Nymphomaniac: Vol. II (2014) Discussion > Perfect Ending, there is a Seligman in e...

Perfect Ending, there is a Seligman in every guy

posted 11 years ago by noam-mimon-441-174086
45 replies | jump to latest

Although we don't have any details about Mr. Seligman, we know enough about him to understand what type of person he is. As a guy, I actually believe that all man have some form of Seligmanism in them. Most of us are sincere but sometimes our sexual desires overpower us.

However, this is a very extreem scenario, in which Mr. Seligman actually convinced himself that he is a-sexual in order not to be confronted with the fact that he is a loner disparately yearning for human contact (just look at his living conditions and the fact that he is still a virgin at age 65). Instead he hides from humanity behind his books and intellectuality.

Joe is his complete opposite. She has lived life so hard that her lady parts don't even work anymore. This explains Mr. Seligman's odd and out of place metaphors, that he uses to relate to her story as he really can't.

For the first time in his live, he finely has the urge and the courage to act on his sexual desires because of the close connection they forced. However, without any experience in human contact he seriously lacks the social skills on how to approach a girl in such a situation.

Joe is of course furious. Not only did he try raping her when she was most vulnerable, but she also feels extremely betrayed by the first person she actually trusted as a friend, proving to her that society doesn't understand her.

In reality Mr. Seligman's sexual and social skills are still stuck on "teenager" level, something he was able to hide with his intellectuality. Again the opposite, Joe's ration thinking is limited expecting a total stranger to truly care for her. At the end of the day, they simply didn't understand each other like most of us in life and in this case the result was pretty deadly.

[–] Daphoenyx 10 years ago

I couldn't have said it better. The movie was ok, but this ending made it awesome in my opinion. Perfectly logical and plausible to me. Thanks for sharing this view wich is also mine.

[–] ColeHeideman 10 years ago

Although this isn't a horrible theory, it doesn't really ground itself in the events of the movie very well. I think there's a pretty clear indication that Seligman truly is asexual, from his lifestyle to the way he reacts to the story. Remember that Joe is so familiar with sexuality that she can tell when a man is excited by the stories she tells.
Also, in his attempted rape, seligman is not aroused at all. He even inserts his flaccid penis inside her in a misguided attempt to arouse himself.

[–] TheMichael 10 years ago

That's a wonderful theory, j205724. I think there's something powerful and interesting in not just the final scenes, but the choice to cut to black too. It takes away very important evidence of what was going through Seligman's mind. We're left to our imagination, which isn't as pretentious as it sounds, because Seligman himself had to imagine Joe's story as it was being told to him. He wasn't there in Joe's life. He doesn't know how things really looked. So we're put in Seligman's situation where we're only given an audio description and not a visual one.

I find there's a few opinions about the ending here that I think are all plausible and important to consider. The first thought that came to my mind when I saw the ending was Joe's quote about human quality can be described as hypocrisy. Joe and Seligman clearly represented 2 sides of human nature. If Seligman didn't do something hypocritical then his and Joe's moment together wouldn't be complete. What Seligman did was heartbreaking, not just getting close to rape but betraying Joe's trust. But what came to my mind first about the scene wasn't that Seligman would force himself on Joe if she didn't shoot him. It didn't look like he was about to force her. Joe had a pretty good long moment to realize what was happening. I think Joe shot Seligman not because of what he was doing but because she may have felt guilty. Seligman wouldn't have the urge if Joe hadn't came into his life and opened his need for sexual release. Joe and Seligman were pure mind sets, free of hypocrisy. Seligman wasn't a hypocrite until he met Joe. Joe felt guilty of this and shot him, and they both become hypocrites in the end. Seligman turned hypocrite because of the obvious reasons, and Joe turned hypocrite because of her sentimental attachment to Seligman that influenced her to kill him instead of letting him have his way with her.

[–] ericmann 10 years ago

I like this discussion of the ending more than the ending itself. It felt to me like a first year film school 'no idea how to finish my screenplay' kind of ending. Especially the cut to black and the continued audio of the black screen. At the very best this is a first film kind of ending, and not one that a director of Von Trier's level should employ. Amateurish is probably the best to describe my feelings.

[–] gorbals406 9 years ago

I must admit that I agree with you on the amateurish ending.

After having read all of the posters' theories on why Joe shot him, I find that most commenters have latched on to her nymphomania as being some kind of "valid" reason for her shooting him. Remember, this was the same woman who had only a few hours earlier tried to shoot her ex-husband and would presumably have continued on with killing P. She didn't kill Seligman because she was a nymphomaniac, she killed him because she had no moral compass and was a spiteful/vengeful bitch.

I find the almost universal condemnation of his stupidly awkward (first-time) attempt at seduction as rape coupled with the almost universal idea of her nymphomania as an excuse for an act of murder downright shameful. She was as much of a "ditch pig" as she was a nymphomaniac. Her sexuality may have been defined by her nymphomania, but her (absolute lack of) morality wasn't.

[–] elisabethskoven 9 years ago

He started with the ending and then wrote the screenplay according to Stellan Skarsgard. It's a provative ending, but it's very thought out and it contains the movies message. We might disagree and dislike it, but it was deliberate.

[–] Sfondi 10 years ago

I felt like the ending was a but tacked on just for shock value, but the posters explaining here do make it make more sense. But upon initial view, I aas thinking "No.. This did not just happen"

[–] estocade 10 years ago

That is exactly how I understood it. The story about a scorpion and a frog pops into mind.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Dejay 9 years ago

I agree that it's an interesting ending but I don't think it's as simple as you point out. I wrote some ideas here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2382009/board/nest/246987219?d=247758526#247758526

[–] bramstoker77 9 years ago

Ya think?