无尽

没时间读完的朋友，简单总结就是导演说了，结尾是happy ending，不是loop，兄弟俩逃出生天。

http://collider.com/the-endless-explained-interview/

‘The Endless’ Filmmakers on Their Trippy Mythology & Deciphering That Ending

This week, Justin Benson and Aaron Moorhead‘s The Endless rolls out on Blu-ray and digital, which means that folks nationwide are going to be unravelling the headtrip horrors of the film’s unnerving, mysterious Lovecraftian mythology and looking for some answers.Earlier this month, I published the first part of my conversationwith the filmmaking duo, which spanned from the duo’s early ideas for expanding the universe they built in their first film, Resolution, to the experience of taking the finished versionThe Endless around the world. And now that the movie has hit more theaters, it seems like a good time to serve up the spoilery portion of the interview, which dives into what to make of the film’s mysterious mythology and ending.

If you need a refresher, The Endless follows Benson and Moorhead as Justin and Aaron (yes, they’re using their real names, but no, they’re no playing themselves), a pair of bickering brothers always at odds who return to the UFO death cult they escaped as kids in search of answers. Except when they get there, they don’t find a UFO death cult at all, but a happy and healthy, if admittedly weird and unsettling, commune of people living life on their own terms. They also find something more sinister lurking in the hillsides of the remote camp — an unseen, oppressive presence that communicates through voyeuristic photographs and video clips, trapping people in time-loop prisons where it manipulates and torments them into various horrific fates for its own amusement. A frontiersman trapped in a loop of mere seconds, a man who has to kill himself every few minutes to prevent a worse fate, and the local cult, who have it relatively easy by comparison — living out a decently long three-moon loop that ends with their “ascension,” aka being shredded into bloody bits. Yikes. At least they don’t have to worry about aging.

Image via Well Go USA

And of course, there’s the return of Mike (Peter Ciella) and Chris (Vinny Curran) from Resolution,who are trapped in the bitter week-long loop of forced sobriety and failing friendship detailed in the 2002 film. The unseen evil in The Endless is the same chilling cosmic threat we met in Resolution, and the films share more crossovers thanyou’d probably imagine on a first watch, so you’re looking for more answers on The Endless, a rewatch of Resolution is the perfect place to start. Or first watch if you caught The Endless first, which works just as well.

However, if you’re looking for an easy play-by-play explanation of what goes down in the film, you’re not going to get it from Benson and Moorhead, who insist everything you need to solve the puzzles of their unconventional cinematic universe can be found right there on screen. However, the duo was more than happy to dive into the ideation behind the film’s mythology and the mindset behind ending it the way they did, so check out the interview below for a discussion of the different ways their “monster” is revealed through the characters and settings in the film, the ideas that helped inspire the unseen menace, and why the ending is more about character payoff than answering specific questions.

I know you guys have said you have this whole mythology totally down from top to tail. Was that something that you had already achieved at the time ofResolutionor did that come later?

JUSTIN BENSON: It’s definitely expanded.

AARON MOORHEAD: The rules didn’t change.

BENSON: But like withResolutionthere were … In both of these movies, there have been massive documents of things that people never see. And it’s really cool because we’re pretty sure people feel these things in the movie. The things that are into that. But like in the case ofResolution, for example. The unseen antagonist ofResolution, which is the same unseen antagonist inThe Endless, obviously. Except inResolution, the point of view of the whole film is from the unseen antagonist. There was like a massive document that went into everything about that “monster” that went to our sound designer to help them design the sound of the whole film. So that existed duringResolutionand there are things in that document that ended up more conspicuous inThe Endlessthan expanded upon. That’s just like one example of one thing.

When it comes to how nailed down the mythology is… Whenthe camera pulls back on that canyon and you see all those bubbles, the time prisons, would you be able to look at that shot and say exactly what’s happening in each one of them?

Image via Well Go USA

MOORHEAD: I can tell you how long those loops are, when they reset, and all of that. That exact area, we know it pretty well. And that’s desert, so there’s a whole bunch of poor animals. It’s probably something like that, but I wouldn’t say that we have an entire map of the world and who’s in it. But it wouldn’t be hard to theorize. We definitely have enough. So it would be pretty easy to take a good gander. And then, the little sequence that — the music trimmings for the montage that follows Justin and Aaron walking past the big totem and it’s in the sort of monolith carved monster looking thing.

BENSON: The rusty dragon sculpture.

MOORHEAD: And the rusty dragon sculpture. So those would all be individual loops that have developed their own sub-cultures and have their own interpretation of what this unseen antagonist is. Depending on how they saw it, the state of mind they’re in, and their own personalities, and all of that. And that these things they’ve created are artistic representations of how they see the antagonist. Whether they’re going specifically through the loop you see in the distance, because they do walk off, that we don’t know. And luckily, we only shot in 4K so you can’t really punch in. [Laughs]

BENSON: And what’s funny is … it’s weird how important that sequence was to us because in the movie we basically, the oldest loop that you ever see is what, 1800 something? Some kind of frontiersman like in a tent, but we have a non-existent Easter Island type subculture that developed its own kind of mythology around it. Clearly. And of course, Native Americans with the totem pole. But even the monolith to us — which is kind of the big image of the film anyways — to us. it’s supposed to scare the hell out of you when you realize that’s what that is. When you realize that, that’s the antagonist of the film as seen by people that are so ancient they’re gone in America.

In a similar vein, along with those monoliths I loved the ways we see this presence interpreted through the eyes of the characters in the film, like Lizzie’s art and Hal’s equation. What was your process of creating all these different understandings of this one being?

MOORHEAD: I mean, that’s something that did start with Resolution but it’s so small. It’s so small. It’s like literally there’s a journal running during the credits sequence of Resolution. It’s a bunch of monster sketches, and that would have been what the French researchers in Resolution were seeing it as. So that goes way back. I don’t even remember anymore what the inspiration for that was. Besides the fact that, unless you can get Giger, the guy who did Alien, unless you have a designer on that level to build a monster … We’re just trying to figure out ways that we can present it visually when we need to at least hint at something and not just show nothing, always. And in this case, we get to show it through sketches, and through sculptures, and things like that.

Image via Well Go USA

In the case of Spring, we showed a monster because the premise alluded to nature as being our designer. And since we don’t have our own Giger, we come up with these, hopefully interesting, clever ways to show an otherworldly being or “monster” and it won’t be really uneventful.

I mean if you wanted to pour a glass of wine, on a dark night and think about it. There’s this idea of every civilization has developed an idea of a deity and a God. And their interpretation of it has trickled down into our religions today. Or died out. But in the same way, their visualizations of it have looked so wildly different. And a lot of the time there’s the idea that … There’s two ideas. One is, what if it’s the same thing? What if they’re all the same thing? Of course, unified religion theory, which is kind of an idea that we play with. But we’re merging it with the idea of, what if wasn’t God? What if it was just a monster? Or what if people with porphyria were seen as vampires? You know, that kind of an idea where it’s like, “Oh, there’s nothing metaphysical about it.” Obviously, our movie’s metaphysical. But what if it was a natural phenomenon that people just tried to interpret as a god. And that’s a lot of what we’re talking about with this; they saw it as God and it’s actually just this thing.

BENSON: And as you saying that, I just remembered where it comes from. It comes from … This is a deep cut. There’s a guy named John Keel, who’s the guy who wrote The Mothman Prophecies. The book is very different from the movie. It’s not a fictional narrative. It’s sort of a journalist’s account of what happened in an area over a period of time. He wrote a whole collection of other books. The one that I’ve read is Our Haunted Planet and what it’s basically about is this concept of ultra-terrestrials.

I’m not saying it is an ultra-terrestrial in this movie, but the idea is that throughout human history whenever human beings saw something and interpreted it as being like, “Oh, I saw something. That was an angel from the bible.” Or, “That was a demon.” Or, “That was an extraterrestrial being.” “That was the Men in Black.” “That was the Mothman.” Whatever. That it’s actually always the same thing. In his case, he was arguing that it was this thing called an ultraterrestrial. That just basically, something that had been here among us, always manipulating the situation and everyone just seeing it differently depending on their culture. So it’s vaguely where the idea comes from. If you could imagine, there are so many species that we haven’t yet cataloged in the Amazon. Things like that. Imagine if there’s like an enormous blind spot that we just completely missed; one really big thing. Again, that’s not what’s in The Endless but it’s that idea.

I do have one very specific question. Are we meant to interpret at the end where we see the image of two cars coming into a collision, that it has anything to do with the car crash that put them there in the first place?

MOORHEAD: No.That’s an interesting one where we realized that was an unintentional thing. About 10% percent of people, they’ll kind of have that question of like, “Do they?”

When I watch Resolution andThe Endless back to back, something I had not picked up the first time was, they seem almost opposite ending moments. Resolution ends on a feeling of helplessness and being trapped and The Endless is all about breaking free. Was that intentionally designed for those two endings to be on opposite ends of the emotional spectrum?

MOORHEAD: Oh, that’s funny. I’m going to give you a yes and no. I think afterSpring, we got addicted to optimistic endings. I think we realized that we are just optimistic people and saying like, “You’re fucked no matter what” is just not our feeling about the way that life is, or at least the message that we want to put out into the world. And also, frankly, it more comes down to the construct of The Endless where, if you’re talking in really broad terms about the movie. If you’re talking about the fact that it says, “Break out of your cycle or be doomed to repeat history forever.” It seems like we should be showing what it looks like to break out of your cycle. And like, “Does that help you?” I don’t think it’s a moral as much as it’s an exploration of it. Because there are people that do enjoy it inside their cycle. I mean, the cult at the end. And you don’t even feel bad for them. A little bit, but it’s more melancholy. It’s like, “Oh. They kind of enjoy it there.” But I think that it would have been untruthful for ourselves if we’d ended it as dark as Resolution had ended.

BENSON: Yeah. It just seemed like we know, yes there is a very literal answer to the movie. And the answers in the film…It may take a few viewings, but everything’s very literal and all the evidence, if you want to call it that, is there. In terms of, where’s the movie ending in the sense of the supernatural, and otherworldly, and the sci-fi aspects, and all that.

But the thing that’s definite, that’s there, that was the most important to us, was just that you’d see that there was a transformation in the interpersonal relationship between these two brothers. And that you’d see that transformation in just a really understated gesture. And that the emotional satisfaction should come from that. I think anything else beyond that, we do things stylistically to kind of like poke the mystery part of people’s brains a little bit. One example is that it’s a hard cut going out. Things like that where just like you sit there and you go, “Oh, wait. There’s another piece of the puzzle to figure out.” To think about longer. It’s things like that. But there’s definitely one answer to the sci-fi part of it.

MOORHEAD: Actually going back to your questions, I just remembered when you said, “People who have viewed the movie multiple times.” There’s something that’s an interesting thing we’ve realizes. Our movies kind of exist in what people have called a Lynchian sort of universe where just things are a little off and all of that. I hadn’t seen almost any Lynch when that comparison started, but what’s interesting is, all of the answers to the movie are, I promise you, they’re in the movie. They are there. It’s not a dream logic situation. We’re not being deliberately obtuse. We just want to tell a mystery that’s got a lot of depth to it. And we just don’t want to lay it all out on the table but they’re in there. If you think about it long enough and hard enough. And you know, you might have to take a couple of, not leaps of logic but leaps of faith that like, “Okay. That is what they meant.” Something like that. But our movies are meant to be, I guess literal. That might be the word for it. They are meant to be telling a full story.

哥哥（不需要吃饭也不需要喝水，车也不需要加油，估计电池也一直都没换新的吧）到底是个什么东西？是一种什么样的存在？结尾说弟弟figure it out，难道他早就figure it out了吗？他一直都知道自己在循环里吗，为了多活几年把弟弟带出去，但始终知道自己从未离开过循环？如果那个神秘强大的不可名状的东西想让兄弟俩在出现三个月亮之前走不出边界，永远陷入循环，没必要用照片提示弟弟去房车那里和哥哥会合吧，也许他俩一直就在循环中（给水这个情节发生了两次，兄弟俩刚会合的时候哥哥就把水给了弟弟，之后弟弟说渴，弟弟手上是没有水的，哥哥掏包，弟弟还问你干什么，哥哥又给了一次水）？未知在玩弄他俩？

1，营地的轮回不是十年一次。如果十年一次，则片末才是营地众人的第一次死亡，但众人显然意识到自己在轮回中，意识到怪物（我倾向于外星人）的存在，说明他们轮回过了。而且如果三月齐圆就是轮回周期，兄弟呆了两天就经历了从一月到三月的变化，则营地的轮回周期只是几天而已。轮回重置后人会“返老还童”，营地众人如果十年轮回一次，则不会如此年轻，证明他们的周期其实很短，导致他们“青春常驻”。

2，兄弟二人也在轮回中。证据大家说得很多了，比如母亲纪念处前幼时作的画是崭新的，哥哥在路上发现左右的景色是对称的，再看才看到营地的山，说明他们从家来到纪念处都属于一个轮回圈。片末兄弟驾车冲出营地时迎头撞上结界，结界上也反映出车子，说明轮回圈之间的结界会反映景物。弟弟与服装女夜观两个月亮，右边的月亮显然也是反映造成。还有车油始终是空的。

3，进入轮回的人来自不同时代，轮回周期也不同。帐篷男的着装最古（有说南北战争时期的），他的周期只有五秒。上吊男是三小时（据豆友说），营地众是几天，其中酿酒男、画画女都是单独入圈的，和其他人不是一波。兄弟俩应该超过十年。因为二人冲出结界后只是脱离了营地圈而回到了原来生活了十年的圈。兄弟二人在生活圈过了十年，从小变大，重返营地又出来后没有“返老还童”，证明他们的周期还没到。而且兄弟俩的权限应该也最高，他们可以出入所有的轮回圈，而有些人只能困在自己的圈里。最明显的是上吊男穿过结界又从农房里出来，他无法去戒毒男那里。领袖男不陪弟弟去车房，因为他没有去那里的权限。

4，寻夫女就是自焚男的妻子，因为她就有贴小纸条的习惯。画画女有个爱枪的前男友，或许是戒毒男？磁带是怪物寄给兄弟俩的，注意观察磁带是凭空落在他们家门口的。这再次证明兄弟俩生活的城市仍在轮回圈里。轮回众人无论是被怪物杀死还是为了避免痛苦而自杀，都有记忆。

5，兄弟俩的轮回周期未明。假设他们老死后重启，则是：重回车祸后母亲死亡的时刻，兄弟俩被救入营地，开始困入轮回。哥哥怀疑营地是邪教，带弟弟逃出，其实是进入了其后生活十年的大轮回。十年后重回营地，然后再返回大轮回。此后生活到死，大轮回重启。其间营地众、上吊男、自焚男、帐篷男等小轮回各依周期重启。大小轮回之间，好比月绕地30天和地绕日365天一样，组成复合系统。

又一部细思极恐的悬疑电影，电影思路想法很棒，在这个循环世界里，不同的人有着不同的权限，而主角应该是什么权限最大的，电影中，循环区域越小，循环时间越短，那么主角兄弟俩是不是拥有着大于所有人的活动区域已经循环时间呢？至于说主角并没有循环记忆，那为什么这不能是主角的第一次循环开启呢？从十年前逃出小镇开始，到十年后再次逃出小镇终止，又或者是到更久的未来终止，小镇外就一定不是循环区域吗？也许只是边界更大，没有走到路标处而已。

尝试解释影片的前因后果，但感觉很多地方都会矛盾，很难自圆其说。就像片中的营地男子所说的，他自己也无法解释到底发生了什么。

首先录影带、照片这种BUG物品先放一边，它们用上帝或导演的视角都解释不通。

1循环区域

片中的循环类似于电影《土拨鼠日》，但本片在同一地区出现了若干不同的时空循环区域。这些区域类似于平行空间，不同区域的人并不能互相看见。诡异的是这些区域的循环周期也不相同。比如帐篷里的老头每隔5秒就经历一次从死到生的循环。虽然他拥有了永生，但更像是永世不得超生。这一幕的确令人震撼。令人想到古代神话里月亮上的吴刚，永远陷在砍树的死循环里。

从已知的几个循环来看，5秒钟的帐篷老头，3小时的上吊男，时间未知的自焚男（感觉周期也不会超过1天），循环周期结束时，对应空间内所有物体会重置，空间内的人会被杀死，而且死得很惨。随后会重生，但人的记忆会保留，所以这些经历过重置的人宁愿上吊甚至自焚来逃避更惨烈的死法。这个设定的矛盾是，当营地重置时，那个带锁小屋里的录像带并不会重置，以至于保存了很多以前的录像带（归根到底这些录像带及照片都是BUG物品）。

2.惯性记忆

只有5秒的老头为什么每次都要朝同一方向冲去。我觉得他可能最初有个起身冲的想法，这个想法在他被重置时仍然保留了下来，以至于他在这5秒生命里惯性地重复着这个动作，事实上他也可以冲向其他地方。这样就可以解释为什么吸毒男和自焚男被重置后每次见面的台词都一样。也是记忆的惯性。

3.到底过了多少年

如果能和5秒老头交流，他对时间的概念一定是最薄弱的，因为他的时间完全被碎片化了，而自焚男认为他自己只被困了几个星期，实际上他十年前已经认识男主了，他的时间误差也很巨大。然而上吊男虽然看上去暴躁无脑，他的时间却是精准的，他知道男主是十年前离开的，并且很准确地说这一切是从09年开始的。而当前最晚算18年的话，十年前就是08年，也就是说在男主至少离开一年以后，上吊男陷入了3小时的死循环。

而5秒老头以及自焚男这些死循环也应该是在男主带着弟弟离开以后发生的（或是刚刚发生），因为过程太诡异了。当时年幼的男主如果见到他们不可能没有印象。

4营地的循环

而营地的循环开始时间就不那么好判断了。如果按照小屋内的录像带年份来看，循环早在兄弟俩被救到营地之前就开始了，而且周期比较长，在兄弟俩小时候逃离营地时还没重置。按这种算法，营地的人甚至可能是20-30年代的人，那重置时的服装应该是古老的样式，然而片尾那些刚刚重置的人们衣服仍然是现代样式。

抛开录像带从另一角度看，这里先从和自焚男同一时空的吸毒男说起，吸毒男和上吊男是一起玩枪的朋友，他认为自己一年前还和上吊男有来往。而上吊男09年开始就陷入循环，之后不可能接触到其他人了。那么吸毒男所在空间的年份最迟也就是10年左右。他和自焚男最迟在10年就陷入了死循环。而自焚男却觉得只是过了几个礼拜，只能说他的循环周期要小于几个礼拜，实际上要远远小于，可能只能按小时算或更短，导致他对时间也没什么数。而营地里来了自焚男的妻子，这个妻子不可能如她所说刚来营地找丈夫，因为丈夫早在10年左右就失踪了。所以她来营地的时间应该也是10年左右。（而此时男主已经离开，两人不认识也很合理）。而她不可能找丈夫找个七八年，她觉得自己才找了几个礼拜。所以营地的周期也就不会超过几个礼拜。而循环开始的时间是男主带着弟弟离开以后。

所以，如果抛开录像带及照片这些无法调和的矛盾。故事的脉络可以是这样的。

营地最初生活着一群有共同宗教信仰或生活理念的人。有一天他们救了两个发生车祸的小男孩，之后两个男孩就留在了营地生活。随着时间的推移几年以后，营地渐渐变得奇怪。发生了诡异的事情。大点的男孩感到害怕，带着弟弟离开了营地。之后营地出现了3个月亮，所有物体重置，其中的人们陷入了各种循环中，后面来了一个寻找丈夫的妻子，然而不久在营地再次遭遇重置，这个妻子也陷入循环。两个男孩在十年后回到营地，发现营地的人还像十年前一样年轻，两天后营地又将开始重置。。。

导演两人拍摄于2012年的处女作《决案》和2017年的《无尽》虽说是两部影片，但在其故事情节和人物角色上却有不少重叠之处，而主题更有意想不到的延续，因此作为同一部野心勃勃的作品来看也未尝不可。比起较为粗糙简陋的处女作，《无尽》则明显地在制作成本上有所增加，令两位导演的狂野想象力得以展露。《无尽》的剧情和人物与《决案》有延续和交叠的部分，尤其在其中的一个场景，讲述男主角误入循环时空，竟出现在《决案》里Mike和Chris的那个小木屋里，奇妙地将两部影片的脉络打通，还无意中引出对抗幕后黑手的终极方式……

无独有偶地，两部影片都是由一盘神秘录像带而引出故事，而且不约而同地在传统的电影类型里逐渐融入惊悚恐怖的氛围，处女作是伙伴电影，而《无尽》则是近年冒起的邪教类型片。故事讲述两兄弟回到十年前逃出的邪教组织，却发现这个邪教的真实信仰与之前不同，还意外发现一个更加阴险的秘密。这部无论在制作水准还是主题概念上都远超过处女作《决案》的粗陋和直白，出现一些玄妙的特效场面。而后半段惊现时空循环的科幻情节又透露出核心主题，日常生活的平庸本质本身就是一种“循环”，一旦陷入这种生活模式便难以脱身。这个主题似乎与前一部作品《爱在初春惊变时》存在着有趣的交集，只不过前者是关于生死的宏大命题，这部回到更为现实的生活方式，更容易获得共鸣。

这部依然存在跟《决案》类似的元电影结构，甚至不惜在最后高潮部分让幕后大神“现身”，不过，这部的重点似乎不仅仅是这个幕后操纵角色的怪物。剧本用惊艳的科幻情节将生活的本质分析得相当透彻，周而复始的行动和目标，不管时间长短，终将回到原点，这种环形时空的世界观远远比简陋的处女作要复杂和诱人得多。

看到很多认真的豆友贴上了导演访谈，我认为哈，一般聪明的导演对那些娱乐周刊或者电影记者都有些降次元的优越感，尤其是那种自己写烧脑电影剧本又自己拍的。有时候导演觉得问题记者个人引导性太强，或者问题不够对他胃口（比如，问题的本身就表现出对这个电影不太理解）导演是完全不介意随口乱说两句的。这和很多成功艺术家一样，他们有时候就是会在他们认为没懂还要去报道的记着面前故意乱说几句。毕竟，电影本身才是导演试图和观众交流的本身，任何诠释都不如电影本身。换作艺术也是一样。

所有的争论都集中在兄弟俩有没有逃出轮回以及为何每批人的轮回都有自己的圈和时间线。我的理解是，本来轮回是在一个圈里的，时间也比较长，差不多十一二年左右（一个小男孩长大成人）。但有些识破轮回本质的人，为了对抗轮回的无意义以及无自主性，他们选择自杀而不是根据“神”设定的轮回节奏。一旦在一个轮回里自杀，轮回会缩短成为：知道轮回怎么回事-自杀这样一个小轮回。因此那个上吊男，本来和营地的其他人一样，轮回时间是十一二年左右（他记得小男孩来的时候的事），但因为他几次自杀行为，他的轮回越来越短 ，有了枪之后就更短了。那些无法交流的轮回小圈子，都是离开了集体，自己寻找解决方案的，他们无法与其他人再次见面的原因是他们的轮回时间变短了。

所以从这个逻辑来说，离开轮回大圈子的兄弟俩，最后撞向轮回的边缘，获得了极短的轮回时间，确实就是那开车的几秒。但是在这个极短轮回里，兄弟都得到了他们想要的东西，弟弟得到了哥哥的信任，解开了哥哥对他生活的控制；哥哥得到了弟弟的原谅和信任。这是他们原来没有的，原来的生活穷困潦倒，互相依赖的两个人矛盾不断。所以长也不一定好啊