I guess happy endings are in demand not only at Thai massage parlours...Director Baz Luhrman has given in to
studio pressure to change the ending of his film, Australia, so that the
character played by Hugh Jackman doesn’t die after all. Here’s a funny take on
it, from the Film Blog at Guardian.co.uk, written by Anne Billson:
“They've got to be kidding! Presumably
these guys have never heard of Titanic.
Obviously James Cameron
misjudged the ending there; Leonardo DiCaprio should
have clambered up on to that bit of flotsam so that he and Kate Winslet could shelve
their class differences, have lots of kids and live happily ever after. Maybe
that would have increased the box office takings.
What about the other films on Luhrmann's
CV? Romeo + Juliet? Pah! Clearly, that Shakespeare chap didn't
have a clue. Wouldn't the story have been more memorable if, say, Leonardo had
opted for a less lethal potion, so that Claire Danes could have pulled him back
from the brink with the defilibrator she'd thoughtfully stowed in her baggage?
Dry eyes all round! Or how about Moulin Rouge?
No need for Kidman to die in that - she only had TB, after all. Surely Ewan McGregor could have
rustled up a last-minute cure, or offered one of his own lungs for transplant?
But why stop there? Let's face it: Casablanca would have lingered far longer in audiences' minds had Humphrey Bogart knocked Paul Henreid unconscious and hopped on that plane with Ingrid Bergman, instead of sacrificing personal happiness for the greater good. Gone With the Wind might have increased its frankly rather pathetic box office takings if Clark Gable had said, ‘My dear, I do give a damn. Shall we try it one more time?’”
>>>
To be honest, the trailer for “Australia” doesn’t make me want to see it, happy ending or not—but maybe this is one of those rare times when the film is better than the trailer?
