Tuesday, February 11, 2014
Shiny, Happy People
The concluding scene of The Last Laugh depicts the incredible gluttony and generosity of the unnamed, demoted doorman after he miraculously inherits a fortune from a dying American millionaire. He feasts on mounds of food, eating caviar as if it were candy and drinking champagne as if it were water. A tracking shot of the "spread" emphasizes the opulence and indulgence of our hero. What is the point of this ending? Is is a happy ending or a parody of a happy ending? Is this supposed to be objective reality or a fantasy? Is this a cynical commercial ploy or is there deeper significance to the ending?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think the intent, on the part of the production company, is to create a happier ending that will leave audiences feeling happy and pleased. It's hard for people, especially people in post war-Germany, to want to see a film that could so blatantly remind them of their own struggles. In stead, the film company believed, creating a fantasy-esque ending that leaves the main character in a good position might be more commercially successful.
ReplyDeleteBut I think the director, in at least a few small ways, tried to create an ending that still kept true to his message of defeatism and depression. The ending of the film depicts an insane show of wealth, almost to a level that feels ridiculous. With very little explanation, other than the half-baked description of the rich man's death, the doorman suddenly becomes one of the wealthiest people in his town. A totally changed man, his previous concerns have completely dissipated, and he now seems to not have a care in the world.
But that is the problem. The scene is so ridiculous that it could in fact be the director's way to still ensure his message carries through. That these sort of things, random and unexplained changes in fate, don't happen in real life. That they're only reserved for the movies. And if this were a real story, based on reality, none of this would have happened. I don't know if that's what audiences took away from the movie, but it's sort of scary warning that endings like this only happen in works of fiction.
In “The Last Laugh”, the German Expressionist methods of distortion and exaggeration hold true even until the last scene. The final scene is a complete parody of happiness that could never be. The fantastical scene sheds a final negative light on the doorman by portraying him as greedy, overindulgent, and voracious. He was a hardworking man throughout his career as the doorman but did not make extravagant sums of money. When he falls to the bottom of the social hierarchy through the job of cleaning the bathrooms, he suddenly gets rich. By random happenstance, he becomes a millionaire by being in the right place at the right time. This is a statement that hard work does not always come with rewards for those who deserve it, but rather money can be acquired by luck and laziness. By serving the doorman ridiculous amounts of delicacies, treats, and libations, his sudden fortune is relished. While he appears happy, one could argue that the money he won will not give him eternal happiness. Living in such an indulgent way, he will not have happiness for long. Though he is generous to his friend who dines with him, others will probably want a share in his fortune. Based on knowledge from other movies and pieces of literature examining the impact of great sums of money on a person, true happiness will be transitory. In “The Great Gatsby,” one of the many themes examined is decadence. Gatsby came upon his money mysteriously, as did the doorman. He enjoys his wealth by throwing excessive parties and events. As in the Gatsby book and films, this last scene of “The Last Laugh” demonstrates that money only creates gluttony and short-lived happiness. A fantastical example of wealth’s effects, this ending parodies true, permanent happiness and success that is earned from hard work.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Julia's previous post. I think in no way could this alternate ending be "a happier ending that will leave audiences feeling happy and pleased. It's hard for people, especially people in post war-Germany, to want to see a film that could so blatantly remind them of their own struggles. Instead, the film company believed, creating a fantasy-esque ending that leaves the main character in a good position might be more commercially successful." How could this ending even be happy after the sole intertitle saying this man has nothing to live for any more? I believe that this is also a cynical interpretation and social commentary on wealth, like the rest of the movie but in a different light. I think it was intended to make the people laugh, although upon any thought, would make them angry. This was a man who cleaned the bathroom and by random chance, won the lottery. This would never happen in real life, let alone a post-war Germany. This last scene is one of fantasy, like other Hollywood films. It is something that rarely, if ever, occurs and something that we all want yet do we deserve it? It reminds me of many other Hollywood films, where all of the bad villains end up punished or in jail and all of the good guys get rewarded somehow in the end. That idea and the one is The Last Laugh are outrageous fantasies that are sadly impossible in this world.
ReplyDeleteF. W. Murnau does an amazing job of directing The Last Laugh and making it a German expressionist movie. A huge part of the German expressionist movement was exaggeration, and the end of The Last Laugh is a great example of this. The alternate ending shows the doorman becoming filthy rich and using his money for very expensive things. It is almost as if he is basking in the glory of being wealthy. I believe that the point of this ending is to provide a happy ending for the viewers. Like Elanna said many people viewing the film were from post war Germany. After going through a war, ending a movie on a sad note would not please the viewers. This is definitely a parody of a happy ending because it is so far fetched. I guess this is okay because a part of German expressionism was exaggeration so F.W. Murnau achieves German expressionism but at the same time he is creating a false reality for the viewers. The ending of the film could be a fantasy or an objective reality. Personally, I think it depends on the viewers. Because if a viewer wanted to believe that the end of the movie could actually happen then that is up to them. It’s all about interpretation. I do not believe that there is a deeper meaning to the alternate ending. I think that it was important to end a movie on a happy note especially during the post war. Another reason I don’t believe that the film has a deeper meaning is because of how silly it is. If it had a deeper meaning I would think that it would be a little more serious.
ReplyDeleteThe ending of The Last Laugh is used to portray how he has not changed as a person despite gaining a tremendous amount of money. At the conclusion of the film, the doorman orders an excessive amount of food for the night guard and himself. They have more food than they could possibly eat. His gluttony symbolizes that despite his immense wealth, he still is not able to fill the void in his life left by loosing his job as a doorman. He is eating expensive food merely because he is able to, but the food itself, despite its quality, is really just a coping mechanism. Prior to being demoted, he loves his job and it brings great pride to him and his family. It was not an easy job and it did not pay well so it was simply what he enjoyed. Upon becoming rich, he was no longer bound by many social constraints and could essentially do anything he wanted. Unfortunately, he is still unable to work as a doorman due to his frailty. He may attribute his frailty to the poor food quality of his meals due to his low salary. Therefore, his actions may also be an attempt to eat lots of high quality food in order to improve his physical wellness in an attempt to return to his dream job. The doorman is even eating at the same hotel were he worked. While some level of retribution is expected against the man who demoted him, it is equally likely that it symbolizes his unwillingness to leave his job by making an attempt to stay near it. In the final scene, the doorman and the night watchman leave the hotel with a man that walks up to them. This man is shooed away by the new doorman, but the protagonist allows him to stay. His actions indicate that despite not still being the doorman, he still aims to be in control of the entrance to the hotel. The conclusion of The Last Laugh portrays the dichotomy between the happiness gained through being rich and the crushing defeat of still being unable to fully do what he loves.
ReplyDelete"The Last Laugh" carries such curious connotations because of the dumbed down dispute that took place during production. As we know, Murnau had an idea for an ending to his film while the producers had another, very different finale in mind. It is for this reason that we are given the only intertitle of the film in between the endings. Murnau's preferred ending is designed to leave the audience with bitter, mentally-stimulating thoughts about Industrialization in Germany and its effects on the changing generations. In my opinion, Murnau uses the doorman to evidence the saying, "Out with the old, in with the new" and its connection to German Industrialization. His defeatist ending makes his stance clear; however, what really amplifies his opinion is the satirical second ending that he was forced to add. While it checks off all of the producer's requirements, Murnau uses the ending that he once opposed to expose the glamorized culture that German society had become. Murnau's second ending is dominated by Emil Jannings' mockery of the wealthy. The manner in which the doorman fell into his wealth mocks the Industrialist culture, showing that hard work and dedication has no actual effect in someone's journey, instead dumb luck will be the only aid in the romanticized culture. Murnau's cynicism develops his deeper, more profound opinions on Industrialization.
ReplyDeleteI think that there is a deeper meaning to this ending with the movie the "Last Laugh". We saw a lot of scenes in this movie of the doorman being depressed and him covering up his real emotions. In one of the earlier scenes we see him walking tall from his job, with his chest out as if he is the town's hero as the locals take their hats off to him. Soon after that we see a scene of him by himself struggling to walk up his own flight of stairs even though this is a simple task. This is brilliant of Munrau to make these scenes parallel, the contrast between these scenes highlights the fact that the doorman has been lying to himself this entire time. He tries to act as if he is still young but in reality he is not. He thinks he is still in shape and that he can still handle the task of a young doorman but he cannot. This is why him enjoying the food is a happy ending. The scene depicts a man being comfortable in his own skin by gorging in the food as if he is a pig. I am pretty sure the doorman would have not devoured all that food in one of the earlier scenes considering the fact that he is insecure about himself. The doorman can now live without putting a front for people.
ReplyDeleteIn relation to the rest of the film, the Last Laugh, the alternate rags to riches ending seems very out of place. The film, as part of the expressionist movement, is not made to have a happy ending that will leave the audience with any closure, hence the distorted nature of the movement. Thus, the ending to this film is out of place because it ends the story of our doorman on a high note where all who have previously wronged him are now left to think on their sins. The point of the ending seems to be to indeed mock the absurdity of a truly glorious and happy ending which would seem all but impossible in the time. Divine intervention alone, or rather that of heavenly rich millionaire, could change the doorman’s fate. Following the theme of distortion and leaving the audience to think about the film, this ending seems to do just the opposite of that. However, an audience may pick up on the fact that this ending does not seem realistic in comparison to the rest of the film and resultantly may realize that this is parody. The fantasy of a happy ending during the German expressionist movement can only be that, a fantasy, because of how heavily the movement delves into the world of poverty and human tragedy. Unless this ending is acting as an apology for the dark nature of the film, which seems unlikely with the precision of the rest of the film, the ending is meant to be a parody to the good life which significantly unachievable in a down trodden world in the German Expressionist movement.
ReplyDeleteThe final scene of “The Last Laugh” is probably the most interesting scene in the entire film. This partly stems that the scene did not originally exist until the producers convinced the director that the movie was too depressing. So in a complete parody of a traditional happy ending, the doorman’s life completely turns around. The doorman goes from being a complete emotional wreck after being demoted, to a happy member of the elite upper class. He was completely ousted from his community after losing his position, he was mentally crushed and seemingly on the verge of suicide. However, this all changes when a rich relative, that hasn’t been mentioned at all even a little throughout the entire film, dies and leaves his entire estate to the unnamed doorman. However, there is some redeemable content in this choice of ending. It allows for some interesting commentary on the upper class. By using the death of a rich unheard of before character over seas as the means of the doorman’s own fortune, it shows how wealth is sometimes unearned, but completely random. The concept that only the hard working, intelligent and opportunistic are the ones who can acquire wealth is completely shattered in this farcical adaptation of the rich. It also dispels the notion that the upper class is “classier” than lower classes. The doorman continuously eats for a solid 10 minutes of film time, and he is not very good at eating. While the final scene is extremely farcical, it serves as very well presented commentary
ReplyDeleteI see the (reportedly) studio-mandated ending as less of a real conclusion to the story and more of a parody of one, a gentle mocking of those who cannot bear to see the protagonist suffer so. The final scene of the "director's cut" is a downer, but it is a fitting, honest ending to a film that chronicles a man's fall from grace. It shows how aging is inevitable, and that even a revered and important man can be conquered by the darkest miseries. However, by adding on this extra scene, the film veers away from the real world and into a far more illogical one, where fortune always favors the gentle and good-hearted. Indeed, the inter-title itself fully acknowledges this jarring shift in tone, deeming the finale to be “improbable”, and claiming that it only exists because “the author took pity on [the protagonist]”. This obvious sense of self-awareness leads me to believe that Murnau wanted to construct his new ending in a way that had some fun with the folks who demanded it. He wants them to see that the “real” ending is the only appropriate one for his film, and that any sudden change in fortune only compromises the message. Thus, he goes all out, portraying the final scene as an exaggerated cartoon that offers closure to the story, but is detached from the rest of the narrative enough so that viewers can disregard it if they choose. It doesn’t seem as though Murnau is chastising the studio, but rather, poking fun at their tendency to be overly sympathetic and idealistic. In this way, the ending actually gives Murnau himself the last laugh.
ReplyDeleteThis alternate ending is more of a parody of a happy ending rather than a true happy ending. This extra scene at the end serves to create comfort in the viewers, rather than serve a critical role in the film. The ending is so far-fetched and so unbelievable that it is not a real fairy-tale like happy ending. When the viewer learns that the doorman inherits the fortune of a millionaire who died in his arms, it is almost comical how unrealistic this situation is. After the doorman does inherit the money and is seen feasting on the caviar, the champagne, and the mounds of food, it is just serving the purpose of mocking the upper class. When the ex-doorman is working in the bathroom, many people treat him without any respect just because they believe they are superior to the bathroom attendant. The ex-doorman is clearly very distraught over this, which is why it is almost ironic that he acts the same way when he becomes wealthy and has more power than the hotel workers. He feels it is unnecessary to eat regular amounts of food, and practically boasts about his excessive wealth. Therefore, this final scene adds to the social message that money often can change people’s personalities, for the better or, in the doorman’s case, for the worse. He used to be a very innocent, victimized man by the hotel staff and hotel guests, but then basically turns into this wasteful creature who acts as if everyone were inferior to him. This sudden change of events therefore makes this ending more of a parody rather than a true happy ending, and also is very unrealistic, making it more of a fantasy than a believable reality.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThe film: The last Laugh, is about a doorman which works for the Atlanta Hotel who is very passionate and devoted to his job. Unfortunately to a turn of events, the doorman eventually is demoted from his prized occupation to being a bathroom attendant for hotel guests. Throughout the entire movie, the doorman ultimately endures the struggles of losing his job and having to deal with people who do not respect him because he loses his job. However the director of the film F.W. Muranu, decides to film an alternate ending because some viewers thought the original ending was saddening and ultimately did not end the film on a good note. Muranu creates an ending where the doorman becomes rich and successful through luck. I solely believe this new ending Muranu creates is a parody of a happy ending. Throughout the film, the doorman only went through hardships and endured struggles pertaining to his job. It would only be logical for viewers to think the ending of the film would be disappointing and saddening, not only based on the events which occurred in the doorman's life, but also because the film is filmed during the German Expressionism era. Though through luck, the doorman all of sudden becomes a successful man flaunting his wealth, by spending it excessively on large amounts of food. Muranu also clearly creates a fantasy of the doorman by having him become rich. Muranu creates a fantasy in which would only occur in film and not in reality. No one in the modern world, let alone during 1915, would obtain millions of dollars through someone dying in their arms and become a millionaire overnight. Through this, Muranu creates a fantasy to show how even though the doorman's life is tragic at first, the doorman becomes lucky and gains enormous amounts of wealth, which would not have been possible during the German Expressionism era in 1915.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the studio ending of The Last Laugh is a small parody of a stereotypical happy ending. To me the director ending, however depressing was a more truthful end to the film. The first ending showed how age affects one’s ability to function in life and how quickly one’s life can fall apart. Though this ending is very depressing and leaves the viewer with a negative outlook on the movie it is much more realistic than the second ending. All of the elements that need to come in line for the second ending to happen are uncountable. The face that the American millionaire had a will stating whoever he died with got all of his money is almost laughable. The ending portrayed that the lazy and lucky are the ones who are able to succeed in life. Since the main character was not able to become rich throughout his hardworking career as a doorman; however he is able to achieve prosperity by just being lucky and standing in a bathroom. The last scene where the former doorman is seen eating his mind out at the hotel he worked out just a few hours ago shows how quickly one can forget his former life. As soon as the former doorman became rich he transformed into the type of person he once served just a few days ago. The studio ending did the job it intended to, the movie now ended on a high note. The viewer though is left feeling cheated for it is obvious that the action that took place would never happen in real life.
I personally really did not like the ending of The Last Laugh. German expressionism is supposed be about showing what is really going on rather than fake happy endings. The last scene was random and didn’t fit with the rest of the film. The rest of the film was very true to the negative things that happen in everyone’s life. Most people will get knocked down a peg in the life, will get made fun of, and will have age sneak up on them rudely. This character created though the beginning of the film was relatable and gave the audience someone to sympathize with. The character created in the last 15 minutes of the film simply doesn’t exist. Becoming wealthy in such absurd circumstances is a situation that no one has been through. The Doorman becomes very difficult to relate with anymore with the camera work. In contrast to the rest of the movie, which has almost a just a montage of close-ups, this short part of the film is mostly conversational shots and doesn’t show the audience all that much of the Doorman’s face. Because of these points, it must have been a parody happy ending making fun of all of the neoclassical art that makes things seem pleasant without any of the darkness that is just a part of life. The ending to this film is a fantasy ending. It is out of place and over the top. It would have been a better film if the ending hadn’t made the commercial cut.
ReplyDeleteI believe the purpose of this ending is to relieve the audience. I think it was intended to balance out the tragedy of the movie prior to it to reach a sort of equilibrium of the viewers' emotions. Though it may seem as a parody happy ending for the obvious over-the-top factor it has, I believe it is a happy ending. The ending feels like it was put in last minute. It has no flow, and it left me confused because of the two radically different stories. There is an inter title, however this does not compensate for the shift of story. This is why I have come to the conclusion that this happy ending is somewhat of a dream. Not necessarily a parody because it is not supposed to exaggerate anything, but it is a dream in that it is improbable. It seems as though it is a fantasy in the way that everything is perfect; he eats all the food he wants, he lathers up spoon-fulls of caviar on all his food, and he is served desserts galore. As stated by Dr. Ialacci this ending was put on by the production company to attempt to change the whole meaning of the film, however in my honest opinion it did not do such things. Adding something to the end would need the audience to view the entire movie over again to see it in a different light. Either this option or putting something at the beginning of the movie would change the meaning of the film.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe point of the ending in The Last Laugh is to act more like a parody than just a typical happy ending. Not many people inherit this amount of money from a total stranger, but life may end up being like how the Doorman ended up being right before the money came. I think the director purposefully made it into a parody because he did not want it to end with this happy ending but the studio insisted on it so it. He made it show that this part of life does not happen to people, but the tragedy the Doorman did face happens everyday to people. Most people don’t inherit a large sum of money, but instead have to work hard so they can have some of the luxuries the Doorman has during this scene and he does not appreciate them. He eats so much caviar and would never have been able to afford it beforehand and this shows how freely people will spend money if they have it
ReplyDeleteSomething else I caught onto about the ending is that the money came from an American and America has always been thought of as the place to prosper because of the American Dream. They are showing how you may not be able to follow your dreams in Europe, but America can help you prosper and live the life you always wanted.
ReplyDeleteIt's clear that the theatrical ending for "The Last Laugh" is the director's way of making fun of the studio asking him to create a happy ending, making it so preposterous that it's clear he's trying to create a farce of a happy ending, knowing that he would be able to slip it by the production staff but also adding in the fact that the REAL ending had already occurred. It was a clever ploy to get the film released but also keep the same message. The ending to “The Last Laugh” is also, in its own way, a part of German expressionism, used often to make satirical accusations towards society and its ridiculous standards. How likely is it that a complete stranger writes in his will that his entire fortune will go to the man who dies in his arms? While it isn’t as dark and depressing as the protagonists’ sauntering through the halls like a ghost, it makes fun of the term “happy ending” and shows that the ending that he decided to add was completely preposterous and unachievable. To add icing on his farfetched cake, the protagonist shares his fortune with the hotel guard, a man he just met, as the movie comes to a close.