Movies & TV Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for movie and tv enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

At the end of "Field of Dreams", Terence Mann gets invited to go with the baseball players into the corn field, and presumably the after-life:

Ray. Ray. Listen to me, Ray. Listen to me. There is something out there, Ray, and if I have the courage to go through with this, what a story it'll make: "Shoeless Joe Jackson Comes to Iowa".

But he doesn't go into the corn field fearing death. He seems to think he will come back and be able to write a story on what he's seen.

When he walks into the corn field and disappears, does he die?

share|improve this question
    
Great question. There is so much speculation as to what is really going on. There is a whole sixth sense theory going on that suggests Mann was dead from the get go, or died after Ray picked him up. It's also thought that Mann embraced death by going into the field even though he says he'll come back to write about it, he could possibly come back as the players were doing. His statement to Ray about not coming with him into the field suggests that it is the way to death. I'm only posting this as a comment because I have no sources to prove anything. – DustinDavis May 21 '14 at 22:05
    
With sincere appologies to @andrew-martin for the most excellent and well thought out answer, I've actually flagged this as Off Topic Too Broad. My actual problem is that the answers MUST be opinion based, since the movie itself (and screen play) don't answer it. The novel that gave the screen play's author his inspiration was only that: inspiration. – CGCampbell May 22 '14 at 12:52
    
@CGCampbell: No apologies needed, but I think these questions are fine. Even though they are opinion based, we can draw on something as opposed to just guessing. There's a fair few questions in this mould on the site,e.g. about The Sixth Sense, Groundhog Day etc – Andrew Martin May 22 '14 at 13:09
up vote 9 down vote accepted

TLDR:

We don't know. There are logical arguments to suggest either side.

Long Answer:

Firstly, thank you for a wonderful question!

Background:

Now, to truly answer this question, it's important to understand who Terence Mann is. Or at least, who he is supposed to represent: J.D. Salinger, the American author most famous for writing the wonderful novel: The Catcher in the Rye.

If you'd like a longer description of this link, take a look at this article. I'll try and summarise it here:

Effectively Field of Dreams is based on a book called Shoeless Joe, by author W.P. Kinsella. In the novel there is no Terence Mann. All the other characters are there, but not Terence Mann. Basically, Kinsella, like many others, read and was fascinated by The Catcher in the Rye and became a huge Salinger fan. In fact, he was such a huge fan that he wanted to include Salinger in one of his novels.

Now, Salinger was very well known for being both reclusive and vehemently against the use of himself or his characters in the media. Despite this, Kinsella went ahead and included him in the book, as a reclusive author who is brought out of his safe place to fulfil his baseball dreams (an admitted desire of Salinger).

Once Salinger discovered his involvement, he was furious. He didn't have enough grounds for a legal case, but made it clear that if the book was ever adapted into other media, he would fiercely oppose it.

To handle this, the film creators made a brand new character, Terence Mann, with the exact same background as Salinger.

So, anything Mann does in the novel, or any of his behaviour, has to be considered knowing all the above information. Kinsella and the film creators knew that his character was effectively J.D. Salinger.

Theories/Possibilities:

So in light of that, here are some theories:

  • Mann is dead most of the film - from the moment he stepped out in front of Ray's car. He had just been dropped off and suddenly appeared to undergo a personality of change of sorts and was desperate to see the field.

This is a fan-theory that's been around for years, that suggests he dies after being dropped off (perhaps a collision?) and that he spends most of the film dead. However, I don't want to go into any more details on it, purely because upon any close inspection it seems to fall apart. After all, his disappearance is reported in the media! Hardly what happens to ghosts. He also calls his father, so, unlike in The Sixth Sense where the protagonist never directly interacts with those around him, Mann is involved and participating in his surroundings.

  • Given the fact this whole character is actually Salinger, it was Kinsella (and the film creators) demonstrating the idea of a man stepping out of his reclusive shadow and embracing the endless possibilities the future holds.

This actually makes a lot of sense. At the end, it's unclear exactly what has happened to Mann. He talks like he may come back, but even if he doesn't, who says he can't write? Effectively, he's going to a new beginning, a new start. This is exactly what Kinsella intended when he wrote the character of Salinger (to give him a "second chance"), so it seems perfectly logical that this was his intention for the movie-only character of Mann.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter where he goes, only that he is progressing and moving out of his reclusive shell. The experience of going into the corn is him embracing whatever lies in front of him. He is in someway "embracing death", because he's embracing all the possibilities of life, whatever they may be (including the possibility of death) - as opposed to locking himself away from the world as he was originally doing.

  • He walks into the corn knowing he is going to his death, but fully embracing this as he is ready to move on to a different existence

This is very similar to the above theory, but effectively goes one step further. It's not just that he is curious about whatever lies in front of him, but that he knows he is going to his death and actively embraces this fact because he wants to experience something wonderful, different and new. This option is also quite logical. After all, all the other players who come from the corn are dead. And remember this part of the film:

RAY: Wait a second. Why him?

Shoeless Joe and the other players wait for Mann to join them, ignoring Ray's question.

RAY: I built this field! You wouldn't be here if it weren't for me.

MANN: Ray, for God's sake, I'm unattached. You've got a family.

Mann's last line certainly suggests there is something more sinister at play here - that he is going somewhere beyond human comprehension and it is unknown if he will return. And theoretically, if he did go, he could write his experiences anytime he returned to the field, even if he could never leave it.

Conclusion

We don't know what happened to Mann. The idea he's dead the whole movie seems untenable, but whether he dies at the end or not is certainly up for discussion. There are logical arguments either way, but given the rest of the players on the team, it seems most logical (to me at least) that he did "die" - or at least "pass on" in the way the baseball players did. However, it was left ambiguous for a reason - to allow discussions like this!

You should also note that the book ends the same way. Salinger gets chosen (based on the same interview Mann discusses in the movie, about his dream of playing baseball) and walks through the field, whilst Ray and his wife go the other direction.

Anyway, on a final note, although my head says he is most likely dead, my heart likes to believe it was just a symbolic representation of what Kinsella wanted Salinger to do - to embrace the new possibilities in life and leave his reclusive nature behind him.

share|improve this answer

He was alive during the movie, because there are too many people that see and interact with him, so we are talking about opinion then based on what each of us are seeing. I have thought about it each time I watch this movie. I have come to the conclusion that he (Terrance Mann)was a part of the entire cosmic game that was being played on that field in Iowa and had a roll to play just like Shoeless Joe had. I believe that it was just his time to go and that it was the way it was suppose to happen from the time that the voice first spoke to ray in the field. The part of the movie that has given me the most reason to ponder about this is the picking up of the hitch hiker Doc Graham when he was already known to be dead. The best that I can come up with is that it was just part of the magic because he never was seen by any other but the people that were a part of the magic.

share|improve this answer

Ray tells Terrence that a newspaper article states that Terrence's father hasn't heard from him and that his father was worried. When Ray leaves the hotel room, Terrence acts like he'll make the call to his dad. "What will I tell him" he says. You never see him make the call. I believe Terrence was a ghost at the apartment. Ray orders hotdogs at Fenway for Terrence. Terrence only interacts with those he knows can see him.

share|improve this answer

Perhaps another theory in between. I believe that Terrance Mann died in the van just before arriving at the hotel in Chisholm. Consider this. We see him driving once on the way to Chisholm, but that is the last needed activity.

However, if you skip that one driving time, then the last time he interacts with someone is at the ball club. He orders a beer and a hotdog. Rays says "make that too". Unless these guys are ghosts, they could not have known what they ordered. But my belief is that he was alive at the park and died either after Ray drops him off at his apartment or on the way to Chisholm.

IF you say he died after he was dropped off, that makes a lot of sense. There was construction, traffic, and an electric bus on the street. He fell and hit his head, got hit by a car, had a heart attack or got shocked. Consider, it would have taken 5 minutes to go upstairs and get a bag, wallet, book and or notepad. But he did not. Why?

So, either way, this means that (perhaps) the receptionist at the newspaper was a ghost and so were all the men at the bar. If you accept that, the (lack of) a phone call to Terrance's father and the rest makes sense. Ray knew that Terrance died in the car and that the ghost is what is left.

share|improve this answer

Mann was alive when he came to Iowa. Ray's brother-in-law saw and interacted with him when they introduced each other. At that time the brother-in-law could not see the ghosts on the field, therefore Terence had to be alive.

share|improve this answer

I just watched this movie last night and I agree w/ +sophillydave that the interaction of T. Mann (James Earl Jones) with other's that can see him are those that are in someway believers we know that Ray (Costner's Character) can clearly see ghost since he spoke to the Doc in the street and later the younger version of the Doc on the highway with T. Mann. I believe that Mr. Mann is dead and perhaps died in his apartment since it appear in the papers that he's father is worried. He has not heard from him. Think this: How old would Mr. Mann's father have to be since Mr. Mann himself has to be well over 60 yr. in the movie. One can say that Mr. Mann (James Earl Jones) has passed in the apt.
When they go to the game and later leave after Ray sees the message, only one seat Ray's seems to have been occupied. In addition to the ending where only Mr. Mann get's invited to the corn field. As for the Brother-in-law seeing him. He doesn't recognize who the person is one can see he is seeing a different person or apparition to explain it. My conclusion: Dead.

share|improve this answer

Mark (Timothy Busfield), the skeptic of all skeptics, can see him the entire time, before he sees the ballplayers. Imo that's proof he's alive the entire time. Remember, he interviews people in Minnesota about Moonlight Graham. I think he embraces that he's near the end and willing to accept he may not return from Corn-Valhalla (Corn-vana?) living but I never had any assumption he was deceased.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.