MovieChat Forums > Martyrs (2008) Discussion > 'Martyrs' ending explained: 'Keep doubti...

'Martyrs' ending explained: 'Keep doubting' is the key. UPDATED

posted 13 years ago by submachine
278 replies | jump to latest

Anna knows, just like the viewer knows, that discovering the existence of the afterlife is Mademoiselle's life work, so important to her and the cult that they are willing to do anything.

The beauty of the movie (which some viewers have completely missed), is that when Anna whispers to Mademoiselle, we think Mademoiselle wins. We think Mademoiselle gets what she wants. We think Mademoiselle is going to tell the glorious news to the gathering cult. And we think Anna has been reduced to nothing more than a used, mindless, unthinking tool.

But then comes the twist: "Keep doubting...bang!"

And we realize we were wrong, as the director Pascal Laugier explains: "the real point of everything is revealed only in the final seconds of the movie. For me, that was the exciting part of the project."

Anna purposely lied to Mademoiselle and said there was no afterlife, she saw nothing. Anna was the first to speak, and what she spoke convinced Mademoiselle that there was nothing, that her entire life was a futile, evil quest for nothing. Mademoiselle gave up, overcome with guilt and worthlessness, and killed herself. But not before giving a final warning to her friend Ettiene: "Keep doubting (because if you don't, like I didn't, you're gonna end up destroyed like me): Bang!"

It is the one and only thing that Anna could do that would destroy Mademoiselle. Despite her pain throughout the ruined shell of her body, she retained enough strength and humanity in her mind to use the one and only chance she had. With a simple whisper she destroyed her captors, finally avenged her friend, and saved countless girls from falling into the same fate.

Why Martyrs works is that we the audience don't know it happens, can't even fathom it could happen, until the shocking reveal forces us to question all of our previous mistaken notions. We can then reflect upon the foreshadowing in the very beginning of the movie, when young Anna tells the doctors she knows she is there to help Lucie, and to find the bad people who hurt her. When we realize that beaten, barely alive skinned creature was not only willing but able to defeat her captor, that is what makes Martyrs great. It is this unexpected display of strength, loyalty, endurance and sacrifice of Anna, a martyr defined, that elevates the movie to a level far above the horror genre. Anna transcends, and thus Martyrs transcends.

How Martyrs tricks us into the false belief that Mademoiselle and the cult won:

1) The gathering cult leads the viewer to believe there is an incoming victory speech.

2) The conversation between Mademoiselle and Etienne, specifically about getting an answer, getting a clear answer, but still actually the wrong answer.

3) Similar appearing emotional expressions of relief/dejection in Mademoiselles reaction to what Anna said. This distinct lack of sentiment shown by Mademoiselle is not only the key to understanding why she wouldn't "greedily" kill herself to reach the afterlife, but is also why many viewers are confused about her defeat. To someone who doesn't understand psychology, she doesn't seem to be acting suicidal or overtly depressed. And that makes the suicide so much more shocking for the viewer. But apparently it totally confuses some viewers into completely missing the twist that Anna lied, even with the warning of "keep doubting". Mademoiselle is cold, calculating and emotionless, she kills herself with the same lack of emotion as she tortures and kills others. She is a cult-member, and the entirety of that cults existence is finding an answer. Find the wrong answer, and the will to live is simply removed, that awareness is what empowered Anna to endure hell. She told Mademoiselle there was nothing, and Mademoiselle ends her wasted life with the same methodical detachment as she ended the lives of others. That is the truly evil villain the director has given us, not some megalomaniacal comic book character.

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] solarpunk 10 years ago

I know this is both an old thread and even older film; however, I have only just watched this film, and like anyone else, have turned to the internet for some answers, and found myself here.

So, I would like to comment on what you have said.

Firstly, why do you assume she lied? The only thing that is clear is that she told the Mademoiselle something she didn't expect to hear. However, we do not know what she told her nor do we know what Anna saw, in which case it is a great leap to say she lied.

In my interepretation (and that is all it can be, given that the ending doesn't give us anything definitive) is that anna saw nothing. Life is meaningless and all the deaths and torture, likewise. This is simmilar to your interpretation without the assumption that she lied about it. In fact, I prefer that she didn't lie about it because that would carry the nihilistic sense of the film. It is a fullstop on the question. Furthermore, if she saw nothing and there is no life after death, then this really does answer all the questions at the end of the film definitively; because had she actually seen something, another answer, then we don't get it, other than there is something else. The nothing else interpretation ends all further questioning.

[–] submachine 10 years ago

anna saw nothing

Did you see the movie? We saw what Anna saw.

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] solarpunk 10 years ago

No I didn't see the movie. I haven't even heard of it. Where am I?

anyway, baring in mind that I haven't watched this film, yep, we did see what Anna saw, which was nothing of any substance, some lense flare from the light above her and then white. So, let us assume that she actually told the old woman what she [and we] saw, how would that go:

-I saw some lense flare and a white light... granted, I was actually looking at the light at the time, but I am sure it is proof of life after death.
-Yeah, that's pretty sketchy.

I mean, what would be the purpose of trying to induce an experience that we know is a common near death experience, i.e. a bright light? Surely the reason the cult were doing all this was to find out something definitive, or at least (as is mentioned in the film) beyond doubt.

We do not see anything definitive or beyond doubt. In actual fact, this is one of those occasions whereby a negative would be the only thing beyond doubt. That is, anything Anna may have seen could always be explained as an hallucination induced by her extreme torture. However, had Anna reported seeing nothing, one cannot doubt that she saw nothing, unless she lies about it.

Next, why would the old bag lady believe her anyway? The old woman says it was beyond doubt and all that... how? how is anything that definite? At least, how is any second hand account of an experience beyond doubt to the point where the old woman would kill herself.

basically, all i am saying is, that to say 'people missed the FACT that Anna lied' is silly, because we don't hear what Anna tells the woman, for all we know she told her she saw heaven and it was all lovely and wonderful and you better kill yourself quick so you can get there. Who knows? Most certainly not you. And even, even, even, if this was the directors intention, that is, Anna lied etc. the director himself couldn't fault anyone for not getting that, becasue, and as I have said repeatedly, it is all based on tenuous assumptions.

to be fair, you may be right, but this film really isn't good enough for me to argue about it... maybe I should actually watch it, it might help.

[–] submachine 10 years ago

You can't start just watching the film the moment Anna sees what she sees..

There is something called a "premise" and you must accept it. That premise is when attractive girls are tortured, they may see what is beyond death.

With that in mind, we now know what Anna sees, and not only that, but we know why Mademoiselle will believe what she says. In other words:

Anna: "There's a cool afterlife and it's cool"

Mademoiselle: "Mmm hm. Awesome, I can't wait to tell EVERYONE!"

And that would be that. Except that isn't that. Because Mademoiselle kills herself and warns Etienne not to go down the same path, so rewind:

Anna: "Yeah there's nothing. lol <wink>"

Mademoiselle: "FFFFFUUUUU"

Martyrs isn't' too complicated. But some viewers of Martyrs are too simple.

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] submachine 9 years ago

Doubting in English still means the same thing in French.

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] jude-75 9 years ago

Whatever she said was not meant for mortals to hear.

For me, that's it, that's the point.

I rarely read people talking about this hugely Lovecraftian ending. 'The things that shall not be named'. 'The unspeakable horror'. Etc

The director said that to him it always was something like that.
Also, very Twilight Zone.

That's what made me just totally crazy of the movie. It becomes pure horror at the very end, with an awesome 'B-movie' twist.

You can imagine what you want. Me I imagine something regarding the Great Old Ones, pure madness, what we would call Hell, awaiting Mademoiselle.

[–] submachine 9 years ago

That...doesn't follow anything we saw in the movie, you're just making up the ending you want.

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] therefdotcom 9 years ago

or in short: it's a copout.

[–] buchowski 9 years ago

The beauty of the movie (which some viewers have completely missed), is that when Anna whispers to Mademoiselle, we think Mademoiselle wins. We think Mademoiselle gets what she wants. We think Mademoiselle is going to tell the glorious news to the gathering cult. And we think Anna has been reduced to nothing more than a used, mindless, unthinking tool.

Eh, is this movie difficult to understand lol? It is years since I have seen it but its not at all complicated. No one wins. Both look pretty dead to me. Anna wasn't after browny points.

To be honest, I think you are a bit of a wanker.

"(which some viewers have completely missed)"

"To someone who doesn't understand psychology"

LOL, she told the woman she saw nothing so they would stop kidnapping girls and torturing them. She thought they would stop if the told them she saw nothing. It wasn't to "win" against the cult leader, she had no idea the cult leader would kill herself, it was to protect others from the same fate. I wouldn't call it psychology, I'd call it just a lie.

[–] submachine 9 years ago

To be honest

Only a liar starts out a sentence like that, but back to the movie, you're just repeating what I said: Anna lied. It's the viewers who don't know Anna lied, and there are many, that are the missing it, due to lack of understanding.

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] scousethief 9 years ago

I agree and disagree, i believe she told her of an afterlife, to which she then ran off to join as quickly as possible.

By telling the Mademoiselle that there was something it would hopefully stop the "cult" from kidnapping other girls to continue searching because they would already know of its existence, therefore she popped a gun in her mouth because Anna's answer was a positive one, also the amount of time...longer to imagine and describe an afterlife and what you see versus theres nothing.
The other cult members knowing she has killed herself would hopefully follow suit ( although Anna wouldnt know that of course she just hoped to get rid of the leader) thats just my thought.

~I do agree that Anna's motive was to end the cult and exact her own revenge, which ever method she used.

[–] submachine 9 years ago

The other cult members knowing she has killed herself would hopefully follow suit

 That's not how cult's work, especially this cult.

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] scousethief 9 years ago

Ermmm yes it actually is , Heavens gate ,jim Jones ,Branch Davinian etc etc it is exactly how some of these cults work, you seem to know very little about cults whilst stupidly laughing away :).All you know about this cult is that they are torturing humans to create a martyr and that they've been here before but the Martyrs died before speaking , thats about it. They are not super rich or have any influence otherwise they would have recaptured Anna when she escaped.

[–] submachine 9 years ago

 Those cult-leaders didn't kill themselves to get away from the cult, it was the exact opposite you fool! 

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] scousethief 9 years ago

Neither did she............unless you have evidence that she did...........please post the link, not your thoughts, not someone elses thoughts, but "evidence" from the writers.

I will wait...................nope i wont

[–] submachine 9 years ago

Did you see the movie? She killed herself without even telling the cult ANYTHING! 

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] scousethief 9 years ago

Yes she did....................and you decided it was for one reason i decided it was for another.

You claim cults dont do "this or that" yet the world knows that they do and the proof is in the headlines.

Now lets get back to you providing proof that what you say is right.........

[–] submachine 9 years ago

Did you see the movie? She killed herself without even telling the cult ANYTHING, and you're still claiming the cult did something? What a moron! 

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] scousethief 9 years ago

Yes ive watched the movie 4 times

She kills herself before telling the cult of the existence or non existence of an after life.

You do not know what the cult does because the film finishes and says nothing.

The film regarding the ending is completely ambiguous meaning it is open to interpretation.

I have offered an explanation and you offered another neither can be deemed right nor wrong because the film neither discusses nor explains ANYTHING with regard to the ending.

THOSE ARE THE FACTS.

Now, on the otherhand you are arguing your point, which is fine, but i ask you AGAIN as you are now being offensive , where is your PROOF that the film meant to portray what you are so desperately trying to cling on to ? If you cant provide PROOF in the way of a director commentary, something from the writer or some other form then what you are being offensive and stomping your feet about is your OPINION, and your OPINION is WRONG.

Get over it.

[–] submachine 9 years ago

You're wasting my time again, if you can't follow what the director has given us, that's your defect. I can, for this movie, for Donnie Darko, for Mullholand Drive - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0166924/board/inline/252774731 - it's just what I do, whether you understand or not doesn't really matter.

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] scousethief 9 years ago

Your wasting your own time and mine by constantly deflecting.

Put up your "evidence" that your OPINION is what the writer/director intended........

You cant because its your OPINION and NOTHING more. Your foot stomping based on your own imagined theories gains no ground with anyone and with every single reply you make yourself look more like the moron you claim others to be.

Now, put up your PROOF..................

Oh you can't ?

You are wrong, get over it, "Moron".

[–] submachine 9 years ago

What kinda fool comes to a movie forum and asks for "proof"!?!? Beat it, kid. 

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] scousethief 9 years ago

As you are so adamant in your opinion im assuming that you have something other than your "opinion" to base it on.

Yet another post with nothing............so im guessing you have nothing :) keep going moron.

[–] submachine 9 years ago

Just keep bumping my thread, puppet, that's all you're good for.


http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] scousethief 9 years ago

Doesn't bother me moron i'll bump your thread all day long it does nothing but highlight what a pretentious little prick you really are.

Now lets continue shall we.

Proof................

Still none ? what a silly little pretentious moron you are.

[–] submachine 9 years ago

i'll bump your thread

Good puppet.



http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] scousethief 9 years ago

Yep, puppet.

Now then moron.......

Still nothing ?

Awwwwwwwwwww

Guess you have nothing then ? such a shame , there was a tiny bit of me that hoped you'd pull something, but nah, just the usual little internet *beep* :( sad

Keep trying.

[–] Thiesi 8 years ago

The film regarding the ending is completely ambiguous meaning it is open to interpretation.

Well, yes - every movie is open to interpretation. For instance, you can interpret the end of Ghostbusters and think they didn't actually win over the Marshmallow Man and that it was just a hallucination. However, unless such an interpretation is backed by what is actually told in the movie - whether directly as in on screen or indirectly by means of logical deductions doesn't really matter - it is really just a random speculation.

Submachine gun comes off as quite the arrogant guy here, and I think that's what makes it difficult for some people to accept his interpretation which is, as opposed to others, based on what actually is in the movie as well as some applied assumptions based on how people "work" (i. e. their minds - in other words: psychology) and furthermore not assuming the director did - knowingly or accidentally - create an incoherent Mademoiselle character.

So, everything SMG says about the note and Mademoiselle's reaction can actually be seen on screen. The director laid it out right in front of us. As to why Madame reacted the way she did, that is not shown and thus up to speculation. However, unless you assume a badly written character that all of a sudden develops character traits that haven't been shown or even just hinted at, SMG's interpretation is the only one that makes sense I've read so far.

True, it is entirely possible that Mademoiselle instantly decides to have afterlife or paradise or whatever you wanna call it all for herself and thus commits suicide without telling anyone. However, despite the logical flaw implied here that that would not rule out other cult members also committing suicide and thus getting into afterlife as well, there is simply no clue, let alone evidence in the movie that after so many years of searching with/for the cult she now just wants to be the only one in afterlife or heaven or whatnot.

Assuming Madameoiselle killed herself for entirely selfish reasons of course also implies assuming Anna told her about afterheaven. But those two assumptions are mutually dependent on each other in the context of the movie: If Anna told Mademoidame about afterdise - which the movie does not show us - and Old Granny committed suicide without telling her fellow cult psychopaths - which the movie does show us - then she would have decided to take the I want all the cake for myself approach which, in turn, would mean implying either a totally unwarranted change in character or a badly written character.

To make a long story short: Unless you allege the director either hasn't done his homework or did for whatever reason create a character that suddenly and without any explanation or hint changes its behavior in an illogical manner, you will need to go with SMG's explanation - even though you might not like his seemingly arrogant way of presenting himself and/or his explanation.

--
"We're with you all the way, mostly"

[–] therefdotcom 9 years ago

"To be honest, I think you are a bit of a wanker. "

hahaha. made my day. thx for that. you are 100% right though.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] entlerjl 9 years ago

Simply Brilliant!

[–] Cruesix 8 years ago

I would say that if your interpretation of Martyrs was "correct", it would make the movie appear pretty "meh".

Out of all the different interpretations I read and thought about, this one is one of the more reasonable though.

[–] submachine 8 years ago

"Correct" doesn't need to be quoted, and I agree it is the most reasonable explanation. Whether you like the movie is a different subject.

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] KutWrite 8 years ago

I think it's simpler than that:

The cult is a bunch of dumb sadists. The search for truth is but a thin excuse to torture others. That's why they don't build on the successful techniques from, say, the other 4 Martyrs. They think up a new, more exciting routine for each one.

This isn't science, it's psychosis.

Mlle's last line reminds me of a joke:

A true masochist says "Hurt me, hurt me!"
A true sadist says "No!"

Thus, Mlle's last line and suicide are HER sadistic torture of the rest of the cult. She's tired and dried up by the decades of inflicting pain and degradation. It has not made her a bit happier. She is even bored. So, as a final thrill, she summons all of them from far and wide for the big announcement. They wait breathlessly. Mlle has the answer, but she tells them, in the context of the above joke: "No!"

Besides, I don't think Anna would take 90 minutes to say there is nothing in the Afterlife. Possibly, she just babbled in her weakness, shock and pain.

That's why Mlle didn't say anything that would halt the cult in their continued search.

I kind of hope, though, that they just commit mass suicide, like that "Heaven's Gate" bunch of loonies.

[–] submachine 8 years ago

If she wanted to torture them, she would have told them Anna said there was nothing. But everything in the movie illustrates how serious the cult is, zero passion in the torture, the exact opposite of sadism.

http://TheMovieGoer.com

[–] imjustasking (161) 5 years ago

That was the only thing left that Anna could do(whisper something disappointing)-----to get revenge.The surprise suicide is all the more striking because Anna is so weak and powerless beforehand. All she had to do was utter the right words (the exact words really don't matter) & she destroyed Madamoiselle. Madamoiselle said "keep doubting" because she didn't want to discourage Etiene from further pursuit of this knowledge---because he then might kill himself too, ending the "research".Unfortunately this would result in more abduction and torture but the point of the film is that Anna got revenge on Madamoiselle, one-on-one revenge, but revenge all the same.