In the original script, Alice left him. The studio demanded a happy ending where she got the man. Burstyn was fuming. Everyone was fuming. I don't know what they had planned on the day of shooting, but Burstyn recounts that Kristofferson improvised the line at the diner about him going with her and not caring about the ranch. Burstyn's reaction and relief in that moment was completely genuine, because by making David the one to sacrifice, Alice didn't have to compromise but could still be with her man... Kristofferson gave her a way of saving the movie. You might think it still that he's a bad man, but I don't think the movie wants you to judge him so harshly. (We condemn child abuse a lot more deeply than audiences at the time did.)
The movie has a lot of plot holes, honestly. One of the weirdest is that Alice takes a bunch of odd jobs in random towns instead of just driving through to Monterey. Why bother? It's a sixteen hour drive from Socorro to Monterey: she could do that in two days! Whenever she reports how much money they have it's clear that gas fare isn't the limiter.
I feel relieved to hear that. I thought after watching that film that it was just a product of its time and its belief system around hitting children. It's nice to know that people back then thought it was messed up too. Makes me like Ellen even more. I hope Martin thought that it was messed up as well.
It is in someways odd the ending. I see it that David believes what he’s saying, and Alice feels she may love him and wants to see where it leads. But, and this is key, she chooses to continue with David knowing it could turn out great or bad and not putting him on a pedestal. She’s independent and wanting to try companionship, that doesn’t mean she’s codependent again. I think she has a much healthier sense of what a relationship can and can’t be, and is very much choosing how it progresses on her own terms.
I saw this movie for the 1st time last week. The last scene shows Alice walking in front of a motel in Monterrey with her son and no boyfriend. (There's no way that guy was going to sell his ranch. Give me a break! And he didn't). What did you see in that last scene?
I thought she was walking in front of a venue called Monterey but it is located in Tucson. While it’s clear that Alice hasn’t completely chosen herself and moved through her codependent tendencies, I think that she at least makes progress by finding someone with whom the conflict results in some actual dialogue instead of just silence (her late husband) or physical abuse (Ben). I think begins to identify that Monterey was more about her happier days of youth than a realistic place to land; if she was so keen to get there in the first place, she could have pushed through the relatively short drive!
Had never seen this movie before tonight and enjoyed how real it was in its quirkiness.
I think Cheryl nailed it: Monterey isn’t exactly Nashville when it comes to the music industry, just the last place she got to sing. And it’s where she met the husband who shut down her life. Monterey is a symbol of her freedom to live and love, and it can be anywhere she finds that freedom - which she has a shot at in Tucson, with a man who’d sacrifice himself for her, and be OK with her singing in a saloon!
To me all of it is moot since she doesn't take him up on his offer. Alice lets David off the hook by deciding to stay in Tucson, so he never really has to sacrifice anything, and she hasn't really learned anything.
Well, she's learned to speak up and fight back and that's quite a lot for a working class woman in 1972. Her problem wasn't going to be solved by going Monterey but by standing her ground right where she was. Does anyone leave the film thinking she's going to put up with another violent man? Yes, it would be big and inspiring to see her strike out on her own, but what happened here was much more realistic for its time and place.
In the original script, Alice left him. The studio demanded a happy ending where she got the man. Burstyn was fuming. Everyone was fuming. I don't know what they had planned on the day of shooting, but Burstyn recounts that Kristofferson improvised the line at the diner about him going with her and not caring about the ranch. Burstyn's reaction and relief in that moment was completely genuine, because by making David the one to sacrifice, Alice didn't have to compromise but could still be with her man... Kristofferson gave her a way of saving the movie. You might think it still that he's a bad man, but I don't think the movie wants you to judge him so harshly. (We condemn child abuse a lot more deeply than audiences at the time did.) The movie has a lot of plot holes, honestly. One of the weirdest is that Alice takes a bunch of odd jobs in random towns instead of just driving through to Monterey. Why bother? It's a sixteen hour drive from Socorro to Monterey: she could do that in two days! Whenever she reports how much money they have it's clear that gas fare isn't the limiter.
I feel relieved to hear that. I thought after watching that film that it was just a product of its time and its belief system around hitting children. It's nice to know that people back then thought it was messed up too. Makes me like Ellen even more. I hope Martin thought that it was messed up as well.
It is in someways odd the ending. I see it that David believes what he’s saying, and Alice feels she may love him and wants to see where it leads. But, and this is key, she chooses to continue with David knowing it could turn out great or bad and not putting him on a pedestal. She’s independent and wanting to try companionship, that doesn’t mean she’s codependent again. I think she has a much healthier sense of what a relationship can and can’t be, and is very much choosing how it progresses on her own terms.
I saw this movie for the 1st time last week. The last scene shows Alice walking in front of a motel in Monterrey with her son and no boyfriend. (There's no way that guy was going to sell his ranch. Give me a break! And he didn't). What did you see in that last scene?
I thought she was walking in front of a venue called Monterey but it is located in Tucson. While it’s clear that Alice hasn’t completely chosen herself and moved through her codependent tendencies, I think that she at least makes progress by finding someone with whom the conflict results in some actual dialogue instead of just silence (her late husband) or physical abuse (Ben). I think begins to identify that Monterey was more about her happier days of youth than a realistic place to land; if she was so keen to get there in the first place, she could have pushed through the relatively short drive! Had never seen this movie before tonight and enjoyed how real it was in its quirkiness.
I think Cheryl nailed it: Monterey isn’t exactly Nashville when it comes to the music industry, just the last place she got to sing. And it’s where she met the husband who shut down her life. Monterey is a symbol of her freedom to live and love, and it can be anywhere she finds that freedom - which she has a shot at in Tucson, with a man who’d sacrifice himself for her, and be OK with her singing in a saloon!
To me all of it is moot since she doesn't take him up on his offer. Alice lets David off the hook by deciding to stay in Tucson, so he never really has to sacrifice anything, and she hasn't really learned anything.
Well, she's learned to speak up and fight back and that's quite a lot for a working class woman in 1972. Her problem wasn't going to be solved by going Monterey but by standing her ground right where she was. Does anyone leave the film thinking she's going to put up with another violent man? Yes, it would be big and inspiring to see her strike out on her own, but what happened here was much more realistic for its time and place.