Seymour offers meat from the butcher as a safe alternative, but the plant refuses- “Must be blood… must be fresh!” The plant suggests murder as a source of fresh blood, a proposition that Seymour understandably balks at, even as the plant tempts him with further fame and fortune (“I have so many strong reservations!” he whines). Now, however, the plant has outgrown simply sucking on Seymour’s wounds and, for the first time, vocally demands food. As the plant grew, so did the success of Mushnik’s Skid-Row Florist, the flower shop where Seymour lived. Prior to this scene, Seymour maintained control over the plant by allowing it only to feed on his own blood. The conflict between the three forces begins during the song, “Feed Me (Git it)”.
The plot of the film is Seymour attempting to navigate the demands of the plant while striving to be worthy of Audrey- the ego, attempting to satisfy the id and superego- and a harrowing reminder of what happens when our base instincts go unchecked. Its job is to fulfill the primal needs of the id in a way that doesn’t harm society and to implement the ideals of the superego in a practical way.These three traits correspond perfectly to the main three characters: the plant is a ravenous beast, constantly demanding food from Seymour while lecherously pawing at him and making bawdy comments about the carnal benefits of murder (“Think about a room at the Ritz/wrapped in velvet, covered in glitz/a little nookie gonna clean up your zits and you’ll get it!”), while Audrey is so perfectly pure and innocent, her picturesque fantasy of domestic suburban life with Seymour involves going to bed at 9:15… in separate beds, of course. The ego is the mediator between the id and superego. To contrast, the superego is the ideal: it’s an idea of an unattainable perfection that drives us to make moral decisions. The id is the animalistic part of the mind– it doesn’t care about society, morals, or much of anything aside from eating and mating. Before the original ending is seen in wide release, a revisit of the changed ending seems appropriate– as well as an examination of how it ultimately worked in the final film’s favor, by transforming the story from a moral against making a deal with the devil to a psychological fable.įirst, a pop psychology primer: Sigmund Freud argued that the human mind is essentially separated into three parts. Recently, rumors have begun to swirl regarding a rerelease of the film on Blu-ray for Halloween of this year, with the original ending reportedly restored. It has become ingrained in the public consciousness, with nearly every plant character since homaging Audrey II in mannerisms or design. Director Frank Oz lamented the change, as did fans of the original musical, claiming it undermined the original moral of the story.ĭespite the ending, however, the film garnered positive reviews and made a respectable sum at the box office. Test audiences balked en masse at this ending, and a happier one where Seymour manages to destroy the plant was filmed instead. Originally, the plant monster, Audrey II (voiced by Levi Stubbs), devoured Seymour Krelborn (Rick Moranis), the nebbish owner of the plant who had been enticed into feeding it human flesh, and Audrey (Ellen Greene), the love of Seymour’s life, before going on to conquer the world as the choir warned the audience against giving in to temptation in the song “Finale Ultimo (Don’t Feed the Plants)”. Little Shop of Horrors, the 1986 film version of Alan Menken’s cult musical hit, has gained a rather controversial reputation for its changed ending.
0 kommentar(er)
