Cinderella always marries the prince. Snow White is always awoken by that kiss. Two out of three pigs loose their homes when the wolf stops by.
These are stories we can recite by heart. We know how they begin, how they end, and rely on them to be the same each time we hear them.
It's a comfort thing, the archiving, and sharing of the story the way we know, and love it. It would be a bit unnerving if in another version of the story those three little pig hunted down, and ate the wolf, or Snow White fell for Doc instead of the prince. Unnerving, and not comfortable at all.
So, what's the heck is Hollywood trying to accomplish with "alternate endings" to movies? There have been many movies released in recent years with an alternate ending. If you don't like how it ended, you can change it, and watch another ending. Feel satisfied? No, not really. The original story does stay with you, and anything else is merely a curiosity.
The 2011 movie "Tower Heist", starring Ben Stiller, and Eddie Murphy has been released on DVD, and Blue Ray with two alternate endings.
Why? The endings may have been discussed early in the films production, but abandoned for one reason, or another. So why think to include them on the release?
I think it might be an example of trying to please everyone, but maybe it's something deeper going on. The director may want to share all of his work, and not leave anything hidden away on some shelf, and never be seen again.
Ego may just have a bit to do with it, too.
I don't think we need to make anymore choices than we need to. For most of us, we are one step away from not remembering where we are at any given moment due to living in a modern, busy world. Adding to the confusion is something to avoid, at least for me. I have trouble remembering how yesterday ended, never mind the several endings to one movie.
A true cinema-phile would cherish the alternative endings just as they enjoy the version with the director, and cast commenting on the film as it plays. For people with a normal attention span this version may be fine, but then, there's me, with an attention span the length of a...
...Oooo, look, a rainbow!
Sorry. See what I mean?
I did get to thinking about this whole thing about supplying different versions of something for those that would prefer column "A", and not column "B". It came to me that it would be a great idea if policies, actions, new projects, and such, that are initiated by the town, came with alternate endings, or work-arounds. Something like, if the copper gutter system on the restored town hall proved to be historically nice, but caused the towns residents cough up a hairball in fiscal protest, aluminum could then be substituted without loosing a dime, or time wasted by arguing. Alternate ending. Happy ending.
In the local scenario it would be less about ego, and more about something to please most everyone. That could still be accomplished without alternate endings, if more alternatives were shared during the process, and each actions pros and cons were then shared in detail before coming to a town vote. Not to say that this isn't done to some extent already, but it would be done all the time instead of promoting one particular scenario to us. Let all decide, not the few. The "good, better, best" of each one would be explained. An informed choice could then be made. No more surprises.
Then, when all the alternate "beginnings, and in-the-middles" are shared, and explained in detail to all, and choices are made from the best of all the information, then do-overs (local alternate endings) would, hopefully, not be needed to be done.
And, we all lived happily ever after.
Yup. You are correct. Take the CPC/CPA funds, for instance. How many people do you suppose really understood that the things "bought" with the surtax money they paid (a tax upon a tax) were bought by borrowing, which, at this point, has left them with a $4.million dollar debt still needing to be paid with their tax upon a tax money. Surprise! We brought in $5 million dollars and borrowed the $4.3 million on top of that. A different ending to that story would be nice.
ReplyDeleteHow many voters will vote to repeal the CPA if they know that by repealing the CPA the effect they will be voting to INCREASE not DECREASE their taxes? Democracy works if the voters are educated about the issues they are voting on.
ReplyDeleteThe CPA is a circumvention of Proposition 2 1/2. It RAISED the amount we can be taxed by implementing a surtax on a tax! It's just another way to spend for more things we don't need, like SLATE roofs, windows which are NOT insulated because someone thinks that the only way you can insulate windows is too take way their old fashioned look, and to buy up more land which we just don't need. It has done very little about affordable housing. We don't need more ball fields at this time. It appears the only place where there is any appreciable amount of money left in the CPA coffers is in affordable housing. We were only required to set aside a measly 10% of CPA funds for that, and there is still money there. The Habitat house is a good thing, but there is only one house, CPA didn't put that much into it, and there have been many fund raisers for it. As I said, we have spent very little on anything we need. We brought in a little over $5 million, and owe $4.3 million - with payments due until the year 2030.
ReplyDeleteWould anyone care to list here the things we really needed which we bought with the approximately $9.5 million?????