Why the THEATRICAL Ending of Little Shop of Horrors is SUPERIOR
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 тра 2024
- In honor of the 23rd day of the month of September, I've decided to make a little video essay illustrating why I believe that the theatrical ending of 1986's Little Shop of Horrors is better than the original ending.
**THIS VIDEO EXISTS FOR THE PURPOSES OF REVIEW AND COMMENTARY. ALL VIDEO AND AUDIO CLIPS ARE USED TRANSFORMATIVELY AND HAVE BEEN MODIFIED FOR THIS VIDEO. THIS IS IN NO WAY MEANT TO SERVE AS A DIRECT MARKET SUBSTITUTE FOR THE ORIGINAL WORKS*** - Фільми й анімація
Here is what i think the studio should have done. When Seymour is told, "Every household in America..." They should have Seymour imagine the original ending. Maybe cut it down for time but that way we would have the best of both worlds.
Dude I was thinking the same thing! Maybe when he gets knocked out when the roof falls on him during his fight with Audrey 2. But then wakes up to finally stop the plant with electricity.
It was just such a waste to not use that footage.
@@timcarr6084 That would have been a great time to do it too.
I was thinking maybe Seymour and Audrey could escape from America before the ending could happen in which all the salesmen could take the leftover snippings where the ending happens
Oooo that's a brilliant idea. That way all those scenes wouldn't go to waste. You know those scenes cost a large chunk of their budget.
In a way it is the best of both worlds because anybody who has the bluray can see either both endings or just the one they like. The very first time I saw this movie it ended with the original with Seymour and Audrey dying, the some time later I saw it again with the theatrical ending and it made it even better for me.
I think the biggest thing holding the original ending back is losing the section from The Meek Shall Inherit. That sets up Seymour’s willingness to keep on killing, which makes his fate more deserved.
I feel like I have to disagree with this point for two reasons.
Firstly, Seymour's willingness to kill for the plant is established earlier than that in both because in both it's established in suppertime. Mushnik may be slightly sleazier in the movie because he tries to use the situation to get the plant, but he is still more or less an innocent who Seymour willingly feeds to the plant in both (in the movie you explicitly see him slowly walking mushnik backwards towards the plant, knowing what will happen if mushnik gets too close)
Secondly, part of the theatrical version that is also lost is Seymour's motive for continuing. The original song makes it clear that if it was just fame and fortune, Seymour wouldn't have had it in him, but his love for Audrey pushes him to commit. This explicit motive of love rather than money is inherently more sympathetic than the story has without it
A lot of comments have said it, but I want to emphasize how different Seymour is on stage and in the movie.
Musical Seymour feels like he's close to being a NiceGuy™, complimenting Audrey with her black eye as if it's pretty - like it's hardly noticeable. While in the movie, Moranis makes it look like he doesn't know that it's a black eye, he's that naïve that he thinks it might be make up.
When the plant talks Seymour into killing Orin (before he sees Audrey being slapped), Moranis again delivers the motorcycle part like he's a little kid - something he can't imagine and would feel great and amazing. He's full of a wonder and thinks the plant might be "good".
In the musical, Seymour seems to thoroughly enjoy it and relish in the thought of making people jealous with him on a bike and looking fancy. It comes off as more adulterous.
In general, the relationship between the plant and Seymour in the musical feels like they're both on the same page or on a similar power level until the plant surpasses him and he underestimates it.
In the movie, Seymour is constantly controlled by the plant.
There's also the difference of Seymours constant fear and misery at his situation in the movie - as opposed to how Seymour poses with the leather jacket, thinking that it will make Audrey like him more. Immediately imitating Orin.
I personally view this as musical Seymour being like the plant - consuming the people he's killed. He at first becomes Audrey's boyfriend, showing a lot more confidence, but still being mostly himself. Then he turns more and more into Mushnick, becoming the owner of the shop.
He starts, although he doesn't realize it, to scare Audrey, which felt to me like a parallel to her relationship with Orin. Movie Seymour never lets his feelings out on her (there's this scene where he's doing finances and the plant provokes him - he goes ballistic and scares Audrey, making it sound like she provoked him.)
Movie Seymour comes off as more likeable - someone stuck in a bad place who tried to escape it and got used at every turn until he breaks out of it. Musical Seymour is that at first and then gets corrupted and consumed by it, using others just as much as they use him.
I watched the movie the other day after not seeing it for many years. I actually think the plant has some kind of telepathy or mind control powers. It could just be because of the campy style of the film, but people act weird around the plant.
The first customer comes in and decides to buy &
$100 worth of flowers because the shop couldn’t break a $100 bill.
Customers immediately start flooding the shop as soon as the plant is in the window.
And there are a lot of other instances like this.
Audrey goes to water the plant when it calls her and doesn’t try to leave even when the plant starts to scare her.
Seymour does say at one point toward the end of the film that he can’t control himself around the plant, or something to that effect.
Mushnik was ready to take Seymour to the cops until they go upstairs near the plant, but he could have been planning to offer Seymour a ticket out of town so he keeps the plant all along, idk.
Anyway, it seems like weak minded people are easily controlled by the plant and only once Audrey and Seymour are together do they stop being manipulated.
Its just my take and I’m sure I’m not the first to think there might be some kind of plant mind control happening in the film.
It makes the happy ending much more enjoyable because Seymour genuinly seems like a good guy in the film but he was depressed and his mind was easily controlled by the plant.
Could be why the plant chose him in the first place.
It also makes the baby plant in Seymour and Audrey’s front yard in the final scene kinda creepy because a normal sane person would not dare feed the plant and go through all of that again but if the plant can control minds, it maybe they would.
Yeah, I watched the musical, and after most of the play I was really wondering if I even wanted Seymour to have a happy ending after how he acted throughout the musical. He just didn't strike me as a very good guy in general, and I didn't feel really bad when he got eaten. It felt more like a corrupt person who finally got what was coming to him.
My favorite character is Audrey but not the plant just the human Audrey 7:25 you know what i mean 7:32
I think an aspect of the movie that's also overlooked is that Seymour doesn't really do anything wrong.
Okay he does a lot wrong, but everything he does is done so passively, and in a way where it's very obvious he is woefully unprepared in dealing with the current situation.
When Orin dies, it's it takes like a minute. And Seymour looks like he doesn't even know what's really going on until he dies.
When Mushnick dies, it's because he leans into what's clearly a giant mouth with teeth and Seymour let's out of little "Sir..." before Audrey II eats him. He basically tired to warn him, but he was too nervous and terrified to do anything about it.
And I think that's the major difference between the movie and the play. They say it's just the ending but it's really the entirety of Seymour's arc.
The play is s story about the dangers of hurting others for your own benefit. He willingly kills two people, and then he ultimately gets what he deserves when he loses it all and dies. He's borderline Machiavellian in the way he contemplates helping Orin, and how he tricks Mushnick into getting into the plants mouth.
The movie is about the dangers of stumbling into something really, really good, and then just accepting that as the way it is while just standing around being complicit in bad things that happen around you, and not having the courage to stop.
It's a lot easier to get attached to a character that is passive and let's bad things happen, then it is to get attached to a character that actively and willingly makes things worse.
exactly my thought as well!
I will admit I am a sucker for a happy ending, especially when the lead character already had a hard enough life. But what I do like is when the audience is at least given the option to watch both versions so they can make their own assement, and the directors' hard work and effort do not go completely to waste and unseen.
If only that was the case with Star Wars. But no, Lucas wants everyone to only have access to the Special Editions, and wipe all trace of the originals.
Ellen is a wonder, nothing can explain her interpretation of Audrey, her vocalisation and unprecedented style in this role. From the look, to the lisp, the key changes and returns...it's a tour de force. No one can take on this role and win. She made Audrey. She will always be Audrey.
I wholeheartedly agree with your point about the lack of Seymour's agency in the directors cut but there's a few more reasons I think the ending fails:
1. They replaced Ya Never Know with Some Fun Now. This is probably the least important change but it's still worth noting. In Ya Never Know Seymour is clearly shown to be enjoying the success the plant is giving him whereas in Some Fun Now we see him bleeding his fingers dry and looking miserable. Him enjoying his success gives him more motivation to continue feeding the plant.
2. They cut the song Now. This is a big one. In Now, Orin begs Seymour to help him get the gas mask off and he willfully sits by and lets him die, showing his agency in Orin's death.
3. They cut the adoption subplot and Mushnik's death is different. Another big one. In the play Mushnik fully adopts Seymour and begins calling him son. In the film he's just some greedy asshole that he works for. In the film Mushnik sees Seymour cutting up Orin's body while in the play he only finds a dentist's uniform in the garbage. In the film Mushnik has concrete evidence of Seymour's guilt and uses it to blackmail him, whereas in the play he only suspects Seymour and asks him to come with him to the police station to explain things so his "conscience can rest easy." In the film Mushnik holds Seymour at gunpoint and accidentally walks backwards into the plants mouth. In the play Seymour actively tricks Mr. Mushnik (his adopted dad) into getting directly in the plants mouth even when he had no concrete evidence of Seymour's guilt.
4. In the film they cut Seymour's soliloquy from Meek Shall Inherent in which he debates letting the plant die but ultimately decided to keep feeding it so Audrey will continue to love him, thereby setting up his faustian bargain that ultimately ends in her death.
The lack of all these things makes Seymour a more likeable and unassuming character, and when combined with his helpless death in the directors cut it leaves things feeling totally unjustified.
(Sorry for any typos. I'm very passionate about this topic.)
Even so, the original ending is far more realistic. Seymour's actions deserved consequences whether he enjoyed the success or not and he did not deserve to have a happy ending, but he got one anyways with all responsibility wiped clean.
Plus no way would Audrey II come to this planet if she knew that man-made tools (like; electricity, fire, weapons, etc) could destroy her. Her killing the man that fed he and taking over is just far more realistic than Seymour actually beating her.
I do agree with you there. The very first time I saw this movie was online with the original ending and for me it was so heartbreaking that I thought it was the worst ending of a movie I had seen at the time. Only months later did I attempt to watch it again, but this time with the theatrical ending and it was like a weight had been lifted off of my heart! It was so much better seeing Seymour standing up for himself and Audrey, and the two of them getting their happy ending. In a way I'm glad that I saw the original version first because it made the theatrical ending that much better.
@@lucindamobley5492 In that ending though, there is an Audrey II plant in the garden of their dream home, smiling!!
ua-cam.com/video/UtJtYayW4VQ/v-deo.htmlsi=-nbmYy_HYe3s8-7i&t=178
4:15 This isn't the first time a movie musical has done so. 1975's The Rocky Horror Picture Show brought back a good amount of its original stage actors to the roles they originated in. Those being:
Tim Curry - Frank-N-Furter
Richard O'Brien - Riff Raff
Patricia Quinn - Magenta
Nell Campbell - Columbia
Although Meat Loaf wasn't originally Eddie, he played him in the original 1974 US production and the short-lived original Broadway run of the show, and of course, the movie itself.
Yul Brynner -1956 "The King and I", Ethel Merman -1932 "Anything Goes" and 1953 "Call Me Madam" I could go on.
Ted Ross and Mabel King 1978 "The Wiz"
Well to be fair, the only reason that the original ending is so long is because the restoration crew used the black and white print as their guide. And according to one of the people who worked on the film, they were planning on shortening ending.
I think that what they should have done is have it so that Audrey survives and goes outside of the shop(like in the theatrical cut), then, Seymour gets knocked unconscious by the rubble of the shop and dreams about the giant plant invasion, and then, wakes up and blows up Audrey 2.
That be kool
that would actually be the best way to make it work
@@minekurtmininer216 Yeah, it would.
That sounds like a shitty ending. Not only including dream nonsense, but a cheap, piss baby ending.
I learned about the director's cut approximately 20 minutes ago in a failed attempt to relive my childhood. It was going so well for a good 70 minutes...
This was me last night watching it at a local community theater! The performance was SO good! And then Audrey and Seymour died (along with my childhood). Changed everything I knew for the last 37 years about this musical!
Even in the theatrical ending we do get to see an Audrey 2 therefore fulfilling the possibility of a grim future while still containing the happy ending within the films narrative. All why the theatrical ending is the best.
Exactly, Seymour may not have caused botanical Armageddon but some other shmuck dose. Plus it's a classic horror trope.
ua-cam.com/video/UtJtYayW4VQ/v-deo.htmlsi=-nbmYy_HYe3s8-7i&t=178
It wasn’t the first time a movie musical had brought back a stage actor to the role they originated. Rocky Horror Picture Show brought back most of its original main cast for the film. Tim Curry, Richard O’Brien, Patricia Quinn and Nell Campbell all played their roles in the film adaptation that they originated.
Yeah this is exactly what I said
This was an incredible video. But something I think that's often looked over, is not only is Seymour's ending unsatisfying in the movie, movie Seymour and play Seymour are two completely different characters.
Rick Moranis did an excellent job at movie Seymour, don't get me wrong. But in the play, there was an entire song dedicated to Seymour weighing the pros and cons of killing Orin.
You could say the same thing about Mr. Mushnik too. In the movie he's much more cruel towards Seymour, whilst in the play he's still a bad person but didn't go as far as to threaten Seymour with a gun. You can kinda justify Mr. Mushnik's death in the movie. Same with Orin. Movie Seymour's just too loveable and dorky to not root for.
But like I said before, play Seymour knows what he's doing, and keeps doing it anyway. He lets his adoptive dad (which btw was so strange to me that they cut from the movie?? I'm thinking the reason was to make Mr. Mushnik appear more cruel but that doesn't make sense to me.) die voluntarily by telling him to get in the plant. He isn't threatened like in the movie. And this leads to Audrey, the person he wanted to protect the most, dying. Basically, what I'm trying to say is, play Seymour started off with good intentions but slowly let greed overtake him and that's why the play ending is suitable. Movie Seymour is more timid and the things just kinda fall in place for him, which makes his death so unsatisfying.
Hope this made sense- I'm autistic and little shop of horrors has been one of my special interests for years now so this is my take on it LOL
6:32 imo this is the coolest version of the ending. I love how he holds the machete in the air like a classic hero before diving right into the belly of the beast
To me, the biggest problem with the original ending is that Seymour was indirectly responsible for the deaths of the people. In the 1960 Little Shop of Horrors, Seymour directly killed people, albeit accidentally. He killed a person working at a railroad track when he accidentally hit him with a rock, and he got run over, he killed a prostitute when he threw a rock in the air and it hit her in the head, he killed Dr. Farb(that movie’s version of Orin) somewhat out of self-defense when he attacks him with dental tools, and Mr. Mushnick tricks a robber who holds him up in the shop by having him crawl inside the plant, in which he gets eaten. In the 1986 musical, Seymour does allow Orin to suffocate, but he it was more out of fear. He goes there to kill Orin, but can’t do it, but sense Orin already has the gas mask on, he asphyxiates. He is already dead when Seymour feeds him to the plant. Yes, that was wrong, but Orin was abusing Audrey. Seymour also feels great remorse for his actions. Mr. Mushnick finds out about it, but decides to allow Seymour to go into hiding while he exploits his wealth, and then he gets eaten when he gets too close. Seymour does kind of back him into the plant, but then tries to warn him at the last minute. As for Audrey, Audrey 2 tries to eat her of its own volition by calling her on the phone, Seymour had nothing to do with it. That is why I don’t think he quite deserved such a agonizing death in the film, and when goes to rectify the situation by killing the plant at the end, knowing good and well he may not come out alive, he earns the happy ending.
Well Mr. Mushnick was an outright villain in the movie. He held Seymour at gunpoint. If Seymour told Mushnick what the plant eats he'd shoot Seymour. So what could Seymour do? Seymour in the movie was a nice guy who didn't believe he could kill people and all of the people who did die basically were self-inflicted accidents. Seymour didn't deserve to die at the end of the movie, this is the anger that audiences felt when they saw it happen in the original cut.
I think it’s also the differences between the character of Seymour in the original, stage play & theatrical cut. The theatrical cut Seymour is definitely the most redeemable and deserves the happy ending the most out of all of them. He’s been verbally and financially abused and he has extremely low self esteem because of it. Same with Audrey. He didn’t actively KILL anybody and him & Audrey deserved that happy ending.
Yes, the original ending is painful, unpleasant and even depressing. But that is precisely why it is interesting.
As for Seymour, again - the film version of this ending is bitter and brutal. It doesn't leave a shadow of the irony or heroism we see on the stage.
That's why it's interesting. If Audrey II is the embodiment of Seymour's bad decisions, then their total domination of him in the finale is an interesting metaphor. Perhaps Seymor could have fought and defended himself more in this scene, but sometimes our bad decisions lead to such strong consequences that we are completely vulnerable to them. Whatever we do.
In my opinion, it is interesting, although of course I understand why it performed so badly in the test screenings. The original ending of the film completely takes away this conventionality of brutality and the hilarity of the whole situation. It is very, very bitter.
I like it. It is something different, more difficult, more emotionally challenging. But I can understand why one might not like it.
I went into watching Little Shop of Horrors (for the first time) not knowing there was a Directors/Theatrical Cut. I watched the Directors version and watching Audrey die just made my heart drop. There's just something about watching a very sweet woman that finally got out of an abusive relationship and just wanted to live a happy dreamy life die like that. So it was hard for me to get back into those last minutes of the film. I then went on to watch the Theatrical ending... and loved it!
But I will say I actually do like seeing Audrey II taking over the world. So I wish there was a version where Seymour attempts to kill the plant but the outcome is ambiguous. Cut to Audrey and Seymour having their happy ending and the camera pulls out revealing that they live in a chaotic world where Audrey II has gone on to take over the world.
While I liked the theatrical ending, I liked the directors cut/ original ending more because it's deeper, and also because I prefer chaos and action to romance. Also because Twoey was my fav character (ok I love Seymour as well)
Tonally, the theatrical ending is the better ending for this version of the story. Thankfully, fans can choose which version they want to watch or own
Having seen the original Off Broadway production back in 1982, and the Encore's production where Ellen Greene reprised her role and having seen the recent Off Broadway production with Jonathan Groff and the movie, I still think that the Stage version has the superior ending. The enormous Audrey II looming over the audience and the cast now as the faces of Audrey II's flowers singing "Don't Feed The Plants" is powerful, terrifying, fun and appropriate. At the end of the song in the original production vines came down from the ceiling of the Orpheum Theatre giving you a sense that Audrey II had taken over and engulfed the entire audience. Two of the times I saw the musical it was in a fairly small theatre, and the intimacy of the small space gave you a sense that you were part of the play. The movie ending that was used was too saccharine and the fact that Seymour who is essentially a "Serial Killer" gets to live "The good life" is unsatisfactory.
FINALLY! Somebody recognices the problem with Mean Green Mother! And this comes from somebody who loves the whole sequence, but in Mean Green Mother he is also completely humiliated. Doesn't help that Movie Seymour is more sympathetic because of some cuts, like Meek Shall Inherit, Seymour actively playing a part on Mushnik's death. I do wonder if maybe Seymour actually played a part on the movie version when fighting the plant, like maybe grabbing a sort of explosive and turning it up as the plant eats him, like giving him a last Hurrah!
And also a last detail, the original movie version kinda shows that whatever Seymour does, humanity is doomed! The salesman already comes with a little Audrey 2, so even if he kills the plant, what can he do?
Those 6 min and 20 sec are for me the best thing about the movie. I love the big plants (roaming?) around. Looks so majestic!
On one hand, Don’t Feed the Plants is an absolute bop and the giant Audrey Twos are epic. Plus the reprise of Somewhere That’s Green makes me tear up. It’s tragic, and it’s the first ending I saw when I saw the musical for the first time, which was a stage production done by a local university when I was a kid. That being said, I love the happy ending. Seymour and Audrey deserved to be happy, and I love the idea of them living happily ever after in the suburbs. The ending I saw, Seymour sacrificed himself and killed the plant from the inside with weed killer, but it was too late because the guy had already gotten clipping to make more Audrey Twos.
Honestly the good ending fits the movie perfectly. The main characters are actually very nice people and I rooted for them.
It's entertaining but you can't beat the legendary villain last line that Audrey 2 makes before it dies.
Just in general, I don't think Mean Green Mother belongs in the director's cut. In addition to everything you say about Seymour's agency and character arc, having a big showstopping number immediately before the finale number seriously bloats the movie. They really should've just done a straightforward adaptation of the "Bigger than Hula-Hoops" scene from the musical.
Come to think of it, there's a weird sort of circular serendipity to the inclusion of the Mean Green Mother sequence. Everything that makes it a detriment to the original ending makes it a great template for the revised ending. The way it unceremoniously beats down on Seymour sets up a great underdog moment when Seymour finally finds the plant's weakness. And the showstopping song that was completely unnecessary in the original ending now fills the void that the omission of Don't Feed the Plants left. It's almost uncanny how well it all worked out.
To be fair, the ending mayhem going on and on is sort of the point and one of the things that makes it so fun. I do agree that to tie it up narratively Seymour should have stood up to the Plant at the end, even though the battle would've been in vain, especially since in the movie Seymour's arc is about standing up to the people (and flora) oppressing him.
Every time he called it "Little Shop" all I could think about was the really bad 90s cartoon based off of little shop of horrors
Well the Original ending did Show an Important Message that Anyone's Actions do Have Consequences and eventually be punished for it. While the Theatrical ending mainly just about Redemption.
I have to agree with you there. I saw the 1960 film in which all of this was based on and Seymour, at the end, called Audrey Jr. a name and told the plant that it messed up his whole life. The plant cried, "Feed me!" And Seymour replied, "Yeah, I'll feed ya!" He grabbed the knife and said, "I'll feed you like you've never been fed before!" He went inside the plant and he killed it but the plant died taking Seymour with him saying, "I didn't mean it!" I don't know about you but after the plant told Seymour to feed him, I saw a look a look on Seymour's face that said, "I hate to do this but since I'm practically past the point of no return anyway, if my life's going to be over, I'm going to make damn sure that it's life ends as well!" Looks like he got his wish. Also in this version, Seymour had a mother and neither her, Audrey (who was a brunette Jackie Joseph), or Mushnick died. One final thing, this Audrey Jr. was NOT, I repeat, NOT from outer space. It was a cross between two plants as I recall.
Absolutely loved this video! With all of the changes that were made to Seymour though out the movie it only made sense that they would change the ending. Hope you make some more videos someday!
In my opinion the exclusion of the full version of The Meek Shall Inherit from either the theatrical or the director's cut makes the original ending not work. In The Meek Shall Inherit, Seymour comes to terms with his bad deeds but resigns to continue to commit them out of promise of personal gain in his soliloquy, it's because of the last few lines "Where do I sign . . . Right on the line," he is actually selling off the rights of Audrey II to be reproduced, but that doesn't happen in either of the versions of the movie because the full sequence is completely cut to only the opening and ending chorus which don't feature that at all. In the versions we have, Seymour is never seen selling anything off and wants to back out of the fame almost immediately, and in the theatrical this is even built upon with the inclusion of Jim Belushi's Patrick Martin who wants to have it done, but Seymour refuses outright.
So in the original this whole subplot of Seymour profiteering directly from Audrey II is on the cutting room floor and comes out of nowhere, it's such a sudden shift it'd be bad writing if a certain amount of goodwill wasn't given to the director's cut due to being a Frankenstein of old material. I'm not saying the idea of a bad ending for the musical is wrong, it fits, but for the movie and its two adaptations, it needs a happy one because the material just isn't there to warrant a bad one. Neither do we have additional elements like Seymour not being the one to directly kill Orin or Mushnik (Orin kills himself accidentally and Seymour doesn't directly lead Mushnik into Audrey II's mouth, rather Mushnik backs into it himself and sticks his head into its mouth) that the play had so to warm the audience up to the idea Seymour is a bad guy.
In my opinion, if instead at the end Seymour and Audrey went somewhere else than the suburban house seen in Somewhere That's Green, which was poorer and more modest, the theatrical would've made a stronger statement against fame and greed. But the original just doesn't work, it comes off way to mean spirited and the message gets lost in translation.
You know what? Now I agree with you. It would have been way more satisfying at least in the bad ending for Seymour to at least go down with a fight, at least maybe grab a knife or the power plug or something, send it at Audrey II as he's grabbed by it, only for Audrey II to crush it almost effortlessly at the last minute. He tried. He _did_ almost get there. He put up a fight. But it was all in vain in the end, the plant was too strong. It'll feel more satisfyingly tragic this way, not like we should somehow mock this pathetic little man for thinking he has a chance.
Anyway they should have kept the solilquy in The Meek Shall Inherit (which barely exists in either version of the film)
I like both versions but changing Seymour to more of a cowardly shy guy instead of an angry incel meant he deserved a chance to redeem himself by killing Audrey 2.
As much as I love the theatrical ending of little shop the sequence of events showcasing Audrey 2's destruction alongside don't feed the plants showed the amount of destruction these plants would deal and makes don't feed the planets even more of a cry for help than the on stage musical made it.
I would have loved to see what people consider the definitive ending in the remake that got canned but alas we will never know
I was fortunate enough to be able to obtain an original DVD from the first release of this back in '98. It has a black-and-white / pre-color-corrected version of the original (20-minute?) ending on it, and even *that* looks slightly different than the colorized / color-corrected original ending that was later released on DVD and blu-ray, using some alternate shots / angles, etc.
Rumor has it that David Geffen, the producer (and *original* backer of the original off-Broadway stage production back in '82 or so), was SOOOOOO pissed that the non-colorized version was released on DVD as a "bonus feature" that he *immediately* recalled all of the retail copies that had been distributed and locked them away somewhere and / or destroyed them! Apparently only about 10,000 copies or so nationwide had been sold and got out at that point, so he was pretty successful in doing so. Fast-forward some 10-12 (or more) years later from '98, and we have the color-corrected release of the original ending, a clean and very professional cut - also about 20-minutes or so long. So while it's great to see such a well-composed, neat release, it *does* make you wonder exactly how much extra footage was left on the cutting room floor! 😲
I think you’re absolutely right in your assessment. I was torn because the original ending fits the themes of the film better, but the theatrical ending fits the tone better. But yeah, Seymour having no agency is what I’ve realised bugs me about the original ending. And it’s five minutes without your main characters involved too.
I really like this video.
The editing is great. Sounds is good. Your voice is loud and clear.
And you talk about a lot of relevant and interesting stuff.
I learned a lot from this video.
It's clear that you put a lot of work into this video and I appreciated it a lot.
I do think this video deserves more views. But I guess the topic of an old musical is not what most people would find interesting. Even so.
I liked it. 👍🏻
I think I'm going to edit together a hybrid. Was thinking it would be fun if the film wrapped up with the theatrical ending and then cuts to the rampage. Concludes our story on a satisfying note but shows how it went much differently elsewhere resulting in the same overall fate for the world while our heroes still get to be together.
My one problem with the theatrical ending is that this weird electricity weakness is just pulled out of nowhere. If Seymore were to win, he could take his gun back and shoot the stem until the head falls off or something.
I loved this movie as a kid. I unwittingly watched the original version on one of my streaming services last year with no knowledge of it even existing. When it got to the end, my mind was blown... I thought it was possibly like some Mandela effect gobbledygook. I was disturbed but I loved the original ending too once I got past the initial shock.
I always found the cut to Seymour's hand thrusting through the rubble with the power line to be jarring and the happy ending out of place. I will agree the kaiju ending, which I was so happy to finally see, can be cut down, and Seymour could be given more agency in his final demise, but if I have to pick one ending it would be the original.
It's a "but is it a happy ending" really, as the final shot is a small Audrey II in the garden of their 'dream home', smiling!!
ua-cam.com/video/UtJtYayW4VQ/v-deo.htmlsi=-nbmYy_HYe3s8-7i&t=178
@@KatMusic2009 Eh. It's a typical horror movie sting to end on an ominous note and leave the door open for a sequel (not that Little Shop was doing that; it was just an homage to the trope). Sort of like old horror movies that would finish with The End... then put up a "?" to make it ambiguous. The theatrical end was as much as an audience pleasing ending as they were going to get.
I remember finding out about the two endings before 2013, so while I had heard about the original ending, I couldn’t actually see it anywhere. No matter which ending you prefer I’m glad that the original is out there now so you can see it and make the decision for yourself. Especially with how hard the crew worked on it.
Fair enough points but I still far prefer the original ending, especially if the meek shall enter it was still a part of it. When he agrees to sign the contracts for deals and keep the killing going, the futile battle at the end shows he created something far too powerful and if he had stopped while ahead he probably would’ve been able to defeat audry II.
Admittedly I’m not a musical connoisseur but I do absolutely love this film, I can still remember the first time I saw it during a drama class in high school, I was hooked right from the start!
The OG ending is depressing but its a morality tale. And did Seymour ever confess about Mushnik and Orin to Audrey in the original?
my school is doing little shop of horrors, and how i’d love to be doing the version where audrey and seymour survive and live happily ever after, i love the ending where audrey and seymour are eaten by the plants. (it also has an amazing finale number, so that’s a plus)
The director's ending would have been more earned if they simply left in the longer version of The Meek Shall Inherit, where it's shown Seymour had a his chance to kill the plant but chickened out at the prospect of losing his fortune (e;g Audrey's love). Without it he's more of a sad pawn in the plant's game who doesn't really have any choice in the actions he takes rather than someone who's doing wrong, knows he's doing wrong and proceeds to do wrong despite that instead of taking his chance to do right by it. Not to mention the climax of the song they cut was total bars
I like the theatrical ending better myself because it's hilarious. I love how Audrey II says ''Oooooh shiiiiiit!'' before he explodes.
For the unused darker ending, instead of the extended ''Don't Feed The Plants'' instrumental, they should've used dramatic orchestral library music tracks (the same music tracks that were used for the 1960's Viacom Marvel Superhero or Spiderman cartoon series) or Alan Menken could've written a new musical dramatic sequence. Menken's quite a good composer
The stage distance is a real issue in most shows. It works great for big extravagant shows like your normal Disney show or say phantom of the opera. But after being a stage performer for the better part of the last decade small stages work much better for certain shows. I did sweeney todd, spring awakening and sideshow on small stages and wow does it work great. Scenes like epiphany and left behind hit ridiculously hard. I'm playing alfred in alice by heart in a few months and it's going to be in the round in a 100 person theater. I'm extremely excited to perform such an emotionally difficult role in such a small place. Also voiced Audrey 2 in 2019, very fun role
The "Director's Cut" released on blu-ray is only a recreation of one section of a flabby assembly edit, which is missing many subtle and not so subtle bits of scenes through the rest of the film which would have been (and should have been) included with the Dark ending. from Seymour being grabbed to the statue of liberty the whole sequence should have been trimmed by half cutting out the strange filler shots and shortening most of the other shots so the songs didn't have to be ludicrously extended to fit.
Here's my opinion, LSoH's grim ending is an important piece of media to acknowledge when talking about movies that have alternate endings. in essence, the grim ending solidified what LSoH set out to achieve, which was to tell a campy horror story. the theatrical ending not only turns the movie into a half-assed rom-com with a minor horror subplot, but it also absolves Seymour of his crimes of murder. the stage show and the original ending showed people what happened when you made deals you couldn't or wouldn't honor. the theatrical ending ruins that moral by saying "If you safe a woman from an abusive situation you too will get the girl."
Awesome video!!! Also I subbed :) also in my opinion if we had the Original Ending but the following happened (not only he stands up to the plant and fights it head on, Mothra and Ghidorah come to defeat the giant carnivorous plants and mini versions of them finish off the other carnivorous plants), I think that ending would be better then the other two ending combined :)
Finally someone says it, that’s what my problem with the original ending was as well, it would have probably been a bit more well receive if Seymour went fighting rather then just being helplessly grabbed and eaten.
I think they should have just had Seymour escape the mouth as Audrey II was chewing, then have him and Audrey escape knowing they couldn’t win, and do the big climax rampage, and then either have 1 final fight on the Statue of Liberty or just have Audrey and Seymour living somewhere else and try to ignore it
Really great video, hope you make some more content like this.
There were, though, previous movies which brought back stage production originators: Robert Preston for "The Music Man"; Rex Harrison for "My Fair Lady". "1776" brought over a number of the stage show originators, including William Daniels for John Adams, Howard da Silva for Franklin, Ken Howard for Jefferson; and Virginia Vestoff for Abigail Adams.
Tim Curry originated Frank-N-Furter on stage and that movie came out 11 years before
the stage ending also provides a level of ambiguity compared to the original film ending, where the stage ending tells about audrey II taking over but relies on the audience imagining it, but the movie shows a setting many people may be familiar with genuinely being destroyed
I like both endings and I’m glad they give you both full movies to choose from and not just the original ending as an extra. I do prefer the original ending more because some of my most favorite musicals are sad, dark and depressing!
My only wish is that if this movie comes out on 4K… they will include both in 4K, but, also restore the full version of The Meek Shall Inherit and Mushnik’s death scene, then to me the movie would be an A+
Seymour's death in the stage play was much more similar to his death in the 1960's version
I've just watched this movie for the thousand time and it was the version with the new ending. I wasn't expecting it and to my knowledge there was only a rough version of it. I thought I was living a Mandela effect moment! I was sure it had an happy ending, and I couldn't understand why I didn't remember this "negative" version!...
I had to check and find this video to understand that I didn't go crazy all of a sudden, and they restored this ending :D
tbh this was a cool experience :D
Nice video, hope you make some more :)
The director's cut needs cuts tho. That's the thing. There's a world where the original ending will land for this movie like it does on stage but as it is it is overlong.
This is a great video essay but I have to call bs on what you said here 4:14 Rocky Horror was made a decade before and Tim Curry originated his role and reprised it in the movie
I was just about to comment this
@@caitlyncarvalho7637 wtf are you on about?
I honestly liked both ends lol
the theatrical ending is still the canon ending, right? cause i love it
(B4 I comment, a shout out to your editor for that little half step jump for the Little Shop theme. Neat trick 😉)
Just saw the original ending a couple days ago.
I agree, the theatrical release ending was better.
Too long, to jarring in tone, it needed to go.
Side note, the movie soundtrack was fantastic to play as a beginning drummer.
Little Shop is one of my favorite movies, and easily my favorite musical. I'm so torn here! On one hand, I grew up with the theatrical ending so it "feels right." But I love the message (I take away) from the plant winning - everyone's greed and selfishness eventually leads to the end of humanity. But I also totally agree the original ending in the film is way too long. Cutting it in half would have been easy and effective. Either way, I love the film - both versions. Thanks for making this video!
I think why the Original ending didn't work for the film is more like Syemore's character
In the stage show: Syemore is more willing to kill
Like example: There is a song in the stage play called "Now/it's just the gas" Where Syemore decided to just let orin die from the gas and sticks with it,
And also syemore lures mushnick into the plant saying there's money in it.
In the movie.
Orin dies by the gas in seconds and syemore didn't have time to react (he didn't save him either)
And he did try to warn mushnick the last second.
What I'm saying is.
In the movie Syemore is more likeable where in the stage play he becomes Unlikeable
I prefer the theatrical ending because its a happier ending, but its not a happy ending, it still ends with a threat.
I like both endings. I feel like they could have combined both with Audrey II growing out and attacking the local neighborhood only to be finally taken out by Seymour at the root base
04:20 Rocky Horror says otherwise!
I'm glad I'm not the only one who prefers the theatrical ending.
The first time I watch this movie I ended up seeing the original ending. The plants taking over seemed more likely as Seymour's character did not really make me believe he could have won, even though I wanted him to.
But yes I agree his death was terrible as was Audrey's.
But I just recently watched the theatrical copy that I had gotten, and found that it had the happy ending.
There I was expecting the ending where the plant wins, and I get the happy ending instead.
I wasn't upset, I was just shocked and went to go look for the ending that I was expecting.
I'm actually glad that I have the happy ending, but I kinda wanted to see the other ending, even though I do agree that the original ending isn't as good.
Does anybody know what video of the Audrey2 that looks more like a Venus fly trap I want to know which video it’s from because that looks really cool
Yul Brynner, who originated the role of The King on stage also played him in the movie.
I liked the ending where Seymour destroyed Audrey 2 & Seymour & Audrey did marry...
I'm a sucker for a Happy Ending. I want Seymour and Audrey to get that happy house and be alive. I do have to say though, it's criminal that the movie lost all that beautiful animation of all the Audrey II's wreaking havoc and the hard work they put into it. If you ask me they shouldn't have let it go to waste. They could've let Audrey II have an additional musical number fantasizing about what he'd do to the world with his pods spreading; but still ended it the way the Happy Ending ends.
I think the whole show is leading to the happy ending. Fron Skid Row to Somewhere Thats Green to Suddenly Seymour the movie is leading up to a happy ending. I don't mind an unhappy ending when the movie calls for it but this one screams happy ending all the way through.
personally i think both are pretty good if they got combined like another comment said
I love the original. I think the creators should be very proud of the last piece.
But. Even in the theatrical cut, the plant gets the last word, so we're left to fear for the happy couple.
I loved the movie, yes, saccharine ending and all. I do appreciate the work put into the theatrical ending, but there's one thing I've learned in over half a century of work, across many disciplines, and it holds true in all but a very few specific instances.
The person(s) that pay the bills call the shots. Full stop.
It doesn't matter how much hard work you put in, how well it works, how beautiful the design, etc., if the customer doesn't like it, oh well. There's only a few exceptions, and even when you can prove your whatever is right and tight and necessary, you're still going to need someone above you having your back.
That being said, I'm glad I got the opportunity to see both endings.
I always argue that the reason the theatrical release feels so cliche, saccharine, and shallow is because it was tacked on last minute. I don't necessarily find it weak because of its content, but its execution. If they had planned from the beginning that the film would have a different ending that concludes with Seymour and Audrey wedding and living happily ever after (with that unsettling final shot of an Audrey II growing in the garden, hinting that we haven't seen the last of him), then that could have worked. But Oz only had so much time to rework the ending, and so it feels so incredibly rushed; Audrey II seems to have won, and he's laughing maniacally and celebrating, and then, in rapid succession, Seymour electrocutes the plant, the plant dies, Seymour and Audrey hug, and they get married. You talk about the director's cut being too long, but the theatrical ending was too fast!
That said, I do respect that, with how theatrical audiences reacted to the ending, Oz had to do what he did. But it's still a crying shame that he had to remove a satisfying, albeit grim, conclusion that feels natural and purposeful for a cheap, rushed one. I think the problem, however, is not that film is more intimate or impactful than theatre. You said that people in the theatre know that they are all actors and puppets... don't film audiences know that just as well? I just think that the people who will tend to go to the cinema are different to the people who will tend to go to the theatre.
I like the theatrical version for better. Simply because, it has a *HAPPY ENDING!*
good analysis!
Good points! I like the original film ending best because I do enjoy how out of left field it is to see him get eaten so fully and totally, but definitely agree it makes for a worse story then the stage play version, that small change in pacing and presentation changes a lot of how his arc goes
I'm impressed you brought up the difference in the two "plant wins" endings. I personally do prefer the "plant wins" ending, and I revel in the rampant destruction that goes on and on, I find it great. That said- I was not a fan with removing all the agency of Seymour, in some ways removing the completion to his character development.
2:22 - It had a young Jack Nicholson as the Masochist in Orin's office!
Thank you. I agree totally with your analysis and opinion.
I enjoy both endings but i enjoy Seymour defeating the plant and living with Audrey i wish they would have mixed both ending have it so Seymour wins runs away with Audrie to live in country side but some spores survived then you can have the the chaotic ending with the spores that survives growing up and rampaging like they did!
They lived happily ever after in Crazy Dave’s house 💀
i'm a sucker for a happy ending and musicals should always have happy endings. boy kills the monster, saves the girl, and they live happily ever after
Some of the best musicals don’t have happy endings. Les Miserables, Sweeney Todd, Evita, Jesus Christ Superstar, Blood Brothers, Miss Saigon, Cabaret, Parade… and that’s why I love them! I do like a happy go lucky musical, but, my favorites are the serious depressing ones!
@@bookemdano7567 and that's why they make all kinds. Les Miserable is so heartbreaking, i totally identify with Éponine, beautiful piece
Although I don't agree in thinking the theatrical ending is superior, you certainly make some very good points and an interesting video!
In my opinion, I did not like the original ending. I prefer the theatrical ending. And that is only because although Seymour did do a lot,he technically didn't murder anybody. It's not like the people who did get eaten by the plant didn't deserve it. With the original ending I agree that you know artists are and if I made that I'd be mad that that part wasn't in the theatrical version. However, at the end of the day the goal was to make a movie you're not going to make a movie unless it's profitable and profitable movies have Happy endings mostly. Plus it's kind of dark. Seymour goes to all of this s*** and the plant wins in the end I mean come on. Even Tony Stark got the girl and the kid.
are you including the original ending of the corman film?
I happen to like the overkill and how long the ending sequence is in the original ending. The over the top length makes it good to me.
I haven't watched the movie/broadway versions of little shop, but I have watched bits and pieces of them. And I agree that the Frank Oz film ending is just plain sad. Had no choice, no defense, no weapons of any kind, just him getting eaten.