Can someone please explain the ending? Didn't quite understand it
-
bing-57 — 9 years ago(July 15, 2016 09:20 PM)
The boy that doesn't talk being eaten- I would say that his death is implied
Well, all the deaths were implied. Each one happened off screen. And the boy that didn't talk wasn't eaten, he was sucked up the chimney to an uncertain fate. The girl named Jordan was "eaten" by the jack-in-the-box, but she may still be alive inside of it.
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)? -
cgrill8 — 9 years ago(October 11, 2016 10:19 AM)
Huh? He was eaten the dark elves pulled him up through the chimney. I imagined they put all the family members as they knocked them out (or putting that slime over their face) which made them more sleepy than anything Stevie seemed completely fine when they wiped her face off)) into the back of the Krampus sleigh. I mean we saw the Der Klown (Jack in the Box) poking out from the back in that quick scene. And it had to be one of the 2 jack-in-the boxes with one of the girls in it. I was hoping to see a scene with them all roped up or bickering at each other in the back of the sleigh actually. With the dad, mom and aunt all with a bite out of their left or right legs but not dead. We only get that impression from Max when he asks his dad if they are all 'going to die'. And another sad thing is the grandmother did not understand the whole Krampus legend as the Director laid out. She knew nothing of his world per se. Only why he shows up, and who he takes. She knew nothing about how be redeemed, or getting her parents back.
3rd generation American from a long line of Gottscheers it was Drandul, dude! -
utexashorns — 10 years ago(February 26, 2016 09:02 PM)
you could not be more wrong if you tried, lol. They all suddenly remembered the events of the night before and how it was almost lost- not just the little boy. The lesson was learned but remember "he sees you when you're sleeping, knows when you are awake", in other words, he is keeping an eye on them in case they forget the lesson and dire warning given about the loss of Christmas Spirit.
-
marauteatime — 10 years ago(December 05, 2015 11:13 AM)
Actually the ending is NOT "pretty clear". The reason I say that is because of the Official Prequel comic. In that, three people in different parts of a city or town are tormented by Krampus and die, just like in the movie. At the end, they are alive with a bell and even run across each other. They can't do that if only a small section is trapped in a snowglobe.
-
marauteatime — 10 years ago(December 05, 2015 11:25 AM)
Considering Michael Dougherty had a lot to do with the comic and that it is an official tie-in, it's more haha at you for not understanding his world. He even said in interview Krampus is not necessarily evil, more darkly mischievous.
-
goonies383 — 10 years ago(December 05, 2015 11:39 AM)
They are most likely only meant to familiarize people with the character who know nothing of Krampus. The movie is self contained watching just the movie you know Krampus is not evil he is a character meant to punish the wicked or naughty. He torments more than anything and delivers this ironic punishment of being forced to have a happy Christmas over and over.
-
wjwolfe-687-149852 — 10 years ago(December 06, 2015 10:24 AM)
The fact that it's an
official
comic book tie-in and had a lot of input from Dougherty himself would indicate that it is in fact canonical to the film. Thus, it is perfectly viable in discussions when discussing the Krampus/Trick-r-Treat universe. -
wjwolfe-687-149852 — 10 years ago(December 06, 2015 10:51 AM)
The strength of your argument is astounding. Show me an interview where it is said that the comic is irrelevant. The comic was written by Dougherty, Shields, and Casey, the three writers of the movie itself, so it only makes sense that they would keep the mythology and the rules of how Krampus works the same in both the movie and the book. I would say that if the people who created and wrote the movie wrote the book, it's probably going to be canonical. The introduction to the comic book (written by Dougherty himself) says "His mythology and history was too big and too rich to be contained to one movie", meaning that the comic expands upon the mythology already present in the movie, something that the back cover also states.
-
nddostal — 10 years ago(December 10, 2015 02:15 PM)
dude-youre posting the same annoying viewpoint on every thread! When a movie comes out, it belongs to EVERYONE. The ending is indeed open to many interpretations-there is no one right ending. That's silly.
-
chris-rozakis — 9 years ago(May 27, 2016 10:18 AM)
You're sitting here talking about this crap like you KNOW for a fact what is and isn't. It's hysterical. Please tell me that you're not an adult yet.
It's a supernatural/fantasy film. Saying what is "real" and what isn't is dumb. -
reaseltbim — 9 years ago(August 28, 2016 03:54 PM)
you are so stupid lol
the creator of the movie literally worked on the comic.. .so you are saying you know more of this project than the actual writer? lol
thats so stupid
the director's commentary literally says that this is meant tobe like Christmas Carol boy you are dumb -
DisturbedPixie — 10 years ago(February 29, 2016 11:24 AM)
so you think he has to be evil to force a family to have a merry Christmas morning forever? seems mischievous to me. Seems like the punishment fits the crime, and Krampus does not have to be evil to do his job. That's like saying what happened to Bill Murray in Groundhog's Day is evil or firing an employee for stealing is evil.
And even if the creator has a lot to do with the movie doesn't mean the story/universe has to be the same. Whole characters were written out of The Hunger Games movie with the original novel's writer being involved. Plot lines were totally warped from the Walking Dead comics when it was made into a tv series.
Some things change in adaptions, and I can't even think of one movie that completely true to it's source material. Just look at how Alice's Adventures in Wonderland has been adapted! Only 2 out of the approx 50 versions in film and tv even are called by the full title, let alone how much the story has been warped in other ways. -
marauteatime — 10 years ago(December 05, 2015 11:34 AM)
"As the grandma in the trailer describes him, he is the shadow of Saint Nicholas. But hes not evil per se. Hes more complex and nuanced than that, said Dougherty. If you study the myth, theres something darkly playful about him. Hes having a good time doing what he does and he enjoys the cat-and-mouse aspect of it.
"Hes not Freddy (A Nightmare on Elm Street) or Jason (Friday the 13th) or Leatherface (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre), this unstoppable monster that kicks down your door and rampages and grabs you. If you study the myth, theres something darkly playful about him. Hes having a good time doing what he does and he enjoys the cat-and-mouse aspect of it."
And he even cites two well known Christmas movies that inspired his story.
"A Christmas Carol and Its A Wonderful Life are kind of nightmares that show you these broken characters who experience a darker side of divine intervention. They need to be scared straight. So it was important to elevate it. If you do a horror film without an emotional core, you dont really have much."