This is a question that I hoped would be answered in the film, but as is usually the case with Noe's work, the ambiguity is what keeps the story alive in your head long after viewing. Here's what I decided in my own head!
From a purely physical point of view, the beating that followed the rape was incredibly severe and all focused on her face and head. I would think it very unlikely that there would be no lasting damage ... and the paramedics do specify that she is in a coma, rather than being knocked unconscious, the difference being response to certain stimuli.
In the case of blunt trauma to the head, coma can be instant and would likely be diagnosed at the scene by lack of eye opening, verbal response or motor response to verbal and physical stimuli.
Coma can be the body's way of preserving energy to heal injuries and, if we assume that none of the blows to the head on the concrete floor actually fractured her skull, recovery is possible, but not certain.
Additionally, the health of the baby would likely be uncompromized, as none of the attack focused on her midsection.
But ...
From the point of view of the movie's overall message, I think that we are to believe that the attack left her in an unrecoverable state. That is to say, her injuries are irreversible.
The main events within the plot are all based around things that change a person permanently. Finding you are pregnant, being brutally attacked and raped, finding that the woman you love has BEEN attacked and raped and of course, hunting down who you believe to be the rapist and murdering him.
Thematically, it follows that Alex's injuries are permanent and that, at best she is left brain damaged, if she even survives.
This would further serve to point out the pointlessness of the revenge attack, adding to the fact the we know they killed the wrong guy - and the chronological device that showed us that attack before we knew the provocation, giving us a more unbiased view of the murder.
reply
share