It's really hard to image yourself into such a situation. All the horrors they've experienced. And to think this would go on endlessly. Through their suicide plan they at least got a bit of control back over their lives. Otherwise they'd just be helplessly delivered to the monsters.

Despite all that, I personally still wouldn't have done it.

@e6r6i6c said:

So would you have shot your own son? In that situation, sure it looked bad, but there was no immediate threat.

I really don't know what I'd do. I don't think I could bring myself to shoot anyone.

@e6r6i6c said:

So would you have shot your own son? In that situation, sure it looked bad, but there was no immediate threat.

would you have jumped from WTC? I think it's impossible to answer these question until you need to answer it (which will be hopefully never).

I have child and it's tough question, for sure not wanting him to suffer if we would end up in situation like The Mist.

but in theory I would probably waited until last moment when is action required, though it's much easier to be tough at keyboard and have faith

@Markoff said:

@e6r6i6c said:

So would you have shot your own son? In that situation, sure it looked bad, but there was no immediate threat.

would you have jumped from WTC? I think it's impossible to answer these question until you need to answer it (which will be hopefully never).

I have child and it's tough question, for sure not wanting him to suffer if we would end up in situation like The Mist.

but in theory I would probably waited until last moment when is action required, though it's much easier to be tough at keyboard and have faith

Well sure I really don't know what I would do in such a situation, but I would like to think I would be clear headed enough to make the right decision. And in my opinion, he made that decision way to fast, he could have waited for some time, maybe even ventured outside to look around, I would not want to make the same decision he made.

I'll echo what's already been said; I can't guarantee how I'd react until I'm in the situation. I think I would be ok with a mercy kill. However, I like to think I'd wait to make that decision. In the movie, he does seem to rush the decision much too quickly. I'm reminded of the movie The Road. [possible SPOILER ahead] The way the dad is willing to mercy kill his son is similar, he's willing but always waits until the last possible moment.

I DESPISE that ending and it ruined the whole movie for me. A parent doesn't do that. At the very least, he could have given the gun to one of the other adults and had them do it.

The most gutwrenching ending to any film that I've seen....

@e6r6i6c said:

So would you have shot your own son? In that situation, sure it looked bad, but there was no immediate threat.

There was also no immediate hope, monsters everywhere, humans killing each other, the military was the one responsible, no supplies, they traveled for hours and they didn't see one single sign of survivors, rescue (atleast it was not shown). I can't answer your question as I'm not a parent myself, but I can see how he made his decision. As for the ending per se, I loved it, honestly I was expecting some "normal" ending, he, the girl and his son survive, hints of starting a new family, the usual jazz, but in no way was I expecting the killings, and then rescue coming.

It was a great idea but poorly handled. There needed to be more time before arriving at their decision. They could have used a montage to show the hopelessness of trying everything and ultimately failing. You don't start mercy killing until you've reached the bitter end, especially when your own kid is involved.

@Drooch said:

It was a great idea but poorly handled. There needed to be more time before arriving at their decision. They could have used a montage to show the hopelessness of trying everything and ultimately failing. You don't start mercy killing until you've reached the bitter end, especially when your own kid is involved.

I agree. Note that family murder-suicides under dire circumstances aren't unknown in the real world (they happened during the Holocaust, for example), so there's certainly potential to develop this sort of scenario in a film like this. But the movie didn't bother to try to make it believable. I was discussing this with people on the IMDb last year, and it was pointed out, for instance, that the characters could have attempted to look for an abandoned gas station before their fuel ran out. Maybe they would have failed, and maybe any fuel they found would have been unusable by then. But people who actually want to survive will push themselves to the limits. Here, it was like they weren't even trying.

Moreover, the way the ending was executed was so mind-numbingly contrived it threw us right out of the story. We're expected to believe that these characters have been driving for days with no sign of a rescue in sight, then their car chooses to break down at the exact moment they're about to be saved? And to top it all off, it has Thomas Jane uttering the cringe-worthy line "They're dead--for what?" and then screaming at the sky.

Some of us will tolerate the occasional deus ex machina to create a happy ending. Here is the rare case where it's done for the sake of tragedy, and as such it lacks any rationale; it's essentially just a way of thumbing its nose at the viewer.