Can someone explain the ending?!? Makes no sense.. *spoilers*

But what did he actually do to make that "right choice" at the end?

When he talks to the husband who comes in and bickers with his wife, he hints that he'd had numerous other wives. I'm guessing this was explained in further detail in a deleted scene or something but it likely had something to do with that.

and what the hell was the point of the tape thing of him raping that girl? was that just incase he made the wrong choice? or was that the reason for his test in the first place because of this sin? Either way it's kinda harsh on the innocent girl as she has no choice in her fate..

Pretty sure the rape of Frank's wife was the reason for him being there - to face what he'd done. The tape itself was just a way of showing his girlfriend (and the viewer) what he'd done.

It is a little cracked that they included the girlfriend as part of his journey toward absolution (well, I guess not true absolution but whatever).

On another note I thought the lead guys acting was awful and unconvincing.

Largely agree here. The way they lit his face in some scenes, I got the impression that someone wanted to try and convince anyone watching this film that he could pass for Ed Norton (or a number of other actors, depending on who you ask on his IMDb page's boards). In the right lighting - maybe - but when you see him act in this - not a chance (not to say Josh Stewart is a bad actor in general, but were I him, I wouldn't include the performance in this film among my highlight reel).

reply share

add reply

formatting help

But what did he actually do to make that "right choice" at the end?

I understood it to mean that him choosing to set his girlfriend free was the right choice.

and what the hell was the point of the tape thing of him raping that girl?

I don't see why it needs a precise point. It could have just been a manifestation of his guilty conscience about what he had done.

Conform or be cast out

reply share

add reply

formatting help

[deleted]

I'm sorry, but I vehemently disagree about the actor; I thought he was the coolest thing going... With the constant over-acting that everyone seems to do these days, particularly in Indie films, I found this guy to be VERY refreshing. He seriously reminded me of a younger, milder Sean Penn; VERY cool and understated.

Just my opinion. I honestly REALLY liked the guy's performance; actually, I thought EVERYONE'S performance was unusually strong for a film of this type. I think that was singly THE strongest element that carried this film since the story and script were nothing to get too excited about. But, the performances and to some extent the directing really added to the extremely mysterious and creepy tone of what was going on...

I have over 4000 films, many of them very rare and OOP. I LOVE to trade. PLEASE ASK!

reply share

add reply

formatting help