MovieChat Forums > Silent House (2012) Discussion > How I think it all 'went down', + open d...

How I think it all 'went down', + open discussion/interpreta tion


First off, we have to look at the clues and pieces laid out here. One has to remember that our narrator, like in ALL psycho thrillers with this brand of "twist" (think Fight Club, High Tension, etc.), is unreliable and provides a lot of room for potential plot holes, lapses in logic, and freedom of interpretation; however, some things do stand concrete here.

The film begins with Sarah out on the water front. Her dad pulls up to the house and she walks back, and complains she had a headache, to which her dad and uncle both think is an excuse for her to get out of working.

From there, it "starts", as far as we can tell, with the Polaroid camera— which I think was the first trigger that we witness as an audience for Sarah. If you watch closely, a look falls over her face when her dad and uncle start using the camera in the beginning to take pictures of the mold infestation, and it looks as if the sound/flashbulb cause her to remember something. So, that's the first seed.

Her uncle then leaves for town, and she moseys around the house downstairs for a bit and opens up a beer. The beer bottle may or may not be a "trigger", but I'm betting it is (I'll explain later). Right after she opens the beer, there's the knock at the door, and we meet Sophia. Sophia is not a real person, and, as everyone else has mentioned, is a figment of Sarah's imagination- maybe a coping mechanism, maybe an aspect of Sarah's personality; I'm not a psychologist, but she's definitely not a real person. Sophia mentions how she and Sarah used to "play dress up" all the time when they were kids, and that she has "some old photos lying around somewhere" and mentions that she'll look for them. All throughout this conversation, Sarah seems confused and embarrassed because she can't concretely remember ever knowing Sophia when they were children, but she goes along with it anyway since Sophia seems to remember her so well. Sophia asks if Sarah's in college, but Sarah says she and school "don't mix" and she's trying to make other plans, perhaps suggesting that she dropped out of college or was in some sort of trouble and is now trying to figure things out for herself. In the meantime, she says she's working for her dad. Sophia then mentions wanting to "do so many things" but being "unable to", and Sarah mentions how she has "holes" in her memory. Sophia says she'll be back later, and Sarah then insists that she does in fact remember her, probably so as not to hurt Sophia's feelings or make her feel weird by showing up like she did, but Sophia still seems totally sure of herself. "How could you forget?" she says, and then she takes off on her bike. This awkward encounter is all foreshadowing.

Later, while Sarah's cleaning out her room, she finds the red tin box which holds some of the photographs, but is unable to open it and she throws it in the trash bag. My guess though is that she had found other pictures elsewhere in the house already, because while she and her dad are investigating the first noise she hears upstairs (prior to her cleaning her room), he comes across some of them spread out on his bed and stuffs them into his suitcase; this indicates to me that Sarah already had found some of the photos and left them laid out for him to come across on purpose. We also see Sarah throw away a pink tutu that's lying on the bed while cleaning in her room. Both the red box and the tutu are other triggers, I think.

Then, notice how the attack that takes place on Sarah's dad occurs while Sarah is cleaning, almost immediately after she throws that red box and tutu in the trash. She hears a loud thud, finds her dad in the room full of the rugs and lamps, and a candelabra is lying on the floor, which is what she presumably clubbed him with. The extreme wound that we witness (where his eye looks practically gouged out) is an exaggeration of Sarah's psychosis. From this point on, everything we see as an audience is a complete free-for-all and is totally up for interpretation.

The chase through the house and property that goes on for a good 40+ minutes is just Sarah's adventure through her past and her subconscious manifesting itself and all of her repressed memories coming back to her. It's a hodge podge of Sarah running from both herself as well as reliving the terror of being abused/chased by her dad. I can't decide if the man in the camouflage(?) suit or coveralls or whatever he is wearing represents Sarah's father, the mentoring aspect of her personality, or perhaps both. It could represent her chasing after herself, trying to force herself to remember the truth, but it could also be fragments of how she remembers her dad when she was being abused. I believe that the makeshift bedroom we see in the basement with the child's bed is a place that she was probably forced to sleep (she may have been locked down there as a child).

Regardless, the billiard room scene is a culmination of all of this. At this point in the film, Sarah's uncle has returned home to find her frantic, claiming that intruders have attacked/taken her dad. They search the whole house and find nothing except the blood left on the floor from where Sarah attacked her dad with the candelabra; as we see later, he's tied up and covered with a plastic tarp downstairs.

So, Sarah goes around the house with her uncle and her dad is nowhere to be seen. Sarah then insists that they "check upstairs" once more, and her uncle agrees to it (I believe she snuck up there and turned the generator on, since her uncle says "that wasn't turned on before"). She goes with him up to the top floor where the billiard room is, and at some point attacks/confronts him and winds up getting a hold of the gun and shooting him in the stomach. It's unclear if she shoots him in the staircase or in the billiard room, but we do see blood smeared all over the walls when she comes downstairs a bit later, indicating that he may have been shot in the stairwell and struggled to make his way downstairs. Either that, or he was shot upstairs and dragged down there by her as we physically see. Remember, this is all up for grabs and could go either way, really.

In the midst of this (probably after the blackout scene, which is when she may or may not have shot her uncle), she recalls being molested on the pool table by her dad and having the photos taken. The scene in the bedroom after this with the blood on the bed, as well as the craziness of that bathroom scene is all just hallucinatory symbolism; the toilet on the wall with the blood is symbolic of vaginal bleeding, and the little girl in the bathtub full of beer bottles and bloody water suggests that she was probably violated/raped with the bottles by her drunken father. Pretty heavy stuff.

Then, wham! The electricity comes back on. Not sure how this happens, but she manages to find a way to get the lights in the house back on. This is where we see massive amounts of black mold covering the ceiling and walls of her bedroom where she had been cleaning. You could argue that the mold, which was not visible in the dark, may have contributed to her psychosis and/or been a psychoactive trigger to her memories (in reality, black mold exposure, especially that heavy, can in fact cause hallucinations). Remember how Sarah complained of a headache at the beginning of the film and had gone outside for the fresh air? It was already established that the house had a mold problem when her uncle discovers it growing behind the wall in the beginning of the film. This is a possibility, but I don't think it hinders the validity of her memories at all, but simply serves as another potential trigger.

So, she makes her way downstairs (this is when we see blood all over the walls of the stairwell I believe, leading down to the foyer) and Sophia is there. She's got the key to the box, which Sarah had all along. Sophia returned with those "dress up" photos, as well— they're in the trash bag on the floor. Remember, again, Sophia is a figment of Sarah's imagination. Think Fight Club. The red box is sitting on the table, and Sarah uncovers her father, who has been covered in the plastic sheet since she initially attacked him and beat him unconscious. Her uncle is lying on the floor on the verge of death, and Sarah's started a nice fire in the fireplace for her own little family intervention.

Anyway, back to the action here. Sarah, confused by Sophia's presence, attacks Sophia and slashes her hand with the garden shears, to which Sophia responds "Stop blaming yourself". Since Sophia IS in fact Sarah, the slash appears on her own hand, which suggests that Sarah self-mutilates as a method of dealing with the repressed memories (which is also probably why she has those inexplicable slashes across her wrist when her uncle picks her up after she breaks out of the cellar— think about it... where else did those come from?). It's here for the first time that we witness Sarah snap into her crazy self, which is what her uncle and dad both encountered when they were attacked by her. She's ranting and raving, pours beer all over her dad and suggestively rubs against him, asks if he wants to "play with her now", etc. Then, just by holding the beer bottle itself, she snaps back into her childhood and regresses like a little girl, crying and saying "ouch, daddy, it hurts" (more implication that she was violated with bottles), and then snaps again and tells her dad "Shhh, we wouldn't want mommy to hear" (something her dad often would have said to her while this sexual abuse was going on). This whole scene reminds me of Mrs. Voorhees in the original Friday the 13th, really.

Then, for a second, we're led to believe that maybe, just maybe, Sarah is absolutely nuts and made all of this up in her head and her dad may be totally innocent, but the second she lets him free, his violent and domineering nature comes right out and he starts whipping her with his belt as she lies on the floor crying and screaming at him like a small child (keep in mind, she's probably in her early 20s and she's acting like she's 9). This just tells me that this is in fact what he's actually like, and this is probably the kind of treatment she got from him as a kid. The uncle, who seems to have been more of an accessory to Sarah's childhood abuse, feels remorse and tries to stop him, and dad dismisses him and says something about how he "liked to watch" too. This small confrontation between the brothers gives Sarah the 5 seconds she needs to grab a hold of the sledgehammer and thwack daddy upside the head once and for all. She decides to have mercy on her uncle since he appears to have been remorseful and had a more passive part of the abuse. Fact of the matter is, she already had shot him and he was probably going to bleed to death anyway. Sarah walks out of the house, mission accomplished.

The end.


So, since this interpretation is extremely tl;dr, here's a shortened crux without the nit-picky details:

1) Sarah was abused by her dad and uncle in that house in a variety of ways when she was a little girl— violated with beer bottles, raped, locked up, beaten, forced to pose for pornographic photos, etc, etc.

2) She's very seriously (and understandably) psychologically f##### up by all of this.

3) Being back in that environment forces her to recall and relive her abuse for a variety of reasons.

4) She finds actual photographic evidence of the sex abuse when she stumbles across the Polaroids, which causes her to have a mental breakdown, so she attacks dad while her uncle is gone, and then eventually attacks uncle as well when he returns from town.

5) Family intervention in the living room ends in a well-deserved blood bath and justice is served.

reply

(Sorry if this is a *beep* read, I was in a rush haha)



What confuses me is that the first time Sarah attacked her dad, she hid him in the carpets and then pretended that she "found him", which is when he fell out on to the floor. He was also still alive and she was trying to wake him up? That defeats the purpose to me. I suppose she was just screwing with herself, or her thoughts, hallucinations and priorities were all f$@^ed up at that point. Also I thought this was supposed to be in real time. By doing this it defeats the purpose of real time, when they are showing us stuff that she didn't actually do, just what she made us think she did, if that makes sense. As in, they are showing us hearing her dad get attacked, then goes and finds him, though she was the one who attacked him. If this is real time, then at what "time" did she actually do this. Our eyes are on her the whole time so how does that work? That's my ONLY problem with this movie.
Another time this happens is when Sarah found her dad tied up and under the furniture plastic; how could she have tied him up and when? That's a lot of time taken up. This is what is defective again about it being in "real time".
After Sarah and her uncle returned to the house and Sarah ran in the house and locked the door and then went to pick up the knife when she left the car the camera purposly didn't walk through the room with her, they just panned the other side of the wall, and then showed her in the next room, where her uncle jumped out at her. Was her dad there all tied up already? Wouldn't her uncle have seen him there when he went in the house first? hmm..

Also I'd just like to add some things that I thought, or got from the movie.
So, I suppose the mom died, I would assume, when she was a preteen, or a few years before this movie takes place. That's probably one reason why they are selling the place.
Since molesters usually like their girls young, I supposed he stopped when she got into her teens and then they also stopped going to the lakehouse and she somehow forced herself to forget over time; and then her dad got sober and became a more normal father (he seemed like an awesome dad to me, in the beginning). I wouldn't think that if he was still abusing her that Sophia would have ever went away. I assume that by her showing up and saying "remember we used to play when we were little" means that the dad had stopped, and now Sophia was triggered and now sneaking back into her thoughts and "planting" little memory seeds back into her mind. Even though she was actually triggering them herself by looking at all the old things/pictures etc.
If this was happening in real life and the dad and uncle were actually there I think this little theory: When her dad saw the pictures on the bed I think that's when he started to realise something was wrong (as in him realising she was starting to remember), he said that the brother must have left the pictures on the bed but we know that that is illogical, he would have no reason to randomly do that. For all we know (since not EVERYTHING is in "real time" like I previously stated) the father could've tried to attack her right after that moment and then that is why she knocked him out with the candlestick.. (or she may or may not have pretended that she didn't know what the pictures were and then just randomly attacked him which makes less sense to me).. Then made to exact her revenge. My question would be, why would they bring her back there with all those things, if she didn't remember, unless he wanted her to? It makes your theory that only Sarah was there so fitting, I really like that and never would have interpreted that.
Overall Sarah did say they had already been in that house for 2 days, she could have found that red box at any time. I don't know where she got the key from though. It was really old. I doubt the father ALWAYS carried it with him. Her finding that key would be like finding a needle in a haystack.



Too be honest, almost the whole movie I thought they were just tripping out over the mold or asbestos that they found growing in the walls. But someone here did mention that it could have attributed to her hallucinations, which I believe to be true.

reply

@youshotandywarhol

Good job with the explanation, but I find one detail to be either wrong, or else a very SERIOUS oversight by the makers of the movie.

You & others say that Sophia is not a real person, but is instead somebody that Sara's mind imagines as a coping mechanism. That makes a certain amount of sense from a plotline point of view, but it makes NO sense from a viewer's point of view. If the movie makers didn't make an oversight with the Sophia character (& I think that they did, but for the sake of spelling out their oversight, I'll consider the possibility that they didn't), then Sophia has to be REAL. Remember, although this is actually a movie, it's presented as a documentary style home video recorded by somebody (Sarah) who DIDN'T do any EDITING to it. Therefore, if Sophia really is imaginary, & not real or a ghost, Sarah should be able to see her, but the VIDEO CAMERA (& the viewers) should NOT.
---
IF I want your opinion, I'll GIVE it to you.

reply

The real-time thing makes sense if you go with the theory someone else posted about it being Freudian. It could all still be happening in real-time. It's just that the camera is only showing the ego's point of view. So while her id is knocking out the father and shooting the uncle, the ego is in an alternate reality. The ego is hearing what the id is doing and even witnesses it occasionally from an out of body type of experience. This is shown at the end when the id is dragging in the uncle and the ego suddenly realizes that it's herself that is dragging him.

reply

One thing that hit me a few minutes after watching it, and maybe this is just me over-thinking, as usual, and maybe it means absolutely nothing, but with her psyche converting between the present and when she was 9 years old, it makes sense, at least to me. If you notice closely, when she is looking for her father, at times she cries out "Dad!", while other times, it's "Daddy?", thus leading me to believe that she is shifting "mentality between the present and her traumatized past.

reply

Youshot: great explanation. I never thought that her harming her father and uncle may also be in her mind. One question though. Remember the scene where she is frantically looking for a key for the backdoor. She steps back for a second and "we" see a blurry vision of a man. She steps forward again and then back and he is gone. I assume she never saw him since she didn't react. If this is all from her point of view and all in her mind, why did we see him if she didn't?

Friendship is longer lasting than love, and more legal than stalking.

reply

That's a really good observation. Since the man is only in her mind, she shouldn't be able to overlook him, unless at that point he was still on the periphery of her psyche and hadn't quite manifested himself yet. In that case, then she was progressing through her dissociation and when she actually began observing him, as she hid under the table, she had reached a new level in this breakdown, one in which she was cognitively aware that there was an attacker but was still unable to comprehend her own actions. However, I would just as soon say that there's no real explanation and the Directors were just trying to creep the audience out; after all, this is generally considered a horror movie and certain 'shocks' are expected. That shot reminded me a lot of The Strangers, in fact when I first saw the preview to this, I thought it was going to be a sequel or prequel to that movie.

"Don't unform, you're a great mob. We'll think up something else to get upset about." Moe Sizlack

reply

I just wanted to say that threads like this are the reason I come to IMDB. Great work by OP and everyone else with their interpretations of the film.

reply

I have to say that is pretty brilliant, I'm passing it on.

Two can only keep a secret when one of them is dead

reply

[deleted]

I hadn't considered the father and uncle not actually being present until I came here. Now I think this makes sense, but wanted to add a couple more observations.

1) In my opinion, the father and uncle both seem extremely young in comparison to Sarah's age. This is totally subjective, but it makes me wonder if they were actually representations in her mind of what they looked like when the atrocities in the house were committed. Just an idea.

2) The sledgehammer isn't actually shown to make contact with the father, is it? It's been a bit since I saw the film, but I wondered if that was also important to illustrate he wasn't really there.

reply

The "not actually happening" theory is an interesting one, but I highly doubt it. While psychologically complex, this is still a horror movie first and foremost. True, a young girl reliving and confronting horrific abuse is frightening, but by the time the credits role, the audience is here to see a body. It's a work of fiction, there's no definitive way of saying whether the events were meant to be literal or metaphorical, but I see no reason the directors would have intended the less visceral conclusion of this being simply a theater of the psyche rather than a realm in which legitimate consequences were suffered by the antagonists. One interpretation is a rebirth through introspection the other is through blood and punishment--I don't imagine a film that is playing on the audiences nerves is going to settle for the former.

I though the father seemed much older and more authoritative than the uncle which I took as a sign that the uncle was manipulated into his participation and was carrying his own set of scars as a result. I thought the sledge hit off camera simply because this wasn't a gory film.

I do respect the idea of the action all being part of her psychological journey, but I don't think this particular film presents such a sophisticated concept. It's a revenge horror film that applies a unique editing a approach to an increasingly common cinematic twist (quick name five films in which "the victim was the perpetrator all along, see pretty easy to do). I thought it was fairly well done for the acting and execution, but I still think it was more about shocking the audience than communicating any profound insight.

"Don't unform, you're a great mob. We'll think up something else to get upset about." Moe Sizlack

reply

I saw this film a few hours ago and after reading all the other threads, I want to say that even though I liked this movie and defended it in other threads, THIS thread made it seem AWESOME. I agree; threads like this are what makes IMDb shine and movies that much more enjoyable. Too bad I didn't have these discussions for all the movies I saw growing up!

twitter.com/swlinphx

reply

I am enjoying these reviews also. This was such a good movie with different layers of meanings and possible interpretations. I think that a lot of people just didn't get it. In the United States, I think that we've become used to very simple movies with easily digested plots and clear bad guys and good guys.

reply

About the beer bottles...could be a possibility that her father got her drunk as a little girl so she would be out of it and submissive during the molestation...I've heard disgusting stories about children who are abused/photographed being drugged or made to drink...a drunken state during the abuse might also have played a part in her not remembering what went on. thoughts?

reply