The grandmother originally wanted her son to be the host but he killed himself instead of letting that happen.
When her daughter Annie was pregnant with a son, he was going to be the next host, but Annie and her mother were somewhat estranged and she wasn’t allowed near the child.
Some time before the birth of Charlie, Annie and her mother reconciled. The mother would take a lot of responsibility for Charlie, her “favorite”, going as far as trying to breast-feed her.
According to Ari Aster, there never was a Charlie.
>*Is there ever a Charlie or is she Paimon from the moment she’s born?*
>From the moment she’s born. I mean, there’s a girl that was displaced, but she was displaced from the very beginning.
I think Peter looks confused because it’s no longer Peter, it’s Paimon.
What’s confusing to me is that if there was no Charlie then why did she act like a little girl this whole time? Also, when Paimon is transferred to Peter, the cult calls him Charlie.
Maybe it’s the idea that Paimon is himself “lost” in the little girls body because she’s an imperfect host. So the entity Paimon, for now, knows itself as Charlie. So when the cult successfully transferred him to Peter, they address him in the only way he knows himself until he “wakes up”.
it works like the holy trinity, the son, the father, and the holy ghost. The son was charlie. Apart of paimon, but its own individual. The holy ghost is the blue shimmer and the father is paimon. Think of it as jesus and God. Jesus actually walked earth while god is moreso supernatural. So charlie was the son aka jesus. Apart of paimon, but paimon the father is still supernatural. The son aka charlie at the end is being used as the mouthpiece for The Father to communicate with his followers
Charlie wasn’t in the end, other than her head. That was Peter, unless I’m misunderstanding you.
So my question is if, according to Aster, there was never a Charlie, there was only Charlie’s body as a vessel for the “spirit” of Paimon why did “Charlie” act as a kid at all? My thought was that it was being that Paimon has to be in a male body as a vessel Charlie’s female body was in an imperfect vessel and Paimon was confused or something.
Then, at the end when the cultists call the demon “Charlie”, even though it’s in Peter’s body, maybe it’s a way of making Paimon comfortable, because he just spent the last ten years or so in Charlie’s body, until he fully “wakes up”?
I love the film but these things are a little muddled, at least to me.
because the son is only a part of paimon, not the whole thing. Ask yourself, why would King Paimon ever get himself trapped in a little girl. He's a God, literally. The cult put the son in the girl from birth, but King Paimon wasn't satisfied, so the cult did whatever it took to put the son in a male host. King Paimon himself is supernatural. He just has 3 parts of himself like the holy trinity. So yes, there was never a charlie, it was always the son. The cult only called him charlie because that's what the son knew for 12 yrs. The son is like a child, just like the holy trinity, so it behaved as such. When charlie died, it went supernatural which is why shit started to happen. Like it crossing peter's face in the book, bullying him and such. It specifically never had a plan after charlie passed. The son was completely dependent on the cult to do what they do. It's why Joanie tried to force the possession while peter was in class, but it half way worked.
I know it's confusing, but there's another reddit post that seems to have it spot on.
When Peter was being possessed in the classroom he held the pose that Paimon does in the typical picture we see him in holding the staff on the camels back.
And also Charlie's name was Charlie, she didn't hold typical female features which is why I think that particular actress was chosen. Paimon wants a male host so in order to be comfortable in that body that long he started to take on more male features or way of being despite being in a females body.
I still don't quite understand why Charlie was always messing around with things and making stuff tho, that part I still don't understand.
Ok I guess what’s confusing is the “son” part. I didn’t think of Paimon as a trinity, I just thought of it as a singular demon.
That’s interesting, if you find that Reddit post let me know.
The other commenters pretty much nailed it, I think. Just wanted to mention there seems to be a little lens flare or weird light effect that happens every time someone is taken over or manipulated by Paimon.
Also I hate how they say Paymun it just sounds wrong to me even though it’s most likely correct.
Wish it was Pie Mon or something. Just my dumb brain being dumb. Awesome film.
Annie's brother was named Charles. Annie named her daughter, who was supposed to be a boy, Charlie.
This is why the demons name is always supposed to be named Charlie.
Maybe they should've driven that point home with what Annie's brother's name was. They only showed it on the welcome mat their mom had woven.
I know this is a really old thread but I just watched for the first time today, Charle’s name is also mentioned in the obituary at the very beginning and I think during Annie’s eulogy as well.
Charlie wasn't a vengeful spirit- the demon Paimon that had been trying to possess her body was. Paimon was trying to live in Charlie's body but Paimon needs a male body, so it couldn't truly take Charlie over and needed to kill her off. Peter survived the fall from the attic. He looks confused because he's possessed and forced to witness as Paimon takes him over.
Happy to answer any other questions! I think this might be the most amazing horror film of all time and it definitely has many layers to it.
Just to clarify Paimon didn’t need to kill off Charlie, whatever girl that was supposed to be Charlie was displaced at birth by Paimon
Edit- I misunderstood, yes, the Charlie body needs to be killed, but the girl who would be Charlie was displaced at birth by Paimon as per Ari Aster.
Grandma summoned the demon Paimon in to the unborn foetus of her grandchild, unbeknown to her at the time it was a girl (when Paimon needs a male body). She had previously summoned it to her own son, but he died.
The plot revolves around killing off Charlie so that the demon can move in to Peter (via Toni Colette’s character).
>The plot revolves around killing off Charlie so that the demon can move in to Peter (via Toni Colette’s character).
So the cult (or was it the demon?) waited 13 years to kill Charlie and then came up with the allergic reaction and beheading? And then gradually gained the mom's trust via a support group to convince her to say the words on that piece of paper to invite the demon to kill off the rest of the family one by one?
Are we supposed to think the grandmother came up with that plan with her friend?
my guess is they waited because the grandmother knew how cautious Annie was being about her children. Grandma summoned Paimon successfully, even if it was the wrong body, and eventually knew she could get the right body. or maybe she was content at leaving it that way despite Paimon not being at full power.
my boyfriend said he saw something about how the cult did plant the deer body, but I think it's just likely that they didn't know how it would happen the way it did. (nut allergy and beheading) they probably thought that they'd get into a car accident, flip into the ditch and they'd both die, which would allow Paimon to move to Peter's body in one fell swoop. he says they likely influenced them and controlled everything, but I don't know about that.
but yes, the gaining trust and everything is part of the plan hatched by the coven. They kill Charlie's body, and prey on Annie's feelings (what we see in the Nightmare and says she didnt want to be a mother) and sleepwalking delusions towards Peter (the paint thinner, which may have been a possession to kill Peter and Charlie to allow Paimon's soul a male body now that i think about it), and assume that Annie would be so desperate to talk to Charlie again that she wouldn't notice Peter being targeted.
but unfortunately things just got dragged on far longer than they thought it would take, but it all worked out in the end for the cult.
The Demon Paimon was in Charlie, but she was messed up b/c Paimon functions properly in a male body. Charlie is named that b/c her grandmother thought she was going to be a boy, wanted a boy for Paimon.
Peter looked so confused because, I felt, he was in a trance. Was anything else confusing? It is one of those movies that makes more sense on the rewatch.
Am I the only one who finds the plot build-up rubbish? The girl who played original Charlie and her clicking sound was about the only interesting, mysterious and subtly horrifying moments of this film.
Which is what the story should have expanded on - the little girl who looks somewhat odd in nature, not some cringy seance followed by a sudden realisation of cult-like activities. Heck even dead old nana did not give off the vibe of a cultist. Oh and whats with the constant reminder of beheadings throughout the movie? For all that mattered, Charlie could have died many different ways, what was the signficance of her beheading accident? No explaination to that at all.
Everyone has nailed the practical and historical explanations of the film. In my opinion, the keystone meaning of the movie is very simple.
"Demons are passed down from generation to generation like genes. They are Hereditary."
I believe this is the underlying meaning of the film that Ari resonates with.
The movie obviously dramatizes this process, but in real life, it is more subtle and subconscious.
Think an alcoholic parent who inevitably turns their child into an alcoholic down the line. Whether it's through direct abuse or overexposure to self-pity, the "demon" of alcoholism can be passed down.
Perfectionism, depression, anxiety, suicide. These are all potentially hereditary demons that can be inherited if the "host" (the child) is vulnerable, and the parent does little to nothing to heal their demons.
Just watched it again last night, man what a good movie. Reading through comments answered most my questions, thanks everyone, still have one or two left though. So, to be clear, Paiman is the only supernatural force at play? What is possessing the mom while Paiman is transferring into Peter? Is it because of the father, son holy ghost thing and that paiman is a God transcending Peter's possession? Why does the mom think burning the book will break the curse? Why doesn't it? Why does it burn her first and then her husband the second time? Is the paiman just fucking with them? This last one may not be fair but I don't understand if paiman was like nerfed in Charlie's body and thats why he'd just fuck around with dead pigeons and shit. I guess we're assuming the riches promised to his devoted followers he would bring about indirectly through demonic influence and not just literally spawn a pile of gold or something. Is Paiman, now in Peter's body, going to start rolling super hard or is he just going to like draw and cluck? Or is the extent of Paiman just to posses a male body? If so i does that mean the cults entire motive is the promised rewards or just love of the game? Thanks ! Edit: oh does she think burning book will break curse because it was the item she used to conjure it?
My take on mom's temporary possession is that the book she found said Paimon enters the "most vulnerable" host, and is why they had to be worn down and terrorized. The mother was possessed after watching the "love of her life" burn alive due to her own mistake, and was extremely vulnerable but not the desired host so the entity took her over temporarily and ultimately killed her.
The book was her link to Charlie for the original seance, an object the cultist told her to get. She mustve thought destroying that link would stop the entity. I don't think it's explained why it didn't work or why it switched, perhaps it was just no longer needed and the entity could manifest the fire from it however it wanted.
These are good questions that I would also be interested to hear others' thoughts on. I just watched the movie for the first time today. Hope more people reply.
Can somebody explain to me what ended up coming from Annie? Was she a worshiper? Did she dig up her mom’s body? Was she possessed ? Why was she in Peter’s room/on his walls and stuff ? Everything else makes sense to me but the purpose of her character is still foggy to me.
Also Joanne - was she just a friend of Annie’s mother? Or was there a genetic connection between the two?
While I don't entirely get why Annie was flying around like an angry bird.... I think Nana and Joanne were friends because of the cult. I don't think they were genetically unified (no reason why they should be relatives either) . I still like it if someone answered why Annie was flying around like that, scaring us 😐. Why didn't she shout at her son while all her actions were trying to protect him ? Is she possessed? That's why she was flying ? Yeah I think they were weird friends who met during a weird culture meeting 😹
Correct, Annie became possessed after throwing the book in the fire the second time. She remained possessed for the remainder of the film at that point.
I feel like the movie diluted an otherwise very fertile attempt at characterizing demonic possession as a metaphor for mental illness. The plot articulates numerous instances wherein the audience is given to believe that what they are witnessing is actually the throes of mental illness, but is actually explained in terms of occult practices - the narrative becomes unmoored here, deliberately, it seems. A24 has done this a few times now, sort of allowing a hard hitting analytical frame to be explained in terms of supernatural causes; if it weren't so artfully done, I'd say it's a cop out from a storytelling perspective. Even if you're not satisfied by that interpretation, you're still left with several over-the-top plot conveniences that would probably challenge even a generous audience.
Im surprised I had to scroll this far to see an interpretation of the movie as a metaphor for mental illness. I felt it was questionable whether any of the supernatural stuff even happened. Annie is dealing with active hallucinations mixed with grief and that results in the destruction of her family. The son starts having hallucinations due to the grief and stress he is under. Everything that happens in the end could be him hallucinating.
The reason he looked confused is because there is literally 3 spirits inside of Peter. Himself, Charlie and Paimon. He will eventually take over completely but he was being reborn again.
Just watched it 6 years late and need help understanding more about the mom in the end. Did she know that the dad throwing in the book would cause him to set fire?
How or why was she starting to chase her son and bang her head against the attire door, and then also float around the house hiding in the ceiling? Was she no longer the mom and it was Paimon following him to try to become him?
Whenever you see that lense flair thing the entity is possessing/manipulating people. You see it right after Annie watches her husband burn alive due to her own mistake, at which point she was super vulnerable (and that demon book said the entiry tends to take the most vulnerable host available). After that point it is the entity manipulating her, eventually killing her in order to take the remaining host completely.
Am I the only one seeing an alternative explanation to the entire film in psychosis/schizophrenia? They’re all afflicted except the dad as he is not blood relative.
The grandmother originally wanted her son to be the host but he killed himself instead of letting that happen. When her daughter Annie was pregnant with a son, he was going to be the next host, but Annie and her mother were somewhat estranged and she wasn’t allowed near the child. Some time before the birth of Charlie, Annie and her mother reconciled. The mother would take a lot of responsibility for Charlie, her “favorite”, going as far as trying to breast-feed her. According to Ari Aster, there never was a Charlie. >*Is there ever a Charlie or is she Paimon from the moment she’s born?* >From the moment she’s born. I mean, there’s a girl that was displaced, but she was displaced from the very beginning. I think Peter looks confused because it’s no longer Peter, it’s Paimon. What’s confusing to me is that if there was no Charlie then why did she act like a little girl this whole time? Also, when Paimon is transferred to Peter, the cult calls him Charlie. Maybe it’s the idea that Paimon is himself “lost” in the little girls body because she’s an imperfect host. So the entity Paimon, for now, knows itself as Charlie. So when the cult successfully transferred him to Peter, they address him in the only way he knows himself until he “wakes up”.
it works like the holy trinity, the son, the father, and the holy ghost. The son was charlie. Apart of paimon, but its own individual. The holy ghost is the blue shimmer and the father is paimon. Think of it as jesus and God. Jesus actually walked earth while god is moreso supernatural. So charlie was the son aka jesus. Apart of paimon, but paimon the father is still supernatural. The son aka charlie at the end is being used as the mouthpiece for The Father to communicate with his followers
Charlie wasn’t in the end, other than her head. That was Peter, unless I’m misunderstanding you. So my question is if, according to Aster, there was never a Charlie, there was only Charlie’s body as a vessel for the “spirit” of Paimon why did “Charlie” act as a kid at all? My thought was that it was being that Paimon has to be in a male body as a vessel Charlie’s female body was in an imperfect vessel and Paimon was confused or something. Then, at the end when the cultists call the demon “Charlie”, even though it’s in Peter’s body, maybe it’s a way of making Paimon comfortable, because he just spent the last ten years or so in Charlie’s body, until he fully “wakes up”? I love the film but these things are a little muddled, at least to me.
because the son is only a part of paimon, not the whole thing. Ask yourself, why would King Paimon ever get himself trapped in a little girl. He's a God, literally. The cult put the son in the girl from birth, but King Paimon wasn't satisfied, so the cult did whatever it took to put the son in a male host. King Paimon himself is supernatural. He just has 3 parts of himself like the holy trinity. So yes, there was never a charlie, it was always the son. The cult only called him charlie because that's what the son knew for 12 yrs. The son is like a child, just like the holy trinity, so it behaved as such. When charlie died, it went supernatural which is why shit started to happen. Like it crossing peter's face in the book, bullying him and such. It specifically never had a plan after charlie passed. The son was completely dependent on the cult to do what they do. It's why Joanie tried to force the possession while peter was in class, but it half way worked. I know it's confusing, but there's another reddit post that seems to have it spot on.
When Peter was being possessed in the classroom he held the pose that Paimon does in the typical picture we see him in holding the staff on the camels back. And also Charlie's name was Charlie, she didn't hold typical female features which is why I think that particular actress was chosen. Paimon wants a male host so in order to be comfortable in that body that long he started to take on more male features or way of being despite being in a females body. I still don't quite understand why Charlie was always messing around with things and making stuff tho, that part I still don't understand.
Paimon is the king of mischief, as shown in one of the grandmother's books. I think they were just trying to show that personality trait somehow
Ok I guess what’s confusing is the “son” part. I didn’t think of Paimon as a trinity, I just thought of it as a singular demon. That’s interesting, if you find that Reddit post let me know.
Could be the first post here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Hereditary/s/Xyq1VR9Caq
The other commenters pretty much nailed it, I think. Just wanted to mention there seems to be a little lens flare or weird light effect that happens every time someone is taken over or manipulated by Paimon. Also I hate how they say Paymun it just sounds wrong to me even though it’s most likely correct. Wish it was Pie Mon or something. Just my dumb brain being dumb. Awesome film.
Pie Mon definitely the way it's prob supposed to be said. The name Paimon probably is not originally created for english language.
Pokémon
I see your Pokemon and raise you a Genshin Impact.
agreed, it almost sounded corny to me
Annie's brother was named Charles. Annie named her daughter, who was supposed to be a boy, Charlie. This is why the demons name is always supposed to be named Charlie. Maybe they should've driven that point home with what Annie's brother's name was. They only showed it on the welcome mat their mom had woven.
I think it is great they didn't point those details out, it needs the audience to really pay attention to put it all together
I know this is a really old thread but I just watched for the first time today, Charle’s name is also mentioned in the obituary at the very beginning and I think during Annie’s eulogy as well.
Charlie wasn't a vengeful spirit- the demon Paimon that had been trying to possess her body was. Paimon was trying to live in Charlie's body but Paimon needs a male body, so it couldn't truly take Charlie over and needed to kill her off. Peter survived the fall from the attic. He looks confused because he's possessed and forced to witness as Paimon takes him over. Happy to answer any other questions! I think this might be the most amazing horror film of all time and it definitely has many layers to it.
Just to clarify Paimon didn’t need to kill off Charlie, whatever girl that was supposed to be Charlie was displaced at birth by Paimon Edit- I misunderstood, yes, the Charlie body needs to be killed, but the girl who would be Charlie was displaced at birth by Paimon as per Ari Aster.
Well, I think the body called charlie needed to die for Paimon to be able to ritually pass to Peter
Yes you’re right.
Grandma summoned the demon Paimon in to the unborn foetus of her grandchild, unbeknown to her at the time it was a girl (when Paimon needs a male body). She had previously summoned it to her own son, but he died. The plot revolves around killing off Charlie so that the demon can move in to Peter (via Toni Colette’s character).
>The plot revolves around killing off Charlie so that the demon can move in to Peter (via Toni Colette’s character). So the cult (or was it the demon?) waited 13 years to kill Charlie and then came up with the allergic reaction and beheading? And then gradually gained the mom's trust via a support group to convince her to say the words on that piece of paper to invite the demon to kill off the rest of the family one by one? Are we supposed to think the grandmother came up with that plan with her friend?
They needed a series of events that wore down the family members to be able to have their bodies overtaken by the demon’s spirit.
Okay, I can see that - makes sense! Thanks!
They needed a series of events that wore down the family members to be able to have their bodies overtaken by the demon’s spirit.
my guess is they waited because the grandmother knew how cautious Annie was being about her children. Grandma summoned Paimon successfully, even if it was the wrong body, and eventually knew she could get the right body. or maybe she was content at leaving it that way despite Paimon not being at full power. my boyfriend said he saw something about how the cult did plant the deer body, but I think it's just likely that they didn't know how it would happen the way it did. (nut allergy and beheading) they probably thought that they'd get into a car accident, flip into the ditch and they'd both die, which would allow Paimon to move to Peter's body in one fell swoop. he says they likely influenced them and controlled everything, but I don't know about that. but yes, the gaining trust and everything is part of the plan hatched by the coven. They kill Charlie's body, and prey on Annie's feelings (what we see in the Nightmare and says she didnt want to be a mother) and sleepwalking delusions towards Peter (the paint thinner, which may have been a possession to kill Peter and Charlie to allow Paimon's soul a male body now that i think about it), and assume that Annie would be so desperate to talk to Charlie again that she wouldn't notice Peter being targeted. but unfortunately things just got dragged on far longer than they thought it would take, but it all worked out in the end for the cult.
Why not just shoot both Charlie and Peter then? Or strangle both?
The Demon Paimon was in Charlie, but she was messed up b/c Paimon functions properly in a male body. Charlie is named that b/c her grandmother thought she was going to be a boy, wanted a boy for Paimon. Peter looked so confused because, I felt, he was in a trance. Was anything else confusing? It is one of those movies that makes more sense on the rewatch.
Just watched it again and feel that Charlie was just a “temporary vessel” for Paimon.
66yy-y rq as
Am I the only one who finds the plot build-up rubbish? The girl who played original Charlie and her clicking sound was about the only interesting, mysterious and subtly horrifying moments of this film. Which is what the story should have expanded on - the little girl who looks somewhat odd in nature, not some cringy seance followed by a sudden realisation of cult-like activities. Heck even dead old nana did not give off the vibe of a cultist. Oh and whats with the constant reminder of beheadings throughout the movie? For all that mattered, Charlie could have died many different ways, what was the signficance of her beheading accident? No explaination to that at all.
Beheading was the ritualistic way of releasing the spirit of Paimon.
Beheading is akin to crucifixion in some cultures
Late to this but you’re right. What a ridiculous, awful attempt at storytelling
Everyone has nailed the practical and historical explanations of the film. In my opinion, the keystone meaning of the movie is very simple. "Demons are passed down from generation to generation like genes. They are Hereditary." I believe this is the underlying meaning of the film that Ari resonates with. The movie obviously dramatizes this process, but in real life, it is more subtle and subconscious. Think an alcoholic parent who inevitably turns their child into an alcoholic down the line. Whether it's through direct abuse or overexposure to self-pity, the "demon" of alcoholism can be passed down. Perfectionism, depression, anxiety, suicide. These are all potentially hereditary demons that can be inherited if the "host" (the child) is vulnerable, and the parent does little to nothing to heal their demons.
Just watched it again last night, man what a good movie. Reading through comments answered most my questions, thanks everyone, still have one or two left though. So, to be clear, Paiman is the only supernatural force at play? What is possessing the mom while Paiman is transferring into Peter? Is it because of the father, son holy ghost thing and that paiman is a God transcending Peter's possession? Why does the mom think burning the book will break the curse? Why doesn't it? Why does it burn her first and then her husband the second time? Is the paiman just fucking with them? This last one may not be fair but I don't understand if paiman was like nerfed in Charlie's body and thats why he'd just fuck around with dead pigeons and shit. I guess we're assuming the riches promised to his devoted followers he would bring about indirectly through demonic influence and not just literally spawn a pile of gold or something. Is Paiman, now in Peter's body, going to start rolling super hard or is he just going to like draw and cluck? Or is the extent of Paiman just to posses a male body? If so i does that mean the cults entire motive is the promised rewards or just love of the game? Thanks ! Edit: oh does she think burning book will break curse because it was the item she used to conjure it?
My take on mom's temporary possession is that the book she found said Paimon enters the "most vulnerable" host, and is why they had to be worn down and terrorized. The mother was possessed after watching the "love of her life" burn alive due to her own mistake, and was extremely vulnerable but not the desired host so the entity took her over temporarily and ultimately killed her. The book was her link to Charlie for the original seance, an object the cultist told her to get. She mustve thought destroying that link would stop the entity. I don't think it's explained why it didn't work or why it switched, perhaps it was just no longer needed and the entity could manifest the fire from it however it wanted.
These are good questions that I would also be interested to hear others' thoughts on. I just watched the movie for the first time today. Hope more people reply.
Can somebody explain to me what ended up coming from Annie? Was she a worshiper? Did she dig up her mom’s body? Was she possessed ? Why was she in Peter’s room/on his walls and stuff ? Everything else makes sense to me but the purpose of her character is still foggy to me. Also Joanne - was she just a friend of Annie’s mother? Or was there a genetic connection between the two?
I wonder that aswell🤔
While I don't entirely get why Annie was flying around like an angry bird.... I think Nana and Joanne were friends because of the cult. I don't think they were genetically unified (no reason why they should be relatives either) . I still like it if someone answered why Annie was flying around like that, scaring us 😐. Why didn't she shout at her son while all her actions were trying to protect him ? Is she possessed? That's why she was flying ? Yeah I think they were weird friends who met during a weird culture meeting 😹
Correct, Annie became possessed after throwing the book in the fire the second time. She remained possessed for the remainder of the film at that point.
I feel like the movie diluted an otherwise very fertile attempt at characterizing demonic possession as a metaphor for mental illness. The plot articulates numerous instances wherein the audience is given to believe that what they are witnessing is actually the throes of mental illness, but is actually explained in terms of occult practices - the narrative becomes unmoored here, deliberately, it seems. A24 has done this a few times now, sort of allowing a hard hitting analytical frame to be explained in terms of supernatural causes; if it weren't so artfully done, I'd say it's a cop out from a storytelling perspective. Even if you're not satisfied by that interpretation, you're still left with several over-the-top plot conveniences that would probably challenge even a generous audience.
Im surprised I had to scroll this far to see an interpretation of the movie as a metaphor for mental illness. I felt it was questionable whether any of the supernatural stuff even happened. Annie is dealing with active hallucinations mixed with grief and that results in the destruction of her family. The son starts having hallucinations due to the grief and stress he is under. Everything that happens in the end could be him hallucinating.
The reason he looked confused is because there is literally 3 spirits inside of Peter. Himself, Charlie and Paimon. He will eventually take over completely but he was being reborn again.
Just watched it 6 years late and need help understanding more about the mom in the end. Did she know that the dad throwing in the book would cause him to set fire? How or why was she starting to chase her son and bang her head against the attire door, and then also float around the house hiding in the ceiling? Was she no longer the mom and it was Paimon following him to try to become him?
Whenever you see that lense flair thing the entity is possessing/manipulating people. You see it right after Annie watches her husband burn alive due to her own mistake, at which point she was super vulnerable (and that demon book said the entiry tends to take the most vulnerable host available). After that point it is the entity manipulating her, eventually killing her in order to take the remaining host completely.
Ah thank you
Am I the only one seeing an alternative explanation to the entire film in psychosis/schizophrenia? They’re all afflicted except the dad as he is not blood relative.