what the hell happened at the end? - The New Daughter (2010) Discussion

[–] wescravenfan2005 15 years ago

At the end of the movie its easy to assume that the mound and daughter are dead. Its unsure if its the father or a creature that is shown in the picture frame. The girl WAS becoming a creature and that is why he dropped the flare on the mound to save his daughter in a way. All of the Mound Walkers are not dead though because at least three can be seen at the end coming for the little boy. Possibly a fourth since it is unknown what is reflected in the picture frame.

The creatures were "gods" I believe. It tells you right in the movie what they are when he is talking to the Professor about the mound. In my would they are just creepy ass creatures that deserve to be blown up!

I hope this helps!

~Dj~

reply

[–] rsmlr13 15 years ago

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0951335/board/thread/164619373?d=164637172 &p=1#164637172

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rsmlr13 15 years ago

Eh, no problem. There's always "one of those kind" on every forum.

reply

[–] Zando777 15 years ago

Someone unused to the cutesy lingo on this board might not know what "Spoil me" means. Sounds somewhat ghey, anyway.

reply

[–] charles-richardson12 13 years ago

But it's not new at all and it's far from exclusive to IMDb. So I don't think ignorance cuts it for an excuse, gay as the common term may be.

reply

[–] glorfindel37 15 years ago

Hey Northernjays, No offense, but you are asking questions that seemed really obvious.

Were you paying attention during this film?

SPOILERS
SPOILERS
SPOILERS

What the creatures are was explained.

What was happening to the girl seemed obvious. Though somewhat interpratory.

What the creature was doing in the final scene, standing over the girl, protecting her out of desire to have her mother the next children of their race and further the continuation of their species was clear.

What Costner planned to do with the explosive/flamable chemical spashed all over everything and the flare in his hand, and the drum down the hole and the echoing words in your ear from the old man in the burnt house about 'a father will do anything for his daughter, even the worst thing' and 'taking her away from there wont stop it' and then seeing Costner grimly setting everything ablaze was not interpratory, it was all too obvious.

reply

[–] DancerGirl417 15 years ago

Costner died. It there was gas, that why there was an explosion. Did you watch this in widescreen? If you did you could see behind the kid was a creature ready to get the boy, then it ends.

My Makeup Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/Calicogirl2l

reply

[–] dorman76 15 years ago

They all die in the end. Costner lights the torch and tosses it into the mound once he realizes that his daughter has become one of them (whatever the hell they are). For a moment, we see a reflection of someone walking toward the boy in the picture frame, then we see more of the creatures in the background behind the boy. Then the movie suddenly ends (thank God).

Roll credits.

As an afterthought, this movie was incredibly boring, incredibly predictable and incredibly pointless. I have no idea what the creatures were supposed to be nor do I care. If the writer and/or director had fashioned something worthy of our time, it might have been a cool enough notion leaving the creatures (and the mound itself) unexplained. However, given the corny mentions of "burial mounds" and little straw-men I can only assume that even the filmmakers had no f---ing clue what the hell was going on either.

And what the hell was with the allusions to the ant-farm and the "queen ant" and all that BS? I guess we were supposed to think the daughter was the "queen" and the creatures were her worker ants...sorry, my computer just punched me in the balls for typing this stupid sh-t.

reply

[–] one189teen50five 15 years ago

Hey dorman---people like you make everything bleak. What the hell would please you? If you basically "already knew" everything in advance, why did you watch it? Nobody put a gun to your head. Too bad there has to be spoil sports like you. FYI...there are plenty of us who enjoyed this movie. Your computer punched you for saying such stupid nonsense. GOOD COMPUTER.

reply

[–] dorman76 15 years ago

Hey one189teen50five -- let's not be those losers who keep bickering back and forth on an IMDb message board. Okay? that's why it's called an opinion, or a preference. I prefer to dis this movie because it had bland acting, mediocre suspense, no horror, poor storytelling and above all else, a predictable nature. I didn't catch why you thought it was so enjoyable. If you honestly sat there watching Costner's character bury that gun and didn't turn to the person sitting next to you and say: "can't help thinking he's going to have to dig that up later" then what can I say? I guess I must be a freaking psychic. If that makes me a spoil sport (for stating the obvious -- or at the very least, a preference) then so be it. Oh, and FYI...I did have a gun to my head while watching this movie. I put it there myself after about the first 15 minutes.

ps: my balls are feeling much better now. Thank you for asking.

reply

[–] one189teen50five 15 years ago

Whatever. I'm sorry you didn't enjoy it because I sure did. The acting was VERY GOOD, not bland. I really doubt that any movie is perfect. They all have stuff to go wrong. It was not predictable; it was good storytelling, and you just didn't appreciate it. That's all.

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] charles-richardson12 13 years ago

I'm a big movie buff, especially Horror, and pretty much nothing can hold me in suspense anymore, except maybe one or two movies a year. But this did for some reason. Just out of curiosity, what movies did hold you in suspense?

reply

[–] xenatikkanen-1 15 years ago

"And what the hell was with the allusions to the ant-farm and the "queen ant" and all that BS? I guess we were supposed to think the daughter was the "queen" and the creatures were her worker ants...sorry, my computer just punched me in the balls for typing this stupid sh-t."

LOL I hope your privates have healed.

I didn't find it boring so much as it was, as a result of poor editing and pacing, slower moving that it could have been. I was somewhat surprised about what the film was actually about, as opposed to what I anticipated. In addition, the title is somewhat misleading, though I know what was meant (after watching), but it still could have had a better title, not that that is a big deal.

I felt incredibly bad for Sam. I loved that little boy, and I just wished they had spared him, though I can see why they wanted to go for a little more unconventional ending instead of the Hollywood everyone gets saved. You don't expect them to kill off the little boy. I knew the mound could not be destroyed, particularly if these were otherworldly or Godlike beings. I just wished the concept was a little different than the mound and the creatures. I felt like I was watching The Descent all over again, though not as creepy.

I actually enjoyed some of the performances in the film. Costner was interesting as the single dad, and as I said, I loved little Sam. Louisa did get on my nerves. LOL

reply

[–] modelajb 11 years ago

At this point, I think happy endings are actually atypical. Most movies these days seem to end in a rather bleak manor.

reply

[–] Ghost_Puke_Rage 14 years ago

"And what the hell was with the allusions to the ant-farm and the "queen ant" and all that BS? I guess we were supposed to think the daughter was the "queen" and the creatures were her worker ants...sorry, my computer just punched me in the balls for typing this stupid sh-t."

Honestly, the funniest thing I've ever read on these boards in 5 plus years.

reply

[–] bellapeligrosa 13 years ago

I didn't understand the whispering in the woods either. Louisa was at home in bed at the time so who was in the woods? I also thought the deities were completely rubbish - too alien/xenomorph (and a similar concept). If they have the supernatural power to transform someone physically AND live undetected during the modern age, then there must be something deeper to them. But they were mean, ugly little bstards and honestly I can't see why the Indian tribes would worship them. Frankly, Costner could have called in a SWAT team and blown them all away, except then the plot would have been scarily like Aliens. Same screechy sound effect too.

It was like a cross between Aliens and Signs. My theory is that they are extra-terrestrial (also bandied around on this board). They should have used more budget on special effects as the creatures looked exactly like what they were - actors dressed up in costumes.

Not a bad movie, but could have been so much more. Sam war very cute though!

It's too cerebral! We're trying to make a movie here, not a film!

reply

[–] MystikalMayhem 13 years ago

The old man who used to own that house said that he couldn't get away. Moving away was pointless. You can clearly see in the end, the girl laying on the mound, her eyes are changing. She is becoming one of them which would explain why she throw up, dig and things like that. I think Kevin realize at that point, there was nothing to do to save his daughter.

With that explosion, Kevin being so close to it, and his daughter, i believe they both died except the walker that was standing next to the girl. Its that one we see walking toward the little boy away from fire. And there another walker behind him as well. So the boy is pretty much doomed as well.

Imo, they all died except the walkers. Soooo... there is probably going to be another family moving there, and another little girl and the story is gonna go on until they get a girl to father their babies so they can keep living on.

The walker are like the ants, they talk so much about in the movie. They're all males, and they need a "Queen" girl, to keep their species going.

reply

[–] AbesOddysee 11 years ago

Rather pointless & depressing ending.

Gaming With Boobs
http://www.dailymotion.com/SpartanHoplite47

reply

[–] one189teen50five 11 years ago

The cops had been alerted. They got there in plenty of time and I think John and Sam were alright. I think Louisa was beyond saving. Imagine what you like but that is the conclusion I prefer to believe.

reply

[–] Crusader_TM 11 years ago

Yeah, I believe the same. Myself I ignore the whole "some creatures survived" thing in the end and go with what I think was the original intended ending with John coming back to Sam.

I really hate when they put in last minute negative crap like that in horror movies. Does anybody even like that kind of endings?

reply

[–] Nemesis42 10 years ago

I liked the film up until the deeply grim ending. Would have preferred a happiness hit but alas everyone died, the boy probably worse than the father and daughter. It sort of stuffed the film for me but I suppose it's bold of them to make it this dark. However they would have expanded their audience by giving it an up ending.

reply

[–] cynthmauch 11 years ago

He promised his daughter he would never leave her. So when he was burning the burial mound, his intention was to kill himself AND his daughter. That's why he told his son, a few moments earlier, to wait for the cops and have them call his mom. He knew he would probably be dead.
At the very very end, we know that he did not succeed in killing all the creatures because we see one behind the boy. We also see a reflection of a figure walking towards the boy. Can't tell who is in the reflection, but I have a strong feeling it's not the dad. It's either the sister (what a sweetie) or another creature. Not a happy ending. Watched it with my 81 year old dad and he was upset with me since he kind of liked the cute boy and wasn't happy with how it all played out.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] meb1982 11 years ago

Those ant people ate the entire family and that scummy Real Estate agent will sale that house to another unsuspecting family. Continually making money off all the people he sales the house to.

reply