<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: It Comes At Night Ending Explained	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/</link>
	<description>Movies, Books &#38; TV for people who like to think..</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2025 17:49:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Ryucoo		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/#comment-1175985</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ryucoo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jun 2023 20:37:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=14945#comment-1175985</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The scenes in the film, especially the dream sequences, aren’t necessarily in chronological order. In fact, most of Travis’s dreams could be considered a memory of the same event that was key to the whole movie: Travis ignoring his dad’s instruction and going out into the woods at night to find Stanley.

Chronologically we see the dog run off and the immediate aftermath of that. Then Travis finds the little boy asleep in the grandfathers room and returns him, followed by his discovery of the red door being left open and the mangled dog the other side of it. The dog is killed and the crisis meeting results in the two families isolating from each other in separate rooms. We then see a ‘dream’ in which Travis is in the woods looking for the dog and appears to stare in shock as the dog is attacked/eaten by something off-screen. Then he awakes and overhears the other family stressing about their boy, and we descend into the final ‘showdown’. We end with another ‘dream’ where Travis walks down the hall to open the red door. 

Travis’s dreams here need not be in order, and perhaps they aren’t even dreams at all. Travis may not have been imagining going looking for Stanley - he very probably did it immediately after the dog went missing and just before he finds the little boy in his grandfathers room. Sneaking into the woods, he rescues his dog from being savaged by our mystery foe, drags it back to the house then discovers the boy, then the door and raises the alarm. I’m not sure if Travis even knows he is the door culprit (and therefore responsible for (a) himself getting sick and (b) getting the little boy sick). He’s probably traumatised and doesn’t know what’s real, what’s dream, what’s memory. But for me his very last dream is less a “walking into the light” moment before passing away, it’s a memory of him opening the red door, further reinforcing that it was indeed his fault. 

In which case, it would seem the film is not necessarily pointing the finger at the first family’s paranoia or reaction. Travis is the film’s protagonist who clearly doesn’t agree with his father’s strict rules for survival - whether that’s the ruthless disposal of grandpa, the resistance to helping or sharing with others, not wanting to look for the dog until the next day, the euthanasia of the dog, the quarantining of the families etc etc. It appears we are on Travis’s side and viewing his father as well-intentioned, but overly protective and paranoid. 

That is until we realise that Travis ignoring his father’s caution essentially leads to the downfall of everyone, including himself. Is this then less a story about the pitfalls of paranoia and more an Icarus tale that confirms it?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The scenes in the film, especially the dream sequences, aren’t necessarily in chronological order. In fact, most of Travis’s dreams could be considered a memory of the same event that was key to the whole movie: Travis ignoring his dad’s instruction and going out into the woods at night to find Stanley.</p>
<p>Chronologically we see the dog run off and the immediate aftermath of that. Then Travis finds the little boy asleep in the grandfathers room and returns him, followed by his discovery of the red door being left open and the mangled dog the other side of it. The dog is killed and the crisis meeting results in the two families isolating from each other in separate rooms. We then see a ‘dream’ in which Travis is in the woods looking for the dog and appears to stare in shock as the dog is attacked/eaten by something off-screen. Then he awakes and overhears the other family stressing about their boy, and we descend into the final ‘showdown’. We end with another ‘dream’ where Travis walks down the hall to open the red door. </p>
<p>Travis’s dreams here need not be in order, and perhaps they aren’t even dreams at all. Travis may not have been imagining going looking for Stanley &#8211; he very probably did it immediately after the dog went missing and just before he finds the little boy in his grandfathers room. Sneaking into the woods, he rescues his dog from being savaged by our mystery foe, drags it back to the house then discovers the boy, then the door and raises the alarm. I’m not sure if Travis even knows he is the door culprit (and therefore responsible for (a) himself getting sick and (b) getting the little boy sick). He’s probably traumatised and doesn’t know what’s real, what’s dream, what’s memory. But for me his very last dream is less a “walking into the light” moment before passing away, it’s a memory of him opening the red door, further reinforcing that it was indeed his fault. </p>
<p>In which case, it would seem the film is not necessarily pointing the finger at the first family’s paranoia or reaction. Travis is the film’s protagonist who clearly doesn’t agree with his father’s strict rules for survival &#8211; whether that’s the ruthless disposal of grandpa, the resistance to helping or sharing with others, not wanting to look for the dog until the next day, the euthanasia of the dog, the quarantining of the families etc etc. It appears we are on Travis’s side and viewing his father as well-intentioned, but overly protective and paranoid. </p>
<p>That is until we realise that Travis ignoring his father’s caution essentially leads to the downfall of everyone, including himself. Is this then less a story about the pitfalls of paranoia and more an Icarus tale that confirms it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Lekan		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/#comment-1043853</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lekan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2020 17:55:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=14945#comment-1043853</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Travis opened the red door to go find his dog, but the dog had dug up the grandfather that was burned and buried (this was what was shown in the dream sequence). The dog obviously got infected and Travis got infected bringing the dog into the house. Travis then touched the little boy Andrew and took him to bed. The little boy started coughing and showing symptoms rather quickly.  
Note: 
Andrew was coughing so he definitely was infected 
Andrew couldn&#039;t reach the red door to open so it was definitely Travis who opened it
Grandfather was barbequed close to the house, and hungry dogs want grilled meat hence the infection
The father spent three days with the family to make sure they weren&#039;t sick before bringing them into the house]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Travis opened the red door to go find his dog, but the dog had dug up the grandfather that was burned and buried (this was what was shown in the dream sequence). The dog obviously got infected and Travis got infected bringing the dog into the house. Travis then touched the little boy Andrew and took him to bed. The little boy started coughing and showing symptoms rather quickly.<br />
Note:<br />
Andrew was coughing so he definitely was infected<br />
Andrew couldn&#8217;t reach the red door to open so it was definitely Travis who opened it<br />
Grandfather was barbequed close to the house, and hungry dogs want grilled meat hence the infection<br />
The father spent three days with the family to make sure they weren&#8217;t sick before bringing them into the house</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jennifer Gosnell		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/#comment-972979</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer Gosnell]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Dec 2018 01:51:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=14945#comment-972979</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[We also saw the humanistic figure in the woods while they were driving..  it wss right after he said he either up around there or just around there.  
And another time when they were in the woods was it 1000s of sacades in the tree?  
We thought the disease resembled tree characteristics.   Not sure why or the the importance of that, but we found it odd.  
Anyway great posts everyone.  
Oh and it did look like the mother was sick at the end...her face and arms but not the dad.  
And a different twist.. no good deed goes unpunished.  That is how my husband saw the end.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We also saw the humanistic figure in the woods while they were driving..  it wss right after he said he either up around there or just around there.<br />
And another time when they were in the woods was it 1000s of sacades in the tree?<br />
We thought the disease resembled tree characteristics.   Not sure why or the the importance of that, but we found it odd.<br />
Anyway great posts everyone.<br />
Oh and it did look like the mother was sick at the end&#8230;her face and arms but not the dad.<br />
And a different twist.. no good deed goes unpunished.  That is how my husband saw the end.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Numenosium		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/#comment-949738</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Numenosium]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2018 03:10:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=14945#comment-949738</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Great read! I&#039;ll have to check this film out. I was curious, but worried it would disappoint. Sounds like it&#039;s the diamond in the proverbial rough of modern horror films (which I usually loathe). 

Oh, forgive me...I&#039;m a bit obsessed with this sort of thing, but I just have to point out that you sort of mixed up the words &quot;since&quot; and &quot;sense&quot;. 

Thanks for the fun and informative post!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great read! I&#8217;ll have to check this film out. I was curious, but worried it would disappoint. Sounds like it&#8217;s the diamond in the proverbial rough of modern horror films (which I usually loathe). </p>
<p>Oh, forgive me&#8230;I&#8217;m a bit obsessed with this sort of thing, but I just have to point out that you sort of mixed up the words &#8220;since&#8221; and &#8220;sense&#8221;. </p>
<p>Thanks for the fun and informative post!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Caden		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/#comment-946951</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Caden]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jul 2018 06:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=14945#comment-946951</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Just watched this film a few days ago and I thought it was brilliant. After reading your review and some of the comments, I am also starting to think of different possibilities of how the ending can be interpreted and I really like that about this film. 

I never really thought of it as Travis being sick from the beginning, but that is starting to make a lot of sense. I am still trying to figure out why they told the boy to cover his eyes as they were leaving (also, if I remember correctly, he was crying and whimpering a lot as the parents were telling him to calm down and to not be loud) I just feel like if he wasn’t sick, then they would’ve showed him to Paul to prove their point. (Then again, this is also all speculation based on the fact that Travis told Paul that he thinks Andrew is sick) 

I also find it tough to believe that is boy isn’t sick because Will got caught in a lie talking to Paul when they were drinking the alcohol in the Gpa’s room. He said he was an only child, but when he was caputured in the beginning of the film, he said he has a brother who died. (Which doesn’t help Will’s case at all when he says his son isn’t sick.)

Even towards the end after the boy is shot and killed, wouldn’t the mother have said something along the lines of “He wasn’t even sick” or “you people are murderers. We tried to leave because your son is the real sick one.” Or something like that?  And then of course I believe both Paul and Sarah are infected at the end since Paul had to take off his mask in the room with the boy/he fought Will in the woods (who was probably infected if his son was) and Sarah was comforting Travis w/o a mask as he was showing signs of infection/dying. 

Wow...I just love how this film makes you think and how you will never really know what the ending is since it is al based on your own thoughts and imagination. Haha 

Thanks for sharing!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just watched this film a few days ago and I thought it was brilliant. After reading your review and some of the comments, I am also starting to think of different possibilities of how the ending can be interpreted and I really like that about this film. </p>
<p>I never really thought of it as Travis being sick from the beginning, but that is starting to make a lot of sense. I am still trying to figure out why they told the boy to cover his eyes as they were leaving (also, if I remember correctly, he was crying and whimpering a lot as the parents were telling him to calm down and to not be loud) I just feel like if he wasn’t sick, then they would’ve showed him to Paul to prove their point. (Then again, this is also all speculation based on the fact that Travis told Paul that he thinks Andrew is sick) </p>
<p>I also find it tough to believe that is boy isn’t sick because Will got caught in a lie talking to Paul when they were drinking the alcohol in the Gpa’s room. He said he was an only child, but when he was caputured in the beginning of the film, he said he has a brother who died. (Which doesn’t help Will’s case at all when he says his son isn’t sick.)</p>
<p>Even towards the end after the boy is shot and killed, wouldn’t the mother have said something along the lines of “He wasn’t even sick” or “you people are murderers. We tried to leave because your son is the real sick one.” Or something like that?  And then of course I believe both Paul and Sarah are infected at the end since Paul had to take off his mask in the room with the boy/he fought Will in the woods (who was probably infected if his son was) and Sarah was comforting Travis w/o a mask as he was showing signs of infection/dying. </p>
<p>Wow&#8230;I just love how this film makes you think and how you will never really know what the ending is since it is al based on your own thoughts and imagination. Haha </p>
<p>Thanks for sharing!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Sinner		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/#comment-944226</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sinner]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jul 2018 19:55:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=14945#comment-944226</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I`m a visual arts professor :)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I`m a visual arts professor :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Taylor Holmes		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/#comment-943635</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taylor Holmes]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jul 2018 15:59:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=14945#comment-943635</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/#comment-943521&quot;&gt;Sinner&lt;/a&gt;.

Alright, I&#039;ll go looking for it. Might I ask what your profession is? Thanks for commenting...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/#comment-943521">Sinner</a>.</p>
<p>Alright, I&#8217;ll go looking for it. Might I ask what your profession is? Thanks for commenting&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Sinner		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/#comment-943521</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sinner]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jul 2018 17:46:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=14945#comment-943521</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi, I just happened to stumble on this blog while I was trying to find something mind challenging to watch -I was just finished watching &quot;Personal Shopper&quot;- and few days ago I also watched this &quot;It comes at night&quot; film.
 I don`t have any take on the whole plot although the end did puzzle me, but what I really want to ask you is this: did you, or anyone, notice a dark silhouette into the wood while they were driving to fetch the family? prior meeting the snipers? Because that really intrigued me not only because it seemed like a cameo or any other sort of symbolism to point out that the whole films plot it is not what is being presented? -kinda like a Lynch-esque manner, adding elements into the films that has nothing to do with anything just for the sole idea of making the viewer wonder ?
Due to my profession I`m just really prone to notice all these random details, which is a blessing and a curse- a curse cause its really hard to find films with hidden symbolism-.
Anyway I`d recommend you &quot;First they killed my father&quot;- if you haven`t watched it yet.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, I just happened to stumble on this blog while I was trying to find something mind challenging to watch -I was just finished watching &#8220;Personal Shopper&#8221;- and few days ago I also watched this &#8220;It comes at night&#8221; film.<br />
 I don`t have any take on the whole plot although the end did puzzle me, but what I really want to ask you is this: did you, or anyone, notice a dark silhouette into the wood while they were driving to fetch the family? prior meeting the snipers? Because that really intrigued me not only because it seemed like a cameo or any other sort of symbolism to point out that the whole films plot it is not what is being presented? -kinda like a Lynch-esque manner, adding elements into the films that has nothing to do with anything just for the sole idea of making the viewer wonder ?<br />
Due to my profession I`m just really prone to notice all these random details, which is a blessing and a curse- a curse cause its really hard to find films with hidden symbolism-.<br />
Anyway I`d recommend you &#8220;First they killed my father&#8221;- if you haven`t watched it yet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Bart		</title>
		<link>https://taylorholmes.com/2017/09/01/it-comes-at-night-ending-explained/#comment-932775</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bart]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2018 06:15:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://taylorholmes.com/?p=14945#comment-932775</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I have a few takes on the events of the movie but what I would like to share is my take on the title and it&#039;s meaning to me.  I believe that the title is in reference to the &quot;boogeyman&quot; of the movie which isn&#039;t a monster or physical being, but the human predisposition to irrational fear/paranoia when darkness falls...hence the night terrors.  Did anyone notice that the few times people ventured out into the dark, there wasn&#039;t a monster to get them?  The fear that these people had drove the events of the movie, not the mystery illness which in all actuality was probably overblown.  Remember the two men in the ambush?  Were they sick, or more likely, irrationally fearful of others just like everyone else.  The movie really delves into the deepest darkest corners of human depravity without all the gore that is so prevalent in today&#039;s cinema.  I found it brilliant.  And for the record, I believe Travis was ill from the start or shortly after.  I also believe he was the one that opened the door and was the one to harm the dog.  I don&#039;t think anyone else was ill.  Will and family suspected the illness, or were fearful of this other group out of the aforementioned irrational paranoia.  Very thought provoking!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have a few takes on the events of the movie but what I would like to share is my take on the title and it&#8217;s meaning to me.  I believe that the title is in reference to the &#8220;boogeyman&#8221; of the movie which isn&#8217;t a monster or physical being, but the human predisposition to irrational fear/paranoia when darkness falls&#8230;hence the night terrors.  Did anyone notice that the few times people ventured out into the dark, there wasn&#8217;t a monster to get them?  The fear that these people had drove the events of the movie, not the mystery illness which in all actuality was probably overblown.  Remember the two men in the ambush?  Were they sick, or more likely, irrationally fearful of others just like everyone else.  The movie really delves into the deepest darkest corners of human depravity without all the gore that is so prevalent in today&#8217;s cinema.  I found it brilliant.  And for the record, I believe Travis was ill from the start or shortly after.  I also believe he was the one that opened the door and was the one to harm the dog.  I don&#8217;t think anyone else was ill.  Will and family suspected the illness, or were fearful of this other group out of the aforementioned irrational paranoia.  Very thought provoking!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
