Dark City and the ambiguous ending.

Last updated on: August 30, 2008 at 10:17 pm by Peter T. Chattaway

Dark City and the ambiguous ending. 2008-08-30T22:17:00-07:00 Peter T. Chattaway

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I finally got around to watching the “director’s cut” of Dark City (1998; my article) a few days ago, and as is often the case with these things, I liked some of the changes and didn’t care all that much for some of the other changes. Maybe some day I’ll make a “viewer’s cut”, just for me, that keeps some of the old bits but includes some of the new bits.

The “director’s cut” is close enough to the previous version that I don’t feel a need to add much to what I have said about the film before. But one thing does jump out at me, namely the way the film’s portrayal of its protagonist, John Murdoch (Rufus Sewell), has become just a little more ambivalent.

In the original version of the film, Murdoch is basically a sort of everyman who wakes up with no memories of his past but discovers that he has a superpower of sorts, namely the ability to re-shape the physical world with nothing more than the power of his mind. Over the course of the film, Murdoch discovers that the world he lives in is a complete fake, created by similarly superpowered aliens who kidnapped a bunch of human beings some time ago and began playing with their memories and identities in order to see if there was anything consistent about these people — anything resembling a soul — that could not be reduced to the simple programming of their brains. By the end of the film, Murdoch has defeated the aliens, and he uses his superpower — which none of the other human beings seem to have — to re-create the world as he sees fit.

Now, in one sense, this would seem to be a happy ending. Murdoch has been trapped in a dark, dreary city for the entirety of the film, wishing that he could visit a bright and cheery place called Shell Beach — and at the end of the film, Murdoch finally gets to go there. However, the reason he gets to go there is because he has created Shell Beach for himself. And lingering over the “happy ending” is the question of whether Murdoch can ever truly be happy in a world that, apart from the personalities of its citizens, offers him no surprises, no otherness, so long as it remains a projection of his own wishes and desires. (Consider, too, that Shell Beach was an idea planted in Murdoch’s mind by the aliens; Murdoch may have conquered the aliens physically, by banishing them from his world, but their influence lingers on other levels.)

To put this another way, Murdoch is a man with the powers of a god, and while the film ends on a happy note — with Murdoch finally mastering his godlike powers — it does not take too much imagination to conceive of a time when these powers might go to his head and drive him mad, or make him insufferable, to say the least.

These are thoughts I have always entertained about the film, ever since I first saw it in the theatre over ten years ago. But it wasn’t until I saw the “director’s cut” this week that I appreciated the extent to which director Alex Proyas is, himself, aware of the potential downside of a man like Murdoch having these powers.

First, at the climax of the film, after Murdoch has vanquished the aliens, the “director’s cut” removes a line of dialogue. In the original version of the film, Murdoch says, “I’m gonna fix things,” and then he talks about the powers he has, and his intention to use them. In the new version, he simply talks about the powers he has, and his intention to use them; the film no longer cues us to see Murdoch’s re-creation of the world as an essentially positive thing — though of course, given how that re-creation is depicted, most of us will see it that way anyway.

Second, and more importantly, at an earlier point in the story, as Murdoch and Inspector Bumstead (William Hurt) are taking Dr. Schreber (Kiefer Sutherland) to the place where they hope to find Shell Beach, Murdoch grills Schreber for information, and at one point he leans over the seat in Bumstead’s car and uses his superpower to inflict physical pain on Schreber. In essence, Murdoch tortures Schreber, however briefly, and his action brings a look of shock to Bumstead’s face. Thus the film explicitly raises the possibility that Murdoch might abuse his powers.

So the “director’s cut” of this film is a little more complicated, morally, than the version which has been out there for the past ten years. And while I might quibble with some of the other changes that Proyas has made to the film, I have to say I rather like this one — if for no other reason than it seems to confirm my more ambiguous reading of the movie’s climax.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

August 29, 2008

Cylons and humans working together!

Next Post

September 1, 2008 The Church Behind Fireproof / How a Baptist church in Georgia became a movie-making mecca

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Anglican Planet Articles BC Christian News BC Report Bible Movies Bible Review Blog Books & Culture Campus Times CBC Radio Christianity Today ChristianWeek Essays Faith Today Festival Cinemas Guide Film Journals Georgia Straight Interviews MB Herald National Catholic Register Salvationist Today's Christian Two Chairs Ubyssey Uncategorized Vancouver Courier Vancouver Sun

Select a Month August 2025 April 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 May 2024 February 2024 December 2023 May 2023 March 2023 November 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 September 2019 July 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 April 2012 January 2012 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 November 2003 October 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 March 2002 January 2002 December 2001 November 2001 September 2001 August 2001 July 2001 June 2001 April 2001 March 2001 February 2001 December 2000 November 2000 October 2000 September 2000 August 2000 July 2000 June 2000 May 2000 April 2000 March 2000 January 2000 October 1999 August 1999 May 1999 April 1999 February 1999 January 1999 December 1998 November 1998 October 1998 August 1998 July 1998 June 1998 April 1998 March 1998 January 1998 November 1997 September 1997 July 1997 June 1997 April 1997 March 1997 February 1997 January 1997 December 1996 October 1996 September 1996 June 1996 March 1996 February 1996 January 1996 April 1995 November 1994 September 1994 September 1991

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

True or False: Job's three friends were named Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar.

Select your answer to see how you score.

FALSE TRUE