such a great ending. i loved that we saw everything from maud's pov, so maybe you could start believing her delusions too, but then the last few seconds confirm it's all some kind of religious fueled psychosis. i wish maud could've gotten the help she actually needed, but ig there's a nice thought she's at peace in the end. such a great film
@@riac5388 girl that's what maude thought, but unfortunately she was sick. ig you could spin she martyred herself in the end? idk i'll have to give it a watch again to see how the other characters interact with maude, and it'd be nice to watch again knowing how it the story goes
@@freakytaxi I will give it a watch again also based on my theory. The film deserves a closer look. TY for responding, it's great to open up conversation with an analytic debate, ty :)
This isn't a typical supernatural horror but rather a slow building one. It's not for everyone but it makes you think deeply, especially if you're a person of faith. Messed up ending. Ultimately her delusions of self-righteousness ruined her
I finally saw "The Devils" the first time 3 days ago and I now finally see why people were saying this would be a damn good double feature with that film, both have incredible endings too. Rose Glass is tapping into some serious brilliance, this movie feels so timeless but also unique on its own. Just got out of Love Lies Bleeding today and JfC, here she goes again. I gotta watch Maud again ASAP
It could be interpreted in two different ways - either that she is literally burning, or she is burning in hell (as referenced in the book’s pictures earlier in the movie).
What's messed up is that if you interpret it from a Christian perspective, she might be doing both. Burns in agony to death and then burns in hell for committing suicide. Grim.
@@TheFinalGirly She’s clearly mentally ill. God, at least in my Islamic faith, doesn’t judge those who are psychologically damaged or those who are born disabled in general. We say that “the Pen [of judgement] stops writing their deeds/fate for them”.
I mean you definitely can. For the sake of the director/writer's intention, it's the former: she's been insane this whole time and you're only now seeing her from reality. Writer/director, Rose Glass: "'Personally, I always thought it seemed quite unambiguous' Glass says of Maud's beach-side death by suicide, which depicts an angelic vision imagined by Maud before abruptly cutting to a far more realistic image of Maud screaming and on fire." 'In my head, it was a sudden snapback to a very harsh reality.'"
Catholicism has an obsession with suffering. So one can also interpret it as she was really pulling a miracle but her soul still has more suffering to go through before she meets god.
They're not comparable at all... people like Bushnell or that Buddhist monk in Vietnam sacrificed their lives to further what they considered a righteous cause. This gal just kinda... sets herself on fire.
@@jamieeapb you can't be all that mentally well if you're fkin burning yourself lol they are barely any different, one's just slightly more grounded in reality
It's just sad that this movie is just about pure religious psychosis and we had to follow this bad example of a christian lady for 1 hour and half without seeing any good counter party to complete the narrative, which is pretty strange since a religious person would like to go to church or at least talk to people about her revelation. It feels alienating and cliche, the writer want to talk about religious fanatism and alienating behavior, but end up being a fanatic and alienated by her ideias herself. The movie still good tho, and the ending is haunting.
@@RYNO2511 lol no. The overall theme is clearly "obsession", it could be used with drugs, alcohol, money, gamble, status, beauty, and so on. Requiem for a Dream did a better work with this theme. But Saint Maud chooses "Christianity" in specific, not islamism, not hinduism. She chooses the most easy and less polemic path to pass a message, that pretty much all hollywood already did. In doing that, she has more than the obligation to add something more to at least maskaret this decision since there is already a ton o media criticizing Christianity.
@@josevictor2229 you're right that it's about obsession, but I don't think the film is necessarily a criticism of religion, Maud just clings to religion as a way to deal with her trauma (as we can see through the hospital flashbacks) and a way to make sense of the world and provide herself with a sense of purpose. The film is more a character study of someone dealing with trauma and mental instability, as opposed to a film about religion or Christianity specifically.
I see this comment a lot any time religion is the subject of a movie, and I don’t see why it’s only with religion that we “need” a character on the other side of the aisle who’s good to balance things out. That’s not the story or message the movie is trying to tell
@@josevictor2229 You've answered your own point there. The theme is mental health and obsession, and the focus of that obsession could be swapped out for literally anything else (such as the examples you gave). It's not about religious fanaticism, it uses religious fanaticism as a vehicle to explore other things. As for choosing Christianity in particular, Christianity is the dominant religion where the film is set and where its target audience resides. It's therefore a lot easier for said audience to identify with and understand what the character is experiencing. Regards examples of counterbalance: Requiem For A Dream didn't need to provide a counterbalance demonstrating the efficacy of prescription drugs, it's an innate assumption, because the audience knows and understands this already - just as with Christianity.
You know when you have a debate about LGBTQ politics on Twitter, and the other side will say "who hurt you?" And then the debate ends with "go die in a fire?" Yeah. So, what we learn from this film is that everybody who disagrees with the director about LGBTQ politics only does so because they are damaged, stupid, and evil. That's pretty deep. Very thought provoking. The film is literally a partisan Twitter rant in the form of a movie. And having watched it, I still have no idea why people are homophobes. The director couldn't have explained it to us, because she doesn't know herself and was never even curious enough to bother to figure it out.
I didn’t get that impression at all. Has the director said disparaging things about religious people irl? The movie tries to make maud a sympathetic character. Also I didn’t get the impression Maud was homophobic. She even explicitly says to the prostitute that it wouldn’t make a difference if she was a woman or a man. I think Maud had a bigger problem with the lust
The core issue about most debates on Twitter going wrong is that one side completely misunderstands the subject matter and is making a pretty dumb argument, as exhibited by your comment
@@oscardude95 Why did you use so many words to say "ur dumb?" "No ur wrong" would have sufficed. That's all you've said here. In the second comment in the thread, I gave you specific examples as to why this was my interpretation of the movie. If I'm wrong about them, then explain how. If you can't be bothered to explain it, then don't waste my time please. Thank you and have a wonderful day.
such a great ending. i loved that we saw everything from maud's pov, so maybe you could start believing her delusions too, but then the last few seconds confirm it's all some kind of religious fueled psychosis. i wish maud could've gotten the help she actually needed, but ig there's a nice thought she's at peace in the end. such a great film
I don't think she's at peace if she screaming in a burning fire!
fueled psychosis? Maud was an actual angel who was trying to find a way to complete a task that God gave her.
@@riac5388 girl that's what maude thought, but unfortunately she was sick. ig you could spin she martyred herself in the end? idk i'll have to give it a watch again to see how the other characters interact with maude, and it'd be nice to watch again knowing how it the story goes
@@beardedbloke2521 you know what i mean 😭
@@freakytaxi I will give it a watch again also based on my theory. The film deserves a closer look. TY for responding, it's great to open up conversation with an analytic debate, ty :)
perfect ending, to watch this clip gave me shivers like the first time. i love this movie
w aiko pfp
@@pahkah.1398 hi punpun!
@@tofufrittonot this sh** again.
After 5 years, I'm still stunned because of this one-second cutscene in the very end of movie... Great horror, 10/10.
Watched this yesterday. Great movie, wasn't what I was expecting but it kept me intrigued throughout. Powerhouse performance from Morfydd Clark.
This isn't a typical supernatural horror but rather a slow building one. It's not for everyone but it makes you think deeply, especially if you're a person of faith. Messed up ending. Ultimately her delusions of self-righteousness ruined her
I love the fact her final words were in Welsh: Gogoniant i dduw
Just got done watching that movie and the ending is unsettling she drove herself to sanity then burned herself to death what an unexpected ending
Great film all around! And yep, that ending will haunt you.
I finally saw "The Devils" the first time 3 days ago and I now finally see why people were saying this would be a damn good double feature with that film, both have incredible endings too. Rose Glass is tapping into some serious brilliance, this movie feels so timeless but also unique on its own. Just got out of Love Lies Bleeding today and JfC, here she goes again. I gotta watch Maud again ASAP
This gives very Twin peaks vibe
It could be interpreted in two different ways - either that she is literally burning, or she is burning in hell (as referenced in the book’s pictures earlier in the movie).
Nah, you can see the beach behind her, it’s real
What's messed up is that if you interpret it from a Christian perspective, she might be doing both. Burns in agony to death and then burns in hell for committing suicide. Grim.
@@TheFinalGirly She’s clearly mentally ill. God, at least in my Islamic faith, doesn’t judge those who are psychologically damaged or those who are born disabled in general. We say that “the Pen [of judgement] stops writing their deeds/fate for them”.
Nah you can’t. It’s just smoke dude
I mean you definitely can. For the sake of the director/writer's intention, it's the former: she's been insane this whole time and you're only now seeing her from reality.
Writer/director, Rose Glass: "'Personally, I always thought it seemed quite unambiguous' Glass says of Maud's beach-side death by suicide, which depicts an angelic vision imagined by Maud before abruptly cutting to a far more realistic image of Maud screaming and on fire."
'In my head, it was a sudden snapback to a very harsh reality.'"
Fuck me this was a hell of an ending
Loved it!
Catholicism has an obsession with suffering. So one can also interpret it as she was really pulling a miracle but her soul still has more suffering to go through before she meets god.
It is forbidden to do a barbecue on the beach .
Rose Glass will reign one day sis
she’s literally me
paladins using avenging wrath
Aaron Bushnell
If you pause at 0:36, you can see Maud's mouth. (It looks like her mouth is wide open, screaming in agony)
Thats not what it looks like that what's happening.....................
Uh yeah she's burning alive so
This is what I thought of when I saw the Aaron Bushnell video. The tragedy of a life tossed away by a brainwashed ideologue
watched this vid today bc of that guy
why must you compare real life political anti-war martydom (although tragic and unnecessary) to a relgious psychosis-induced suicide
They're not comparable at all... people like Bushnell or that Buddhist monk in Vietnam sacrificed their lives to further what they considered a righteous cause. This gal just kinda... sets herself on fire.
Exactly. A zealot is a zealot.
@@jamieeapb you can't be all that mentally well if you're fkin burning yourself lol they are barely any different, one's just slightly more grounded in reality
😂
It's just sad that this movie is just about pure religious psychosis and we had to follow this bad example of a christian lady for 1 hour and half without seeing any good counter party to complete the narrative, which is pretty strange since a religious person would like to go to church or at least talk to people about her revelation. It feels alienating and cliche, the writer want to talk about religious fanatism and alienating behavior, but end up being a fanatic and alienated by her ideias herself. The movie still good tho, and the ending is haunting.
I think the film is dealing more with mental health than just religious fanaticism
@@RYNO2511 lol no. The overall theme is clearly "obsession", it could be used with drugs, alcohol, money, gamble, status, beauty, and so on. Requiem for a Dream did a better work with this theme. But Saint Maud chooses "Christianity" in specific, not islamism, not hinduism. She chooses the most easy and less polemic path to pass a message, that pretty much all hollywood already did. In doing that, she has more than the obligation to add something more to at least maskaret this decision since there is already a ton o media criticizing Christianity.
@@josevictor2229 you're right that it's about obsession, but I don't think the film is necessarily a criticism of religion, Maud just clings to religion as a way to deal with her trauma (as we can see through the hospital flashbacks) and a way to make sense of the world and provide herself with a sense of purpose. The film is more a character study of someone dealing with trauma and mental instability, as opposed to a film about religion or Christianity specifically.
I see this comment a lot any time religion is the subject of a movie, and I don’t see why it’s only with religion that we “need” a character on the other side of the aisle who’s good to balance things out. That’s not the story or message the movie is trying to tell
@@josevictor2229 You've answered your own point there. The theme is mental health and obsession, and the focus of that obsession could be swapped out for literally anything else (such as the examples you gave). It's not about religious fanaticism, it uses religious fanaticism as a vehicle to explore other things.
As for choosing Christianity in particular, Christianity is the dominant religion where the film is set and where its target audience resides. It's therefore a lot easier for said audience to identify with and understand what the character is experiencing.
Regards examples of counterbalance: Requiem For A Dream didn't need to provide a counterbalance demonstrating the efficacy of prescription drugs, it's an innate assumption, because the audience knows and understands this already - just as with Christianity.
I'm sry but LoL :P
what's so funny?
You know when you have a debate about LGBTQ politics on Twitter, and the other side will say "who hurt you?" And then the debate ends with "go die in a fire?" Yeah. So, what we learn from this film is that everybody who disagrees with the director about LGBTQ politics only does so because they are damaged, stupid, and evil. That's pretty deep. Very thought provoking. The film is literally a partisan Twitter rant in the form of a movie. And having watched it, I still have no idea why people are homophobes. The director couldn't have explained it to us, because she doesn't know herself and was never even curious enough to bother to figure it out.
I didn’t get that impression at all. Has the director said disparaging things about religious people irl? The movie tries to make maud a sympathetic character. Also I didn’t get the impression Maud was homophobic. She even explicitly says to the prostitute that it wouldn’t make a difference if she was a woman or a man. I think Maud had a bigger problem with the lust
Strange, I didn't glean that off of this movie at all
The core issue about most debates on Twitter going wrong is that one side completely misunderstands the subject matter and is making a pretty dumb argument, as exhibited by your comment
@@oscardude95 Why did you use so many words to say "ur dumb?" "No ur wrong" would have sufficed. That's all you've said here.
In the second comment in the thread, I gave you specific examples as to why this was my interpretation of the movie. If I'm wrong about them, then explain how. If you can't be bothered to explain it, then don't waste my time please.
Thank you and have a wonderful day.
Its not that deep nor that terminally online man