The Lasting Impact with Some of the Best End Credit Songs

Music and songs have always played an important role in filmmaking since its inception of the silent era. Whether it is a moving soundtrack or a well-placed song, music adds not only to individual scenes but to the entire movie and even beyond. We often recognize, identify, and associate movies with their unforgettable soundtrack; be it the themes of the Godfather, Lawrence of Arabia, or Love Story, the soundtrack takes us right back to the movie itself and is often intimately connected with our feelings and sensations experienced while watching the said film.

As someone who has grown up with music videos having been part of the glorious MTV generation, I especially appreciate it when filmmakers make effective and full use of this. The film may at times come off as a music video or worse a perfume commercial but in the right and capable hands, all this will make us feel elated. Not that music is always necessary as the Dogme 95 movement has demonstrated, yet it paints a vivid picture and adds push, drive, and adrenaline as seen and experienced rather memorably in films like The Social Network or even Challengers (a shoutout to the talented duo of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross).

Yet, I believe that end credit songs are equally important and relevant to the movie experience, and they may be somewhat underrated or downplayed in their overall effect and influence of the movie itself. This is rather a type of after effect or of coming together of sorts. It can also accentuate or emphasize certain emotions either experienced throughout the film or be intimately connected to a given protagonist. I will briefly discuss a handful of end credit songs that I found lasting and impactful and that have significantly enriched my movie experience. Here we go in no particular order:

 

Suicide in Civil War

No, not the Marvel movie. Sure, that one was quite good and impactful but not as heart-wrenching as Garland’s depiction of what a (second!) American civil war would look and feel like. To be honest, I hated the film at my initial viewing; when it was over I thought it was mediocre at best. The plot was nonexistent, it was random scenes connected to a misguided road trip, snapshots of a conflict that was never fleshed out alongside characters that were one-dimensional; the dialogue was not well-crafted and not really memorable, and the ending was just dark and pointless.

That may have been the point you might rightly point out as the characters, both new and seasoned reporters and journalists are just taking note and documenting events outside of their control via the medium of pictures. This is undertaken perhaps for posteriority, out of curiosity, or simply for themselves, a type of self-gratification. Yet, before we get to the final shot, not unpredictably another still, there is the intro of a song that feels out of place and yet at the same time precisely augments and elevates the feelings of despair expressed in the movie.

The song in question was by a band I had not heard of before but it has been rather influential. Their name is characteristically Suicide, and the lyrics are simple but effective in their simplicity: dream, baby, dream. There was devastation, death, and destruction throughout the film’s running time, and then the film ends on rhythms that may have come from a second-rate synthesizer with lyrics that could have been penned by a high school student. In other words, it was baffling and utterly brilliant.

In fact, I had to look up the song and got a Google alert due to the band’s name and then I put it on repeat, listening to it countless times. As I was doing so, the final scene from the movie started replaying in my mind and I began to appreciate its deliberate tone and overall message. It literally helped me change my mind and feelings towards the movie and I saw what Garland was trying to show us here. In fact, it turned out to be a movie that must be watched especially in the background and context of today’s world, politics, and polarization.

Although some have criticized the film for not taking sides, I believe those critics missed out on the whole point (yes, it did have a point after all!), namely, to show us and document the brutality, callousness, and evil of a civil war and that it would not be in any way or manner a glorified war or a glorious revolution. No, all we would get is mayhem, chaos, death, and destruction, and the end of a once beautiful and promising nation. But as the song points out, we should not lose our ability to dream, baby, dream of a better future and a better more peaceful world despite it all.

 

Sinnerman in Inland Empire

Now Lynch’s Inland Empire was a baffling movie and that is a serious understatement. It also means a lot especially considering that we often equate the word “mind-bending” with this filmmaker whose films have pushed envelopes, boundaries, and our imagination, and which often represent Kafka’s worst nightmares reimagined on the screen. Throughout, his movies have been scored by the outstanding composer Angelo Badalamenti, whether it is the sad melancholic opening piece for Blue Velvet or the jazzy but equally sad and yearning intro of Fire Walk With Me.

Yet nothing compared to the ending of Inland Empire. This may be a spoiler except first, there is nothing to spoil here, and second, nothing really happens and yet everything does. The driving song is “Sinnerman” by Nina Simone, and we see characters coming together not as characters but as actors portraying them.

It is dark but weirdly uplifting and, in a way, there is a sense of catharsis not in a clear and direct way but rather in a surreal unconscious way and form. Suddenly, everything comes together, the monkeys, though random, somehow make perfect sense, and we understand on a nonverbal level why there were talking bunnies, and the film feels complete as a result.

The counterpoint and statement of this well-chosen song brings it all home and ties up the different knots or rather unties them for us and give us a full picture. Perhaps any other ending would have made me feel that I had just wasted a good three hours of my life on a movie that was disjointed and all over the place. But that was not the feeling I left with, courtesy of the vibrant and memorable song of “Sinnerman.”

 

This House is…. The House

The House is yet another surreal experience woven around the concept of a… house. It is stop-motion animated and consists of three short films that are in no discernible way connected to each other and that each feel different as they take place in different time periods and more importantly in different houses made by different filmmakers.

The first one is more like a traditional goth horror story set in the 1800s; the second one, a bizarre real estate interaction set in the 2000s involving various rats, which goes horribly and devastatingly wrong as the place becomes infested with bugs and insects (don’t ask), and the third one set in a (more or less) distant future, which ranges from anthropomorphic cat renters from hell to renters from another spiritual realm during an upcoming end-of-world disaster.

Although each vignette was well-made, I was wondering what the point of this anthology was. Then I heard the final song. It was not only thematically linked to the house and delineated the difference between a house and a home, but it was in the voice (literally) of one of the characters.

It was the second film’s real estate developer played by Jarvis Cocker singing as an anthropomorphic rat musing about how a house was nothing but a building, just a number of bricks put together, whereas a home was where the heart was. And suddenly, the house transformed into an important symbol of both estrangement and feeling at home, and I could not help but to love and appreciate how the film somehow with the aid of this final song managed to connect three random stories into one.

 

Hoist that Rag in A Most Wanted Man

A Most Wanted Man was very good throughout, but the final scene played brilliantly by Philip Seymour Hoffman, such a huge and irreplaceable loss to the world of cinema, summed up despair, frustration, and desperation in palpable ways. The song by Tom Waits only underscores the feeling of helplessness of someone being played by higher forces or simply forces that are outside of one’s control.

In the film, we see how the protagonist tries hard to make things work and to gain credit and recognition only to have everything unexpectedly snatched away from him in the last minute. He steps out the car, drives along but you can sense his nervousness and anger, and then it all ends and culminates in the mesmerizing Tom Waits song. I think of this character whenever I hear this song; they are intricately linked together in my mind, and at the same time, I realize how much I miss this towering acting legend who left us much too soon!

 

Honorable Mentions

I would like to finish with three honorable mentions. First off, Tarantino’s rather mediocre Death Proof, arguably one of this worst and least interesting films (I did like Jackie Brown but had strong reservations when it came to The Hateful Eight), but this grindhouse film ends with a brilliant piece of filmmaking and a catchy punchy end song.

It feels quite liberating and feminist as the women joyfully and gleefully take revenge on the perpetrator played coolly by Kurt Russell with the Serge Gainsbourg song "Chick Habit" in the background (originally “Laisse tomber les filles”) that is a warning to better not mess with girls (in its original not to play with an innocent heart) as they could just like that come back and bite you and even kick you in the head before you know it. This ending elevated what was a rather bland and uninteresting film when viewed and considered by Tarantino’s standards.

Then there is a Dogville that not unlike Inland Empire made us think what the hell we had just watched until the pulsating tune of “Young Americans” by David Bowie appears with images from the civil rights movement, and we suddenly understand that the film was criticizing and commenting on various elements of American history, culture, and mentality. And just like that we find ourselves back at square one.

Authenticity, Role-Playing and Leading Double Lives in Bertolucci's Last Tango in Paris

One of the movies that had been on my watchlist for a very long time, we may be even talking decades here, is Bernardo Bertolucci’s notorious and controversial Last Tango in Paris. Bertolucci was known to often push the envelope, yet in this case, it may have backfired a bit. It seems that the film got a lot of attention and publicity for the wrong reasons and for its somewhat shallower and superficial aspects, which overshadowed its different strengths alongside the depth expressed in this idiosyncratic film.

The frankness and vulgarity can feel shocking and even jarring to this day, whereas the graphic nature and the explicitness in terms of sexuality fail to compare with other films that have radically pushed ahead and passed and surpassed many taboos and boundaries since the inception of this film. Arguably, this may have been due to the existence of Bertolucci’s groundbreaking Tango and let us not forget that famed French enfant terrible filmmaker Catherine Breillat appears briefly in it; still, there is more than meets the eye and much more to this movie than its controversy.

In fact, the strength of this film lies in what it has to say about its characters and their relationships with themselves and with others, including but not solely pertaining to issues of sexuality and the physical expression thereof. Furthermore, the film brings up and touches upon various themes that play with notions of reality versus fiction, lived versus imagined lives, and wishful thinking versus the reality of things. On the surface, it is an anti-romantic and anti-idealistic film but somehow it ends up holding and containing certain elements and seeds of romance and idealism within its dark heart.

To further explore this, the symbol of the double is of relevance. Interestingly, the word double has in fact two meanings. On one hand, it is a copy or mirror image of something or someone, while on the other hand, it is a splitting and separating into two, which may contain unequal or unwanted parts.

In the first instance, we have a type of doppelganger, someone who looks, acts or thinks as we do. The focus is on similarities, which can be eerie in some cases, and it is not unlike being identical twins. A cinematic equivalent of this would be Kieslowski’s The Double Life of Veronique where it seems that the same person is simultaneously living in two different parts of the world (Weronika in Poland and Veronique in France) as a type of carbon copy or duplicate of the other. This double life is as if the same soul had been split into two equal or equivalent parts of the self with each leading its own separate existence miles apart.

Yet sometimes, the double is the shadow or the shadowy self, the parts within us we don’t acknowledge or do not wish to, and this has been exemplified in the push and pull of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, for instance. The personalities lead a double life as there are two different sides to them that for one reason or another are hard to reconcile within the same person and their shared environment.

In fact, the art of filmmaking falls somewhere between both realms. Some filmmakers may create an alter ego, a character that shares many similarities with its creator, say Guido in Fellini’s 8 ½. At the same time, no matter how faithful the representation may be of the real person or real things and events, the film only manages to reflect them and can only be based on them as it is not able to fully and accurately capture the entirety, the same way a snapshot does not give us the full picture.

The problem is that the event cannot be identical with its representation, no matter how hard one tries, and the closest you can come to a potential replica would be to do a documentary on it; and yet, focus, editing, and other filmmaking choices can slightly - or significantly - distort the issues and facts at hand.

Let us now discuss the different doubles and their reflections, deflections, and mirror images in Bertolucci’s film. Please be aware that from now on there will be major spoilers and do proceed at your own caution. You can of course watch the film first and then return but again, you may need to proceed with caution.

 

The Double Life of Paul

The main protagonist played by Marlon Brando creates a double life for himself. His wife has just committed suicide, and he feels angry, lost, and in limbo. He is looking for a place to stay and then meets Jeanne by accident. It is not that he is sexually attracted to her (at least not initially) as he shows little interest in her or anybody else for that matter. Both are just taking or filling up space in an apartment that feels as dark and gloomy as Paul’s soul.

Yet suddenly and with little warning, he grabs her and makes love to her. It is instinctual and animalistic and has very little to do with any type of feeling. She goes along and does not resist him. Then both walk out, each their own way. But something lingers within each of them, so they decide to continue meeting for these clandestine sexual trysts, but he sets the ground rules from the beginning.

It is essential, he proclaims, to stay away from personal details and information with absolutely no names whatsoever. Each would remain anonymous in this artificial space, and they would agree to never meet outside of the confines of the apartment. After a while, Jeanne finds this frustrating as she has become curious about this strange enigmatic man. Oddly enough, it is this air of mystery that makes him so appealing to her. It is not difficult to see and understand why she is intrigued by Paul, especially after we meet her fiancé, the bland and self-absorbed Tom. But more about their relationship later.

As to Paul, he is grieving but he also displaces his anger, frustrations, and personal failings upon this young woman who has happened to cross his path at an importune time. He is cruel to her at different points of their time together. This makes Jeanne uncomfortable and yet she keeps returning to him and continues taking the abuse and humiliation that he inflicts upon her. This reaches its most extreme point when he anally rapes her while spouting nonsensical phrases about family and religion.

When taken in conjunction with his request to being fingered by her and then spouting vile and disgusting images of pigs and bestiality involving Jeanne, it made me wonder whether the character had been abused by the clergy. In another scene regarding his wife’s funeral arrangements, Paul vehemently opposes his mother-in-law to have priests present at the service while in another scene he almost beats up a man while angrily calling him a “faggot.” There may be homosexual tendencies or traumatic experiences that these scenes and situations insinuate or point towards, especially when taken and considered in connection to each other.

The sexual frustration and the double motif also existed on the side of his wife. For a handful of years, she, the hotel owner was living with one of the guests, an ordinary and insipid-seeming man called Marcel. In fact, she turned him into a stand-in Paul as she got matching bathrobes for each and re-lived and re-enacted similar or the same routines with either one of them.

The scene where both Paul and Marcel are sitting next to each other in identical bathrobes after the suicide of their respective wife and lover has a surreal touch to it; it also underscores the hinted double life that Rosa had during her marriage with Paul. Her lover Marcel went along with the charade and did not counteract or oppose Rosa’s wishes and desires. Soon enough, the passion ran out, but they still pretended to be a duplicate version of the joyless marriage she had with Paul who was residing a few hotel rooms away from there.

After Paul, in a moving and emotionally stunning scene, pours out his heart to the corpse of Rosa surrounded by an array of flowers and with make-up on her pale motionless face, he seems to change his air. Suddenly, he comes to or becomes more himself and then passionately pleads Jeanne to stay with him. Jeanne who up to then had merely been a projection of Rosa with all his bottled-up hatred and resentment aimed at her suddenly becomes a different person to him. Although he had previously turned her down and even mocked her for confessing her love to him, he now wants to start anew and begin an actual relationship with her.

At this point, Paul breaks all his made-up rules, goes up to her on the street, gives his name, tells her his age and that he is a widow and that his wife has committed suicide. All these intimate details pour out in a frenzy and in less than a minute. He also shares with her later that he owns a hotel and that he would now like to be and live with her.

This sudden move has its opposite effect. Jeanne may realize that she was never in love with him but that she rather loved the persona, this fictious double that he had created for her. As a result, she loses interest and decides to break up their relationship (or whatever it was that they had previously). Instead, she prefers to get married to Tom. In typical fashion, Paul cannot accept this and starts chasing her down the streets of Paris in another surreal scene that borders on the comical in its emotional overreach and intensity.

Before the film and Paul, the American, reach their respective end in her Parisian apartment, I would also like to point out the fact that Brando did not stick to the script but added his own flourishes and lines throughout the movie. The infamous and humiliating use of butter, something that the actress Maria Schneider had not been aware of was indeed his idea. There are other lines that stand out and look and sound improvised and probably were not part of the script.

Instead of simply being an actor that plays the character, Brando was modifying the role as he went along by adding a more personal dimension to Paul. This is Paul as imagined by Bertolucci and reinterpreted by the actor Marlon Brando. The alter ego becomes another double that is split apart from what the original character was supposed to be like and this occurs and evolves during the process of acting and filmmaking.

 

The Double Life of Jeanne

Jeanne seems like a person full of energy and zest for life who has unfortunately settled for an artificial relationship with wannabe filmmaker Tom played by Jean-Pierre Léaud. In this sense, I cannot help but think of Bertolucci, the director who is trying to express his desires, wishes, and fantasies alongside his pain and confusion via the medium of images, words, and sounds.

Yet, there is a hint of criticism there as Tom is as shallow and vapid as they come. He does not seem capable of true feelings and in fact lives in a world of fantasy in which there is nothing else but he himself and the movies. This can be seen from the moment they first appear together where he wants his crew to film everything they say and do, no matter how private and confidential. She is, according to him, the main subject of his next film.

There are various other scenes in which he supposedly explores Jeanne’s childhood and past including her first experiences of love and romance, but it is serving only the purpose of making an “authentic” documentary-style film. In this case, what is real is turned upside down and is put on its head. Although Jeanne expresses her feelings, he is less interested in her than capturing all this to make a movie out of it. It is exploitative in nature and serves only his own purposes instead of appreciating and respecting her feelings.

In that sense, Jeanne is just a character he happens to marry for the intents and purposes of making a movie about a man who decides to get married to a woman like Jeanne. He does not explore her because he is not interested in her as a person while he himself has little if anything to offer because he does not have a self or personality to speak of.

What is it that Bertolucci intended to say or show with this film? Part of it is of course the desire to make a film that pushes boundaries but also it talks about how we create doubles in different shapes and forms in our lives. It could be a double of ourselves, where he split into two seemingly incompatible beings, Paul in his two versions, Jeanne as Paul’s lover and Tom’s fiancée, Rosa as Paul’s wife and Marcel’s lover.

In each of these cases, this lack of authenticity creates a vacuum that accentuates the pain and suffering underlying each life. At the same time, since each of them fails to connect with their own nature, they are incapable of connecting with other people and their relationships become a bundled mess that lacks honesty, integrity or any type of sincere feeling or sentiment.

Final Thoughts?

In the end, we can create works of art via sublimation, but we must be aware to distinguish one from the other or at least not get confused between the two. Reality is a tricky thing and the moment you try to capture it, it seems to fly off the handle. Yet at the same time, we do not want to live in a world that is purely of our own making; we ought to rather find or settle for a comprise and integration of the two while continuously trying to find or be ourselves or remain authentic to what we believe to be our true nature.

Otto Rank and Thoughts on Individuality, Education, and Indoctrination

All absolute viewpoints, positions, and actions are fallacious; moderation is the key to everything, and we ought to question all things and matters. Although I believe in that statement, I am also aware of its inherent fallacies and contradictions. It is in and by itself what it claims to denounce, and it is like the statement that reflects on itself by saying that this statement is true. In other words, it is an absolute statement that wishes to eliminate or at least sow some doubts into all statements, beliefs, and thinking that are deemed absolute but at the same time, it is essentially and inherently a paradox in and of itself.

Secondly, this also underscores the importance of moderation and although we can counter that the practice and statement itself should be also taken in moderation, i.e. everything to be taken in moderation including moderation itself, yet it should be seen as a more balanced way of refraining being taken or rather being taken in by any radical one-sided viewpoints and lifestyles. Lastly, we should question everything including questioning whether we should question all things, or not. The main aim here is not to confuse or play with words but to point to serious issues and reach some potential and hopefully clearer understanding of them.

Otto Rank in his book Beyond Psychology points at the internal conflict and dilemma of the educational system, which at the same time becomes a microcosm and symbol of the paradox of human existence. On one side, education aims at general knowledge and the formation and development of the self, as in the inspirational Greek call for self-discovery, namely, to search for and “know thyself.”

Yet on the other hand, there must be necessary limits, restraints, and compromises for society to co-exist together in relative peace and harmony, a type of social contract or acceptance of laws and responsibilities to be able to live together. This is the other aim of education to help and guide us by living the life the way we want while also balancing it with accepting and respecting others to be able to do the same. It is individuality pitted against social conformity, or the individual good versus the common good, and education is the playground where this is played out.

It is a balancing act between what Otto Rank calls the psychology of difference versus the psychology of likeness and it affects us all in one way or another. We want to stand out and be different in terms of our own personality and ways of thinking and being, yet not to the extreme idiosyncratic degree where we would have nothing in common with others. We do need others not only as a foil or point of comparison, but we need them in the sense of our own identity formation be it via groups, clans, nations, families etc. all making part of that which we personally identify with.

It is an existential push and pull (the duality of being an individual) and if taken to its extreme on the side of individuality it can lead to eccentric behavior at best and utter madness at its worst, while conformity in its extreme would strip us of everything that makes us unique, and we would, again at its worst and most extreme, be nothing but a mindless cog in the machine or a humanoid instead of a full-fledged human being.

Education finds itself at this crossroad. On one hand, at least ideally, it wants to help us put ourselves on the path of self-discovery to find ourselves and to bring out not only our unique ways of being but aid us in expressing this via speaking and writing and to guide us towards thinking for ourselves, commonly referred to as critical thinking. That said, I much prefer the term thinking outside of the box and in that sense to be authentic, steadfast, and even revolutionary in one’s own thoughts and viewpoints.

Yet, left on its own and unharnessed, this could potentially lead to chaos and dissonance, and even further left field to anarchistic tendencies, hence education wants to also help us maintain and adhere to social order. This is not meant in the fascist or communist sense but rather as its opposite, to uphold democracy and democratic tenets and not to give sway to forms of totalitarianism of any stripe or color.

As Otto Rank put it, communism and fascism are two sides on the same coin. It is in either case, a denial of freedom and choice by means of force and violence. In communism, the ideology that we are all the same and equal is enforced and imprinted upon everyone whereas individual difference is not only frowned upon but intentionally stifled.

In the case of fascism, we have the opposite end of the spectrum; it is the individual and their differences that are underscored alongside the belief that a given collective group, entity, and ethnicity is not perceived as equal and as a matter of fact deemed superior to others. In both situations, the individual and their rights and choices are disregarded and trampled upon for the sake of what each ideology sees as the common good.

Education plays a crucial and often unspoken role in all of this by ways and means of indoctrination. Ideologies are then inserted, consciously or unconsciously, into the curriculum or the institution. Education ought to be free of any politics or ideologies but, in practice, this is often a different story. A particular ideology may hold sway at a given time and/or in a certain environment, and, as such, the school or university would not be educating people anymore but molding and even brainwashing them.

This is not limited to the realm of education but also applies to psychology. The current norm is upheld as a golden standard and everything that goes against it in one way or another is shunned. The individual who does not fit the particular mold is then fashioned and molded to get rid of the parts that are in conflict with it. This could be achieved via different means and methods, ranging from medication, institutionalization, or on a more common basis, by changing thoughts and views through cognitive therapy. The given patient or client is adjusted and re-adjusted to what is considered to be the current standard of sanity or normalcy.

Certainly, in many cases, this is indeed helpful and necessary as I would not want to state absolute statements or throw the baby out with the bathwater. Yet, the problem lies exactly in the mistaken belief that one’s view is and must be absolutely correct, whether we are talking about the patient, the psychiatrist, or the mental health expert.

This can be evidenced in what was considered abnormal in the past, including any difference or deviation in terms of sexuality or sexual preferences. What was considered abnormal and even illegal has become more accepted and commonplace because our views, values, and ways of thinking have changed. We have in addition to the conflict between the self and the other, the individual and society, another factor that is rigidity versus openness and flexibility.

That is another element of a delicate balancing act, and it should be a staple not only in psychology, politics, and education but also a personal practice of each and every one to move from fixed beliefs and mindsets to one of curiosity and empathy so that one is not held captive or hostage by the latest trends and fashions of the day. 

Change is a constant that we experience in our daily life but at the same time, we are often enticed and driven to latch onto the most current view by eschewing anything that went before because we feel we are at a vantage point, which we deem superior to the previous one. Regardless of the truth and value of this, issues may arise when this is done in a radical and absolutist way and by denying or ignoring the necessary nuances and considerations that come with it.

You may also be interested in the following post and the podcast below:

Otto Rank The Soulful Psychoanalyst: From Psyche to Beyond Psychology

 The Work, insights, Influence, and Legacy of Otto Rank with Robert Kramer and Kirk Schneider