Feed me

File: 1504118497349.jpg (31KB, 509x625px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 509x625px

>theatrical ending
Why is this allowed?

File: audreyII_feat.jpg (275KB, 800x459px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 800x459px

>>87138178
>sneed me seymour!

>>87138210
The theatrical ending was objectively better, though.

>>87138294
No it fucking wasn't.

>>87138178
Nice performances, nice sets, great costuming, AMAZING visual effects, excellent camera hustling. Wonderful musical film except for the godawful lyrics

>>87139527
>except for the godawful lyrics
What's wrong with the lyrics?

Is this the musical thread

>>87138817
Yes it was, I don‘t care what the fans of the original ending say: The theatrical ending is still objectively superior. Seymour was not a cold-blooded killer: he just a patsy who happened upon some bad circumstances. He didn't directly kill anybody, and in the end, he finally came to his senses by putting an end to the plant, saving the world, and getting the girl of his dreams. And as far as this "oh, the original tells of the folly of greed" crap, what I gather from that is that the whole world have to suffer because Seymour made a couple of bad choices. He was basically a good person with a good heart. Didn't Seymour turn down Patrick Martin's offer to sell Audrey 2s? If he was truly greedy, he would have been like: "Screw them, I want the money." But no, like A Christmas Carol, it showed that a person can change his life around if he wants to. The original ending was fucking awful, because although it looked fantastic, it was just dark for the sake of dark. If all a movie is going to tell you at the end is: "the world sucks, people are evil, and life has no purpose", then you are providing the audience with absolutely nothing in the end. You have to leave a movie with something.

>>87139748
Nothing