What's in an ending?

I've been thinking a lot about two certain movies released in 2010. Though they are rather different, they share some similarities. Both are made by extremely talented directors, both are visually breath taking, both could fall in the mindf**k category and both star Leonardo DiCaprio. These movies are Martin Scorsese's Shutter Island and Christopher Nolan's Inception. The main item I would like to talk about is their much debated endings.

~If you haven't seen one or both of the movies, I will try not to spoil the endings, but I might give away a tiny tidbit or two, so please read at your own risk.~

The endings aren't similar at all and neither are the main story lines. But they got me thinking about a viewer's preference when watching a movie that builds to an ultimate climax. Both films put a lot of effort into their endings, but go about it in different ways. Inception, which was probably the most debated ending of any movie this year, went the ambiguous route and left the audience guessing and theorizing. Shutter Island leaves it all out on the table and explains everything. And I mean everything. Ben Kingsley's character even busts out a chalkboard to help in his explanation.

I should say that I thoroughly enjoyed both movies. They're both thumbs-up movies in my book, mostly because they're extremely well made.

When it comes to endings, it's not really about preferences to me. Both endings can work if they're done right. For instance, both Psycho (very good movie) and Vanilla Sky (very bad movie) have endings that need to be explained in detail. But in most cases, including Shutter Island, the technique kills the pace of the movie, though that's probably the point. You can be as mysterious and secretive as you like because you intend to slow it down later and explain everything.

When it comes to ambiguous endings, the trick is that most of them are actually completed endings in some sense. In Inception, Cobb (DiCaprio) feels the story is over. The audience is unsure of the ultimate outcome, and I think Cobb is too, but he doesn't care at that point. And that's why, though definitely ambiguous in the viewer's mind, it's not ambiguous in Cobb's mind.

Director Darren Aronofsky's last two movies are The Wrestler (2008) and Black Swan (2010). Both, like Inception, have ambiguous endings that likely aren't ambiguous to the lead characters. And look at 2007 Best Picture No Country for Old Men. That's another movie that had a highly debated ambiguous ending, but when you stop and think about it, it wasn't ambiguous at all to Tommy Lee Jones' character. His decision was made and he's living with it.

Now while I definitely did enjoy Shutter Island, after the 20-minute explanation at the end, the movie is over in all aspects. I wasn't thinking about it nearly as much as I thought about Inception or Black Swan. And I think that's why ambiguous endings work. They keep you talking, they keep you thinking. Though the story is wrapped up to some extent, it's certainly not drawn out on a chalkboard for you. I think most people would say they prefer the Shutter Island type ending because it's more satisfying, which is understandable. But in films, like any art form, I think the goal is to leave you with something. I was definitely on the edge of my seat during Shutter Island, but when it was over, I kind of didn't care anymore because there were no more secrets. With Inception, I was still on the edge of my seat after it was over and I think, for the most part, that's what I like about movies. A movie might be two hours long, but the good ones will live on much longer and eventually grow into something bigger and better.

The first image is Mark Ruffalo and Leonard DiCaprio in Shutter Island. The second photo is from Inception.