MovieChat Forums > The Tortured (2012) Discussion > Ending explained for those confused.

Ending explained for those confused.

posted 13 years ago by jnvestal
18 replies | jump to latest

The couple said the childs name during the torturing. Why did he write the note? Because the mental influence of the torture actually broke his mind and convinced him that he was the killer. He didn't do it to "give the couple relief or closure". This made me think of an episode of Star Trek: TNG where Picard was being tortured. I may get the number of light wrong, so please forgive. The torturer told Picard that he would stop the torture if Picard told him how many lights there were. Picard would say Four, and there WAS only four, yet the torturer told him there was five and would torture him, trying to break Picard into saying he saw five, when there was only four. As a final act of rebellion, picard told the torturer that there was four lights. Later in the episode, Picard admitted that because of the torture, he actually eventually SAW FIVE lights. This is sorta similar. The man in the movie was tortured so much and told "you killed our son" that he was broken down and convinced by the torture that he REALLY WAS the murderer. Naturally, he felt guilt and killed himself. Yes, they had the wrong man. But, due to the torture that broke his mind, he was convinced that he really did it. My apologies for any misspellings or gramatical errors, it is very late.

[–] GuanXing 12 years ago

Thanks for the Star Trek reminder. Great example and it does explain everything. :-)

[–] Silly28 11 years ago

I don't think it was the torture that broke him down into thinking he actually did it. I think he REALLY DID have memory loss from the accident. So he believed them when they said he did it even though he really didn't... he just couldn't remember. That's what I think anyway. And he didn't kill himself out of guilt either. He did it because he couldn't stand the torture. That's what he said in the note. That even though he agreed that he deserves all the things they have done and plan on doing to him he can't handle the torture anymore.

I giggle when I get attacked for my opinion, because it just doesn't make sense

[–] blacknyellowsquid 10 years ago

^ AHHH that makes the most sense!!!!

[–] timothy-5 11 years ago

OK, I replayed the last 10 minutes. The real killer was caught by the police near the end of the movie (they showed his face, which was not bloodied). The guy Erika & whatshisname tortured had a bloody face when he killed himself. At the time the tortured guy said "Benjamin", his parents hadn't yet said his name in front of him, so many people, including myself, thought he was the real killer because he knew the little boy's name. But in the quick cut scenes near the end, one of them had Erika's husband say Benjamin in front of the tortured guy, so THAT'S how the guy knew the son's name. The torture inflicted upon him was so horrible that he eventually thought he really was the killer. Erika and her husband never knew he wasn't the real killer. The tortured guy had awful, dark brown eyes and the real killer had pale blue ones. Eye color is such a prominent feature that they should have known he wasn't the killer. They should have used 2 guys with the same color eyes. Sela Ward played Jessica Savitch in a TV movie. They dyed all the brown out of her hair, but she didn't wear blue contact lenses. With her dog doo brown eyes, I couldn't believe for a second it was Jessica. Visine's slogan is get the red out, and mine is get the brown out. I digress so I'll stop here.

[–] corpus_callosum 11 years ago

seems kinda bizarre that you hate brown eyes so much.

must be a tough life for you, when most people on the planet HAVE brown eyes and you have to look at them constantly.

[–] babycallie2000 10 years ago

I love brown eyes! I wish I had them. My eyes are green. I wish I could have a man with brown eyes. At least, I did once with my first husband. Brown eyes are beautiful!

[–] sedativchunk 11 years ago

THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!

[–] KramerTM 11 years ago

Wrong. He had memory loss and didnt know he didnt do it.

[–] armynod 11 years ago

Sounds like a reasonable explanation. Although, how do you explain why the torture victim waits so long before saying the name of their Son?

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] iasimkhovich 10 years ago

if he was just reciting one of the only things he knew about them, and heard them say it, the only logic he could have used would be that saying it wouldn't directly help; it would just incite them more. duh.

you've got me strapped down, you're crazy, you mention your son. later, after i tell you i have no idea what's going on, you ask me the name of your son. i've got nothing to say to you, and saying the name of a victim you're blaming me for isn't going to do anything but... prove that you should be hurting me?

[–] al666940-3 10 years ago

"the only logic he could have used would be that saying it wouldn't directly help; it would just incite them more. duh."

True. In his mind to admit to anything (real or not) would only ensure his death. At that point he must've had some hope of making it alive.

But eventually the torture will get anyone to admit anything, anything to get the pain to stop. And even believe it too. Anyone who doubts this needs to read about Stalin's purges of rivals, whom would confess in kangaroo courts to whatever they were tortured to.

Just read Orwell's 1984.

[–] loganwolfsbain 10 years ago

Yes partly that but mostly memory loss too as far has he knew he might have done it he couldn't remember after the head injury

[–] sandrock41 10 years ago

I'm a pretty big Bill Moseley fan and it WAS Bill Moseley on the table the whole time. I know Bill when I see him, so this ending was so *beep* stupid.