MovieChat Forums > Take Shelter (2011) Discussion > The ending explained (There is only one ...

The ending explained (There is only one concrete interpretation)


SPOILERS BELOW!!!!!!!!!!!





There are three main camps in regards to what the ending means:

Theory 1: The ending is another one of Curtis's hallucinations/nightmares.

Theory 2: The scene is a metaphor for Sam completely accepting her Husband’s condition. And her saying "Okay" means she also empathizes with how he must feel when he sees these hallucinations/nightmares.

Theory 3: He wasn't having hallucinations/nightmares and they were all premonitions of a future world changing disaster.

Honestly, all three of these theories would have merit if it wasn't for the interview below. The writer literally gives away which of these 3 views are correct when he answered the question. Based on what he said, #3 can be the only explanation that makes sense. Many have given excellent reasoning behind why #3 is correct. I will give very simplified yet obvious reasons why that can be the only explanation.

First here is what the author had to say:


Q:Without spoiling it for readers, the ending of the
film is somewhat ambiguous. Do you have a preferred way that
you want viewers to read it?

It’s specifically designed to be ambiguous. That really riles
some people and some people really love it. What’s funny and
interesting to me — and not to sound too cocky about it, but
I really do think it worked — is everybody talks about the
specifics of what’s happening in that scene. And to me, the
specifics don’t matter that much. And I’ll explain.

What is happening, what is going to happen, all that is just
fun to talk about. But what’s important to me is that these
two people are on the same page and are seeing the same thing.
There’s several interpretations of where they’re at. And
that’s great. But as long as they’re seeing the same thing I
think there is a resolution
and the possibility of hope in
the film.


The writer tried to be "ambiguous" in his answer but slipped up with the bolded parts. Basically the only thing he gave away was the "they were both seeing the same thing." And he follows up with saying that "because they are seeing the same thing there is a resolution." These two lines are extremely telling as to the writers true ending and leaves no room for interpretation of alternate explanations. Here is why:

Theory 1: The theory regarding the last scene being another of Curtis's delusion's is impossible under what the writer stated. If he was just "dreaming" his wife, child and the disaster then it's impossible for them to be "on the same page." The only way they can be on the same page is if the last scene is real. Obviously Sam can't simultaneously have the same nightmare that Curtis has. Thats the only way they can be "on the same page." Based on the entirety of the movie; this would be a ridiculous explanation. In my opinion this is the weakest theory because based on the writers answer it's clear its not a hallucination.

Theory 2: The metaphor theory is also practically impossible based on the style and direction of the movie. The movie followed a strict set of rules. The director made very clear distinctions between what Curtis was hallucinating and what was reality. Many movies are meant to be seen as if the audience is "part of the movie." Artsy movies often do this where even the audience is intentionally confused by the writer as to what’s real, what’s going on and who the main character is.

In this film the author made it very clear what was going on. The only thing the audience wasn't sure of is if Curtis was delusional or seeing premonitions. There were no "made up" or "metaphoric" scenes in the ENTIRE movie besides the hallucinations Curtis has. So it would make no sense that the writer added in a random fake scene that is not "real" or "Curtis’s delusion" that is supposed to represent a metaphor for Sam's complete understanding of what Curtis goes through. It doesn't fit in with the style of the movie.

Plus a tsunami, multiple tornados and polluted rain seem like an extremely weak metaphor for Sam's understating/complete acceptance of Curtis's condition. Finally, how can they "be on the same page" if this is a completely made up scene?

Theory 3: That brings us to the end scene being 100% real. This is the only explanation that fits in with the style, theme and flow of the movie if you take into account what the writer said above. The first thing we notice at the end is that there are very clear separations between what Curtis imagines and what is reality. Through the whole movies we know exactly which is which.

The second clue to the ending being real is the hallucinations/nightmares he has. They all follow one simple rule that makes it clear that they are not reality. Anytime he sees/hears birds, thunder, tornados, polluted having temporary hallucinations (like when he hears thunder at work with Dwight) or when he is having a nightmare.

Watch the first nightmare he has when his dog bites him. Pay extra close attention. Notice that his daughter doesn't react/see at all to the thunder, lightning or tornados forming. In fact, there is a scene before his dog bites him (10:58) where you can clearly see that his daughter see's nothing from the fact that he is staring up at the storm with grave concern while she is acting like it's just another day. This same scenario repeats in all his dreams where he is the only one that can see the signs.

So we know that the movie has clear separations between the "fake scenes" and reality. We also know that in EVERY single "fake scene" Curtis is the only one that sees the signs of disaster. Furthermore, the author states that at the end its a fact that Curtis and Sam are on the same page. Based on all these facts, there is no explanation besides the last scene being real. Another clue to this scene being real is the fact that this is the ONLY scene in the ENTIRE movie where someone else (Hannah) see's the storm besides Curtis. To make it even more clear, the scene is shot to show that Hannah actually see's the storm in this scene BEFORE Curtis. When you add all this together the only theory that makes perfect sense is #3.

On a side note, based on the size of the Tsunami, how Tsunami's work in real life and the families proximity to the beach; I believe they all died. The reason Curtis and Sam are so clam at the end is because they understand and accept their death. They want to spend their last moments together in peace as a family without going into hysteria and distressing Hannah.

reply

Very well written and thoughtful post.

It's certainly interesting to think about and ponder the multiple different possible interpretations of the ending. I wouldn't go so far as to say that any of them is concretely more accurate than the others though.

I think it's intentionally ambiguous, and we the audience are allowed to interpret as we please.

As much as I'd love to believe that the storm at the end is actually some apocalyptic event that he has indeed had premonitions of, I don't think that's it....at least not for the way I viewed the film.

I think the most paramount point of Curtis' character is that he will not leave his family. Clearly there are abandonment issues from his past concerning his mother's illness, and it's mentioned multiple times throughout. I don't think it's any random chance that the last piece of key dialogue in the film is in the doctor's office, and it revolves around him potentially having to leave his family to seek the treatment that he needs.

All 3 members of the family at the end could represent a few different ideas. Should he actually be slipping into paranoid schizophrenia, "the storm" can easily be him tipping over the edge. The fact that they're all able to see the storm together at the end could mean that they all accept his fate, and will face it together as a family. At least that's the most uplifting take on the story. A nice sentiment, but like I said, it's ambiguous enough that any take isn't necessary correct.

reply

Sorry. Incorrect - all 3 are still possible. 3rd one is the least interesting resolution.

-------------------------------------
I own you.https://goo.gl/0avZjB

reply

I literally just finished watching this and came on here to see the general consensus. Was surprised there was a thread about the ending being ambiguous as upon watching it just seemed completely clear to me that he was having premonitions and the storm was real.

There was no 'peace' as Chastain looked terrified and his last 'Sam!' was one of urgency, the whole 'ok' bit and nodding was clear to me as 'lets get our arse to the shelter' after making sure he was 'seperated' from it as the psychiatrist suggested.

Of course my 'opinion' but I saw nothing to make me even suspect different than what we saw. Didn't seem like an Inception ending to me :p

reply

Only thing is that it more than likely wouldn't be possible to even get out of there in time. You can see the huge tsunami already forming in the reflection on the last shot. It was gonna come in fast.

reply

I read an interview Nichols did with IFC. The film was based on the idea of a marriage only suceeding when the 2 are on the same page. (He had been married for a year and was basing it loosely on his own marriage.)

As far as the ending was concerned, he specifically stated he left it ambiguous so that every viewer would take what they believed from it.

Lastly, it's a just a movie...

"I do not like mixing up moralities and mathematics."
Churchill

reply

I think #1 and #3 are still possible, but the structure of what happens (it was not Curtis' hallucination that Sam joined and also it was initiated by the daughter) prevents #2. The daughter and wife clearly did not accept and exist in his mental illness. If he had the vision and looked to his wife and she went along (but the kid didn't) then that would work with #2. That didn't happen.

Which leaves #1 as the most likely. I would presume that they aren't at an expensive beachhouse on vacation. The fact that they have a place ON the beach deviates from their financial situation throughout the movie. They aren't at the beach. Curtis' mind has taken them there. He is probably physically in a hospital back in Ohio and his mind is continuing his life with them in a way that he can accept.

If it is #3 that is fine, but an earlier poster mentioning the cheapness of a twist ending as being something that would degrade a film that did so well communicating the impact of mental illness.

reply

In the end, they all face "the storm"(Curtis' mental condition) TOGETHER, and ultimately this is the only thing that matters. The last scene was a dream that Curtis had, which signified the way HE came to FEEL about the reaction of his family after they realized the truth about his mental condition. In the beginning of the movie, Curtis was facing the severity of his illness entirely on his own, as he was utterly afraid(rightfully so) that no one, and especially his beloved family, would understand, and thus they would reject and leave him because of that. Eventually they found out what was going on with him, but instead of leaving(which he was deeply convinced would happen), they didn't. They turned out to be extraordinary understanding of his illness and despite its severity, instead of leaving, they accepted the situation for what it is and stayed, which is an ultimate manifestation of the great love they have for him. His last dream is actually a consequence of him letting go of his fear of abandonment, and although "the storm" indeed is coming and is real, he doesn't have to face it alone anymore.

It's quite a simple interpretation, really, that's what makes the movie so great.

And having said all that, I would actually have LOVED it if the last scene was not a dream and if Curtis actually had turned out to be right all along about what was coming, but alas, that would kinda make zero sense. And this would be the ending which I would have prefered to be 'the truth', but so far I just can't convince myself about its validity...

reply

My theory is that on the ending the storm was real and they just went quickly.

_
http://67.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lm56tvJqLq1qb9pa3o1_500.gif

reply

The problem I have with this interpretation is that you disregard Theory 2, because "it wouldn't make sense that there is only one metaphorical scene in the end". To be clear, I think the storm in itself is a metaphor from start to finish. There is never a storm the way Curtis sees it. The storm could be anything. It's just a symbol of his irrational fears, which in the context of this film, take the form of a storm. Irrational fears are a typical symptom of all kinds of mental illnesses, and especially paranoid schizophrenia.

And the storm isn't even the only metaphor in the film. The shelter is also a metaphor. Mental illnesses often cause the person suffering from them to isolate themselves from the outside world, because they can no longer handle it. Their interpretation of their surroundings is so dark and bleak that it makes it impossible to face the realities of life. This leads to avoidance of social gatherings, going outside and living life, as it has become too difficult. It's no coincidence, that the moment Curtis actually goes into hiding is right after he has a meltdown during a social gathering. The stigma of mental illness only adds to his hardships, making isolation seem even more desirable.

The key scene here is towards the end, where Curtis has brought his whole family into the shelter (albeit because of the only 'actual' rainstorm in the film). This is how mental illness works: it affects not only the person suffering from it, but their loved ones as well. Curtis attempts to isolate himself, but wants his family to come with them. The key to understanding the metaphor here is in the dialogue. Samantha says that they will not leave Curtis, but he must open the door himself. He must be the one to take the first steps towards seeking help and starting the healing process. He opens the doors and finds out that everyone in the neighborhood seems to have a pretty routine attitude towards the storm. It's no biggie. It's he himself who built it up to be something it isn't because he has let fear distort his thinking.

What happens next? Curtis seeks help. The grim reality is, that he needs long term care. Mental illnesses don't go away with a snap of fingers. At the same time, Sam and Hannah get to really learn what it is that Curtis is suffering from, and no doubt get informed about the symptoms of the disease and how they feel. This all leads to the beach scene, where Sam and Hannah finally learn to empathise with Curtis' suffering. They literally "feel" the rain and "see" the storm. Samantha says "okay." to note that "okay, I understand what you have been dealing with now".

This all fits in with what Nichols said: "But what’s important to me is that these
two people are on the same page and are seeing the same thing." This is what empathy is. Putting yourself in someone else's position and understanding their point of view. They are on the same page and are now ready to start the journey towards healing.

But like Nichols said, there is no definitive answer to the ending. You can take away from it whatever you want. You could also interpret it as Hannah and Samantha creating a fear for the future of their own, because they realize how much of a struggle their life will be from now on.

So no, there is not only one concrete explanation. There are many, and the way you disregarded Theory 2 (which I think is by far the most plausible and realistic one) is not based on facts but opinion.

reply