HELP!

But thank god he made it ambiguous enough that I can read it otherwise because that sucks. It's a cheap punch in the gut that undermines the powerful relationship drama that went before. The 'emotional payoff', referred to elsewhere in the comments, for me comes when Shannon opens the door to the shelter and learns to trust his wife's instincts over his own.

Who wants religious mania -justifying vindication when you can have a less bombastic but more relatable message about human relationships. Marital trust over religious faith, please.

The two aren't mutually exclusive, I'll admit, but it's very hard to not feel like that ending is a slap in the face to the wife character and all she has stood for.

I thought the ending to Take Shelter was fairly forthright. When she sees the tidal wave and says "Ok. Ok." she isn't afraid of what's coming because it puts to rest her fears about her husband's sanity and commitment to her family. That forgiveness and that relief is more important to her than incoming death and to take that final scene literally, for what it is, hokey or no, is what gives it it's power. To say, "it was all another dream" doesn't really add anything to the plot or the conversation. All this shit happens to him and our emotional pay-off simply takes place inside another dream? That rings false. I believe that the strongest form of emotional power lies in the revelation, relief and ultimately forgiveness of that terrifying moment. Jeff Nichols achieved a highly unusual emotional payoff in an incoming death tsunami. It's pretty clear what is happening. Adding ambiguity cheapens the storytelling in this particular instance. At least, that's my take. I didn't know there were other stances!

Super stoked for Mud.