The writer obviously intended to shock the viewers with the surprise ending, and he did, but it ruined the movie. I could have understood murdering the mother (understood, that is, not approved of), but murdering the child just doesn't fit the story. For one thing, male (not female) children were highly valued. For another, the father said he wanted his son (but not his wife) back, and made a feeble attempt to get him back. During that attempt, his father-in-law chastised him, telling him that a physical tug-of-war in the street was not the way to go about it. So, the father-in-law would then approve of killing the boy? Not likely! Now, some people have said that the boy was killed by accident, but that's incredibly sloppy. It would have been easy to kill the mother without harming the child. And, call it bad acting, but the brother's reaction to killing the child did not look like surprise to me! It would have been a far better ending for the mother to pick up the gun off the street and shoot her brother, who was advancing toward her with a knife.
Review of When We Leave
