Society of the Snow - Ending Explained

"Society of the Snow"'s narrative is framed by the voice of Numa Turcatti, who, in a significant twist, is revealed to be one of the last to die before the final rescue. His narration from beyond the grave elevates the story from a simple survival tale to a poignant remembrance of all 45 people on the plane. The survivors' ultimate decision to resort to cannibalism is a central, harrowing plot point. The film depicts this not as a descent into savagery, but as a systematic and spiritual pact made out of desperate necessity. They agree that should they perish, their bodies should be used to sustain the others.

Another critical event is the avalanche that buries the fuselage, killing eight more survivors, including the group's initial leader, Marcelo Pérez. This second catastrophe deepens their despair but also strengthens their resolve. The climax of the film is the incredible 10-day trek undertaken by Nando Parrado and Roberto Canessa. After climbing a massive peak and realizing they are much farther from civilization than they thought, Nando's refusal to give up is the ultimate turning point that leads to their encounter with a Chilean arriero and the subsequent rescue of the remaining 14 survivors. The ending does not shy away from the survivors' trauma and guilt, emphasizing that their return to the world is not a simple happy ending but the beginning of a lifelong process of carrying the weight of their experience.

While the film presents a narrative focused on unity and shared sacrifice, different interpretations can be explored. One perspective might question the singular, unified narrative of the 'society.' The film, while showing debates, ultimately presents a cohesive group. An alternative reading could focus on the potential for more pronounced power struggles and fractures within the group that may have been downplayed for a more inspirational message. The 1993 film 'Alive,' for example, depicted more internal conflict.

Another interpretation centers on the question of divine intervention versus human will. The film leaves the 'miracle' aspect ambiguous, with characters themselves questioning it. A secular interpretation would view the survival as a testament to human ingenuity, resilience, and luck, devoid of any supernatural meaning. Conversely, a more spiritual reading could see the entire ordeal as a profound test of faith, with the survival of the 16 as a complex, messy, and tragic miracle, where the sacrifice of the many was necessary for the salvation of the few. The film deliberately leaves this open, allowing the audience to grapple with the meaning themselves.