The Ending


*** WARNING - SPOILERS **

Overall, I liked this movie, but was a bit confused about the ending. I don't really understand why Arthur Kipps and his son had to die at the end of the movie. After all, Arthur did retrieve the little boy's body from the bog and placed it in the coffin with his mother. Why would the woman in black then cause Arthur and his son's death at the train station? The only reasonable conclusion I can draw is that she was enacting a "mercy killing." Arthur was deeply depressed since his wife's death, and I can only assume that he was most likely going to get fired when he returned to work. After all, he didn't finish the job that he was sent to do, and his boss did give him a final warning. Although the ending was tragic, I think the woman in black was simply trying to do Arthur and his son a favor by reuniting them with Mrs. Kipps. On the other hand, the final scene shows a malevolent shot of the woman in black's face, and there is scary, foreboding music. Are we to assume that she is going to keep on killing, even after she got her son back? Anyway, this was the only part of the movie that I was conflicted about. I'd be interested to read what others think about the ending.

reply


I was kind of expecting that ending to happen, But I did not think Arthur Kipps was going to die as well. I thought she was going to end up just killing to boy.

I was surprised when he jumped as well.
the ending left me pretty sad and pissed off. It made me wish they got a priest or someone and they exorcised that bitch to hell.
Kind of wish there was a sequel where they do an exorcism or something.

One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them.

reply

[deleted]

A sequel?????

reply

[deleted]

Awesome! Hopefully she's been restricted to the house this while.

reply

The Woman in Black is still vengeful. She killed both Arthur and his son. The final scene tried to make it a happy ending for them, but the reunion could have been left out. Then there would not be this conflicted ending.

reply

I think people missed how much he was grieving. It's why he didn't really care that there was a volatile ghost in the house he kept staying in. If he had his wife to go back to, he'd probably get the hell out of there. Although his and his son's final fate is unfortunate, it's kind of amazing in a way because they're reunited with their wife/mother, maybe something Radcliffe's character wanted all along. The ending also shows that the woman will never stop. Evil/death will never stop.

So many horror movies, if they have a message at all, have messages that exist in a vacuum -- only meaningful within the fictitious story they've created. This one has a message that goes beyond the context of its story, in my opinion.

reply

[deleted]

I think she's keeping up her revenge routine but is also rewarding Arthur for his efforts by reuniting him with his wife/son in the afterlife...I got the distinct impression the WIB expected him to hop the tracks to save his kid, otherwise she could have just had Joseph jump in front of the train much later. And she also neatly takes Arthur, as Sam's now surrogate son, away from him - remember Sam said his dead son would be about Arthur's age, so no escapes for substitutes either! Anyway, despite what the filmmaker's may have intended this seems to be a cool wrap up for me...made an otherwise OK film better.

reply

Here is my interpretation:

Before the ending the voice of WIB kept saying "I will never forgive" over and over again, thus implying that she would never stop killing children as revenge no matter what happens. Therefore she went about her business and killed Arthurs son, but what she did not expect was that Arthur would be prepared to sacrifice his life trying to save his son.

Earlier in the movie we learned that Arthur was miserable after losing his wife and he also said that he sometimes felt that she was still there beside him. When both Arthur and his son died the wife came down and guided them into the light (heaven) where they would be happy together forever.

In the last seconds of the movie WIB looks angry. This is when WIB realizes that Arthurs son is lost to heaven instead of in her tormented realm. But, WIB will be back killing again and collecting all the children she can simply because she wants revenge and she will never forgive ...




Crime of passion. Yea, just look at all the passion on that wall.

reply

[deleted]

Awesome explanation!

reply


Absolutely spot on.

reply

I'm not at all sure she has a realm where she collects the children. I think her main objective is to separate the children from their parents, just as she was separated from her son. In this case she failed, Arthur and his son not only remain together, but gain their wife/mother back to boot.

reply

Seemed like they went to a "happier place" when reunited with his wife. This movie was intense in parts! I think it works for this type of haunted mansion movie. I thought it was very dark and atmospheric throughout. I liked the setting in the marsh and how they had to time their comings and goings by the tide. A couple of parts were confusing, for example why they couldn't recover the boy's body previously ("We have something they didn't" (meaning the car)-huh?). Why the boy's body appeared fresh but his mother's body was a skeleton (didn't he die before her?). Other than that I thought it was a pretty good movie for this genre.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Regardless of what anyone believes or intended, it's what you want to believe. Even if the creator of the story intended something else. It's your own perception of life & your world that's presented to you.
By the way: the first thing that came to my mind too, was that the woman in black was simply trying to do Arthur and his son a favor by reuniting them with Mrs. Kipps

reply

I hated the ending too, I screamed at the screen when the little boy was walking towards the train. At first, I thought they escaped injury, until I saw the end. That was really sad.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

All good theories, but ultimately the Woman in Black was just merciless.

In the original novella, the whole story is recounted by Kipps who's still alive and an old man. In his story, his wife is still alive and not married yet. Years after the incident with WiB, they marry and have a son.

One outing, they're on a carriage ride when WiB appears in front of the horses and makes it crash into a tree. The kid dies instantly and the wife is critically injured until she succumbs to her wounds months after. In the end, the WiB got her vengeance, and Kipps spends the remainder of his life in grief.

But hey, that's just the novella. This movie was remarkably different from the original, so all these theories give their own light to the story. So interpret it how you want.

If con is the opposite of pro, wouldn't congress be the opposite of progress?

reply

[deleted]