Discuss Paris, Texas
Discuss → Movies → Paris, Texas → General
What are we invited to think of the ending? *spoilers*
posted by FergooseSTAFFMOD on June 8, 2021 at 5:04 PM
I mean its fairly clear objectively that Travis, at best, has severe mental capacity issues and makes a succession of horrific decisions in taking his son away from a stable family environment and returning him to the woman who had abandoned the child, had stopped even enquiring about the boy and had a somewhat unsavoury and unreliable job and lifestyle? For example, some months she can only set $5 aside for the boy.
Yet I sense it was the director's intention to suggest that the reunion of mother with child was a good thing? The mother who hears voices, possibly tried to kill Travis in a house fire (?) and is now some kind of sex worker who is seemingly fraternising with pimps. Yet the director chooses to only show the joyous reunion of mother and child in a clean hotel room, and show nothing of what might await the boy mere hours later (e.g. is she living in poverty, using drugs, working as a prostitute, have a terrible boyfriend? All of which appear viable scenarios given the evidence presented).
Or are we to simply set our feelings of the child's predicament aside and revel in the character examination of when loves goes wildly off the tracks and the psychological damage it can cause? The film does that pretty darn well but the child's predicament is surely also critical to fhe movie and casts a cloud over the whole affair to me, because we are actually witnessing is a tragedy, but one wrapped up in an incongruously upbeat reunion.
Given the incredible ratings for this film I know I must be in a slightly perplexed minority.
6/10
Reply by MongoLloyd
on June 11, 2021 at 10:43 AM
I can't get past Travis married to a woman who looks like Jane. That, to me, is very strange casting.
And, there are plenty of dumb films stories that have incredible ratings. Probably because there are plenty of dumb people in the world, haha.
Reply by rooprect
on November 21, 2022 at 1:15 PM
According to director Wim Wenders this was NOT supposed to be a happily ever after ending. So yes, we are supposed to question the boy's future, possibly be disturbed by it. He's the unfortunate product of 2 very damaged adults, and there are no magical Hollywood answers. The film ends with very dark, twisted highway scenes (symbolizing the irresoluble knot of their lives), an oblique view of Travis's emotionless face lit by the artificial lights of traffic, and equally dreary music. If I'm not mistaken I think Wim mentioned that at one point they were toying with the idea of a happy ending where Travis drives to a stop light, thinks, and then turns around (implying the "family" might get back together), but they flushed that idea real fast, mercifully.
I think one of the reasons why this film was so critically acclaimed was that it dared to be realistic and leave a hint of a bitter aftertaste. We get a conflict, a dramatic confrontation, but no perfect resolution, just Travis running away yet again & dumping his problems on others. Perhaps the cryptic title "Paris, Texas" refers to a fantasy "El Dorado" that Travis believes is his salvation, even though it's just a run down lot in a depressed part of the country which he has never even visited. Wim Wenders' protagonists often suffer from character flaws that never get fixed. Contrary to the Hollywood arc where the protagonist has a clear revelation and redemption, Wenders films dare to present characters who don't really change, as in real life.
If you've seen Wim's prior films, such as "Alice in the Cities", "Wrong Move", "Kings of the Road", "The American Friend", there's a similar pattern. The films end on a seemingly upbeat or visually magnificent finale which implies a superficial calm within the storm, but if you really analyze what happened you realize that it's really a veiled tragedy. "Wrong Move" in particular has a very deceptive uplifting scene in the mountains of south Germany, but (particularly if you listen to Wim's commentary track) you realize that the character hasn't changed at all; he keeps making "Wrong Moves" up til the end. I think the protagonist in Wrong Move is the template for Travis in "Paris, Texas" - a lost soul who keeps running away; despite confronting his issues, he never really learns or evolves.
So your uneasy feeling at the end of this movie is exactly what you're supposed to feel.
Reply by Midi-chlorian_Count
on June 26, 2023 at 6:37 AM
We don't know what will happen next but in that moment it is the perfect ending with the reunited mother and son and Travis having done the right, selfless thing after his past actions which had caused so much harm to them.
I think there are obvious ambiguities for the viewer to dissect here, for example the money Jane has been sending. Sure Anne says $5 one month but I thought the important thing to pick up on was that she had always sent something, once a month, since establishing the account. I think that it supposed to show us her re-establishing her commitment to her son in some way after abandoning him. That's why it was important, even if the amount was small, that she always deposited something.
I've also read people saying that it was especially unfair on Anne, who had raised the boy as her own. Again, from one point of view a fair assessment but there's also the flip side that Walt (brilliantly played by Dean Stockwell btw) never shies from saying that Travis is his real father and Anne questions what would happen to them if they lost Hunter. So, sure it looks like a better environment for the boy at first glance but is it really long term? The "parents" relationship only seems glued in place due to his presence.
Plus, with regards to Travis ripping him away from that stable environment, he asked Hunter very clearly if he was sure he wanted to come. He never even initially asked him. The boy wanted to come and find his real mother. So again the notion that leaving him alone was the right thing to do negates understanding the kid knows he was abandoned by his mother and would grow up without that ever having the possibility to heal inside him.
I think the end represents Travis's attempt to fix things - caused by him in the first place - as best as he could. After discovering Jane and what she's been doing, he knows they will never, ever be able to reunite without the same issues happening again. However he rises above himself and does what he can to provide a best possible fix for Jane and Hunter.