Ending Theory...

Could the ending have just been Roy's wishful dream that nathan didn't die or was still with him?

Hi Allentravis,

I think you are actually trying to ask "What did the author intend to convey?" That question cannot be answered. The author -- i.e., the screenwriter, James Bolton -- only implied some possibilities. Don't be angry with him, that's a common literary device, often used to get the reader (or audience) to get into the spirit of the story by rousing their feelings. It works (if it didn't, we wouldn't be writing here.)

We can go back to the original book by Jim Grimsley, but we must keep in mind that Bolton only used the book as a starting point for his screenplay. Bolton absolutely re-wrote the ending to suit himself.

In the book we are privy to Nathan's delirious thoughts as he lies beaten on the floor. He imagines he sees the hole in his own skull, then he sees Roy, then his Dad, then others (the sheriff).

He imagines, "He will shake his head to free himself. He has practiced the gesture for most of his life, he will find it easy. When he does, he will be in the present again, and he will be awake, and Dad will be nowhere near. He will shake his head, and sit up in the attic, and find Roy."

(The screenplay is essentially faithful at this point, except that we don't hear Nathan's thoughts. But soon, movie Nathan is walking to find Roy.)

In the book, he finds him at the church, and after a somewhat stunned reunion, the two of them disappear into the woods. Other church members try to follow them, but fall behind. Finally Nathan and Roy sit down to rest.

"They keep very quiet, listening for sounds of pursuit. Roy slides an arm around Nathan's shoulders. Nathan feels all the reticence with which the gesture is performed, then sighs and leans against Roy. "You were dead," Roy says, but his tone is more of confiding than disapproving. "I saw you."

"I know."

So now we see that book author Jim Grimsley uses the same literary device as James Bolton to draw his readers into the story. Both dip a toe into the supernatural, with different results (Grimsley: Nathan lives, Bolton: Nathan dies).

And both writers leave it up to you to interpret their story however you like.

reply share

add reply

formatting help