Dog in Cage plothole cleverly covered

Actually, it is a big deal because she says she doesn't remember what happened, and she is going to review the tapes to see what exactly transpired. She stops and asks her brother if he remembers anything and says "No, you don't." She basically says that the dog must've been enough to "bait the shark." It makes no sense why she stops viewing the tape to uncover what actually happened to the dog, it is important to know if she actually fed the dog to the mirror. It would also aid her case in explaining that the mirror is indeed host to a demonic being as showing the dog being consumed would be very explicit. When Kaylie comes back to the room, the cage is still in front of the mirror without the sheet on. That should mean that there should be evidence of the mirror consuming the dog, as it was not moved by Kaylie or Tim while they were manipulated. Kaylie and Tim should be very curious what happened to the dog as they had a dog themselves when they were kids and they aren;t 100% sure what happened to it because there was no video evidence of its demise to the mirror.

Well actually, during the movie, Tim and Kaylie argue what actually happens to their childhood dog when the mirror was introduced to the house. Tim believes, with the help of therapy, that the dog got sick and had to be put down coincidentally around the time the mirror was placed in the room. Kaylie specifically recalls when her mother locks the dog in the room with the mirror, and then the room locks up from the inside until Kaylie's father can return from his golf trip. Kaylie, per her account, claims she stayed outside the room the entire afternoon from the time the dog was locked in the room to the time her father returns to open the room. When the room is opened, the dog is no longer to be found and there is no way to verify what exactly happens as both Kaylie and Tim are just kids, and the parents die during that stint with the mirror. Can you really claim the mirror does not literally eat the dog? Per Kaylie's account it would seem the mirror fully consumes the dog somehow. But also, as a kid, there are things that become exaggerated in memories. So it is one of those things that we really don't know. One thing is for sure, the 3rd camera is not pushed away from the view of the mirror when the grown kids return to the room, the tape should reveal what actually transpires with the dog. Whether Tim actually lifts the sheet and releases it, or the mirror consumes the dog. It can only be one or the other because the dog never shows up again in the movie after that scene.

If the dog is consumed before the moving of the cameras to face each other, the tape should reveal WHEN the dog is consumed. If it is before or after the moving of the cameras. I would postulate the dog is actually consumed BEFORE they move the cameras to face each other because the mirror needs enough power to begin manipulating Tim and Kaylie to move the cameras to face each other without their knowledge. But there is no question that audience is left in the dark on this issue, and I was surprised they just glossed over it. I even said during the movie to my date, "watch the tape, wtf why aren't they watching the tapes?" lol

There are two cameras on tripods that Kaylie and Tim move to face each other. But there is a 3rd camera mounted on the wall that never gets moved. Definitely rewatch the movie here. Like i said, it makes no sense why Kaylie doesn't rewatch the tape. Is that the mirror manipulating Kaylie and Tim to not be more curious about what happens? But that argument still isn't convincing enough as the mirror's power is clearly inconsistent during that point in the movie. I feel like the way it went down was the mirror first fed off the dog and consumed it giving it enough power to manipulate both tim and Kaylie to move the cameras to face each other and place the plants down out of the view of the 3rd wall mounted camera and then make them leave the room, then the mirror got more power by consuming those plants. Just a theory.


I had to rewatch the movie 2 more times because the first watch bothered me and I had trouble following it all in the theatre. This is a great film to challenge your psyche.

I agree with your conclusions.

I also saw the short upon which this movie was based. In it, the test dog does disappear. I figure they did it behind a sheet in the original due to the low budget. In this version, they probably didn't want accusations of animal abuse... or maybe it would mean an NC-17 rating or some-such.

In the short, the mirror-dog was ironically named "Flip."

Oh, and also in the short, the neighborhood pets, even the crickets in the area, all disappear.

Your whole argument is a plot hole. The sister rambled on for about 10 minutes about the background story of the mirror. How much more do you require? And for anyone with half a brain cell it was blatantly obvious that these "people" are all those that the mirror killed. I mean I thought they made it pretty obvious when the sister was one of the "people" right at the end. It was all explained. Now that I explained it to you in more detail, did it still suck? It's fine if you didn't like it. Just don't make up reasons.