MovieChat Forums > The Descent (2006) Discussion > My interpretation of the ending...

My interpretation of the ending...

posted 6 years ago by CinemaDemon989 (1286)
18 replies | jump to latest

Now I know that the most obvious factor would be to assume that Sarah stabbed Juno in the leg, out of vengeance for technically killing her friend (who's name I can't remember). To be fair, Juno did stab that girl on accident. It wasn't intentional. In a situation like that, what good would it have done for Juno to admit to what she did? At that point, I think it would be really irrelevant. So I don't entirely view what happened as Juno's fault. Overall, she was in a completely insane and nightmarish situation. But still, it was pretty messed up.

I think Sarah left Juno to die, because during the end, she had a wicked moment of clarity, understanding that the situation that she was stuck in, was really all Juno's fault. Maybe Juno wasn't entirely responsible for stabbing that girl in the throat...but she was certainly responsible for Sarah being in that situation...due to her overwhelming need to explore an undiscovered cave system, which ultimately came with an extreme set of risks and consequences. So really, the whole situation was Juno's fault, and in that moment, Sarah recognized that. And more importantly, she trusted Juno, and that trust became shattered. After all Sarah had been through, losing her daughter & husband, I think being trapped in a cave full of a bunch of demonic reptilian creatures was the last straw on her sanity. She mentally snapped, and took her aggression out on Juno for being the only one who created the situation that she was in. Like I said...it was an intense feeling of 'broken trust'.

And on top of that, I think in that final moment, Sarah came to terms with the fact that Juno was once having an affair with her husband. I think Sarah knew that the entire time, but due to the severe trauma she experienced, she sort of went into denial about it. And yet again, for Sarah, regarding Juno, that was just an extra smack in the face.

Was Juno innocent or guilty? You decide. Thoughts? Feedback?

[–] Driver (18) 6 years ago

Juno did want to go there but she didn't make anyone go with her. They all willingly went in with her. So, I guess that in a way, Juno isn't the only guilty person. They all are.

[–] CinemaDemon989 (1286) 6 years ago

True. But still, the group were under the impression that they were exploring a cave that had already been discovered. I know Juno was intrigued by the whole thrill of discovering a new uncharted cave system. But she should've known or at least considered that there were risks involved...for everyone. I still think the whole situation was primarily Juno's fault.

[–] Driver (18) 6 years ago

You're right. She was careless and she endangered her friends, but they could've refused to go down there at any time. Juno is definitely at fault there but so are all the other girls.

[–] CinemaDemon989 (1286) 6 years ago

How? They thought they were entering a 'safe', readily-visited, and well known discovered cave system.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

i agree. Juno downplayed the risk. They didn't really know what they were in for.

[–] goldgoldgold (84) 6 years ago

Juno had a lot of marks against her: Killing Sarah's friend, sleeping with her husband, tricking her into going into a cave full of monsters.

I can't even blame Sarah for her reaction.

[–] CinemaDemon989 (1286) 6 years ago

Exactly!

[–] CinemaDemon989 (1286) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TylerAArse (2651) 4 years ago

I don't think Juno was actually "guilty" of killing Rebecca. It was a totally accident. But her lying about it was a different story, and once she was called for that and then lied about it, it makes her look extremely bad.

So now Sarah is looking at Juno with this sickle in her hand, and this is what probably comes to mind for her:
-She lies to Sarah's face about the death of a very good friend.
-She is actually responsible for everyone's death since she lied about the descent.
-She was playing friend to her face and boinking her man behind her back.
-And now, (wo)man-eating creepy-crawlers are closing in for the kill.

So yeah, why not sacrifice this sorry bitch so you can go. I'd would've done it.

[–] CinemaDemon989 (1286) 4 years ago

Agreed. No doubt about it. Juno had to die. Sara reached her breaking point.

[–] sslssg (27397) 4 years ago

I still toy with the idea that the movie is really a metaphor for mental illness and there are no actual monsters. So I think that Sarah killed Juno because she was killing all the facets of her emotions and Juno had to die.

[–] CinemaDemon989 (1286) 4 years ago

I've started to view it in the same way as well.

"The descent" - the descent into madness

But then again, that's a lot of additional details to add into a plot for just being a metaphor.

[–] sslssg (27397) 4 years ago

I think it needed the details for it to be a metaphor. I also think it's smart, as this way the movie appeals to a greater audience as you can see it either way and still be correct.

[–] TylerAArse (2651) 4 years ago

No way is this all in her head. I'm not even sure what's in the movie to make you come to that conclusion. Have you seen the 2nd one? That pretty much kills that theory.

[–] ExTechOp (2737) 4 years ago

The sequel eliminates the metaphor theory, true.

But even without that, there's no reason to think the creatures are imaginary. It goes against the theme of the movie, being lost in a hostile environment with unknown dangers.

Sarah's "descent" occurs just fine without making the creatures imaginary.

One last point I haven't seen addressed on this thread - Sarah's husband and child were killed in a car accident because he was distracted, and it looked a whole lot to me like he was about to come clean about Juno. So Sarah could've hitched her own daughter's death onto Juno as well.

[–] sslssg (27397) 4 years ago

Well, the sequel doesn't make sense if you've seen the original ending as well. So there's that.

Reasons to think that it is Sarah who is doing the killings

1. Sarah is mentally unstable and we see her leave her medication in the cabin. This is a deliberate shot. Why was this shown to us if we aren't to suspect her mental health.
2. Sarah has hallucinations before entering the cave and she is the first one to see the crawlers. Right before she sees the crawlers she hears a giggle. Not once, but twice.
3. When Sarah gets stuck in the cave, she has a breakdown. She's not actually stuck but this could be considered the moment that she really loses it.
4. When she sees the claw marks, her friends, especially Juno, tell her that her eyes are playing tricks on her. Maybe? Maybe not.
5. When Sarah screams, the others hear it as a crawler scream
6. The look on Juno's face when she sees Sarah near the end, she is terrified. That could be for different reasons, but she looks incredibly scared of her.
7. The birthday cake in the hallucinations continually show 5 candles, but at the end (the original ending where she is still in the cave) there are 6 candles.

There are theories out there about the friends representing different parts of Sarah's psyche, there are also hidden faces and eyes throughout the film.

There is also a deleted scene that shows a crawler in the hospital. So it was at least the film maker's intent to make us question what is really going on. Like I said, the movie can be interpreted either way and can still be correct.

[–] Kurt (189) 4 years ago

Not to mention the description IN the movie of cave madness, foreshadowing the whole rest of the movie. I don't care about the theories of what her friends represent, but she certainly is completely mad at the end of the movie, there can be no doubt about that. Whether there even is a cave we cannot know, whether there are creatures and if the cave exists, what exactly happened there? We cannot know. However, there's a madness theme going on throughout the movie, including the "descent" title itself. It's not a cop out ending "it was all her imagination", because it is not really explained, all we know is that she is completely insane and delusional. Loads of element of the movie leads up to that conclusion, like all the points you make.

I see this as kind of an unreliable narrator type thing, just it is the director here instead who is deliberately unreliable. That's why we see things that she doesn't see, so we can think that the creatures really exist.

So there are many possibilities- the whole movie could have happened as we saw it, but she still became insane at the end - or it could all be her insanity playing out (As I said then we cannot know what actually happened) and everything in between.

[–] jasonbourne (1027) 4 years ago

I finally made it through to the end. I had trouble before the monsters came in as the movie was too claustrophobic for me. ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

Anyway, it took me only 15 years to see it again, but was able to push through and make it to the end; I saw the US ending. It didn't make sense. First, why was Juno so concerned about Sarah and waiting for her? She didn't help Beth (I thought it was an accident), but she should've helped her. Then we found she slept with Sarah's husband and she led them to this spelunking cave and put them in danger. So, Sarah had almost a right to stab her in the leg near the end. However, the way she escaped and the seeing Juno's ghost at the end was weird. I'm just going by the first movie, but it leaves several questions. I think Sarah descending into madness makes the most sense, but I also think everything happened as we saw it. Not a bad movie. Should be rated higher, but it leaves some questions after watching it.

[–] brux (14666) 3 years ago

These are not real people. This is a sensationalistic horror movie where all effort when into creepiness and special effects. Trying to raise this to the level of a living person ( sorry to say this, and it is understandable as the media seems to be trying to program us to do this rather than live life ) is borderline insane, or will drive you there at top speed.