Walking out of the theater after seeing a film with a satisfying ending is like walking out of a restaurant stuffed: the last thing you want to do is go back in for another meal.  As a filmmaker, it seems in my best interest to end my films in such a way that the audience craves to go back in again.

I’ve consistently found that the first time through many of the films I’ve come to love, I walk out scratching my head thinking “really? what’s the big deal?”  That’s the key.

It wasn’t until I walked out of the Coen Brothers’ A Serious Man (2009) that I firmly grasped the power of this sort of ending.

An ending that’s tied up nicely in a bow leaves the viewer with nothing to do.  Everyone’s alive; mankind will survive to fight another day; they got married.  An ending with ambiguity allows the viewer to ask themselves the crucial question: “What did I miss?”  The answer? Everything.

The final thought contextualizes the entire film.  It provides that little bit of knowledge that makes all of the preceding scenes ring true.  In the particular case of A Serious Man, it introduces the relationship between deus ex machina and coincidence.  As Larry Gopnik finally receives his tenure, a tornado threatens the life of his first son.  The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away.

This idea is only introduced in this final scene.  There is no tornado striking down young Danny Gopnik, no tearful funeral, no resolution from Larry to go to Temple more often, simply the two situations.  Throughout the film, we have aligned ourselves with Larry in his growing cynicism of Judaism, but this final scene is just enough to instill a heaping dose of doubt.