Shallow Grave

[misk111]

Spoiler. So, is Alex dead or alive at the end? I used to say alive but after watching it again I am swaying towards dead. Does anybody have a convincing arguement for either please?

[sft42]

What does it matter? It's not an integral part of the film at all......if he's alive the cops have him...if not them the big knife pinning him to the floor boards have him....personally I'd like to think he lives and gets the money later on.

[Caladon]

he is alive. he can't die from the knife in his shoulder. as the camera pans down, following the blade, to under the floor boards where the cash is...he starts to laugh and shows he now has the money. of course he lives

[Pickle]

I'm with Caladon. It makes much more sense for him to laugh if he knows he's going to live and keep the money. I think he probably gets away with it too, as the others have gone and he can blame it all on them.

[andy hughes]

He absolutely lives - and because he couldn't have pinned himself to the florr, the money is his to keep, wether his cohorts are found or not. It's one of the few films I;ve watched and been so engrossed that I actrually said "Yes!" out loud, much to the amusement of other patrons, and the horror of my companion!

[sft42]

I just re-watched this film on the basis of this discussion and folks there is no definitive version on this one (unless anyone knows the director?)....He's losing plenty of claret while he is pinned there and his laughter could just as easy be interpreted to mean that he is thinking of what is going to happen in the very next scene we are shown in the film when Juliet open the case and finds that the money isn't there.....Though having said all that if you look behind him when the inspector (Ken Stott) comes in you'll see two paramedics talking very casually, that might indicate that his injuries aren't life threatening?....Basically you takes your pick but I don't think he would get the money as surely plod would discover it when they search the flat for forensic evidence?

[andy hughes]

I hate to get 'trainspotterish (no pun intended!) on this - but if Alex has obviously had no part in the shenanegins (as far as the police are concerned) he has only to retrieve the money and skip the country before any examination of the flat takes place. He can't be arrested, he hasn't done anything except get GBH from a murderer, so I stick with my version - he's home free, and I say again "Yes!" ... sorry, got carried away there!

[violaine]

I understand what everyone's saying, but the one thing that makes me wonder is: if he's alive, why aren't they giving him medical attention? Even if they think he's a criminal, the police wouldn't leave him there to suffer or to die, surely. I've always wondered about the ending of the film, and I've never been able to come to an firm conclusion. If I had to say either way, my guess would be that Alex is dead, and his reaction at the end when the police are in the apartment is meant to represent him having a kind of afterlife expeerience: even though he's dead, he's satisfied to know that he's won the battle over the money and that even though he won't be around to spend it, it still means that his other flatmates never managed to get it all to themselves in the end either. Of course, the thing that would go against that view is that the film hasn't contained any 'unreal' elements before then - eg. fantasies, dream scenes - so for the film to break with realism only at the end would seem inconsistent with the rest of the movie. So I can't say for sure either way; there is evidence to support both sides of the argument. Does anyone know if the writer and director have ever commented on this issue? Or is it something they wanted to be deliberately ambiguous?