SPOILERS! Discusses the ending and biggest twists in Andhadhun.
My issue with the ending to Andhadhun is that it does leave me a little confused. However, it does leave you with a lot to consider. A walking stick, an empty can and a subtle movement. From the Andhadhun ending explained perspective, this makes me question everything Akash has told us. I think from the ending and how everything plays out, we can assume he may have gotten his sight back, but I wouldn’t bet on it.
Akash meets Sophie two years after the main events and tells her how he managed to survive. However, I wasn’t fully convinced by his story. Whilst it isn’t impossible to believe, Akash knows how to manipulate people and tell them what they want to hear. He has done it before, so why should we believe him?
What happens at the end?
Akash meets Sophie in Europe whilst playing music. He tells her that Dr Swami took him and Simi away in a car. Simi then killed Dr Swami. Later, Simi dies due to an accident involving a rabbit.
Akash says he survived by not taking up the opportunity to get his sight back via a transplant using Simi’s corneas. He is now living his life and playing music.
This does sound like a good explanation, however…
We don’t actually see any of this happen. We only hear it from Akash’s perspective. This is important as nearly everyone has something to hide in this film. I was left questioning whether he was telling Sophie the truth or what he wanted her to believe.
Not necessarily a lie, but I just couldn’t fully believe it.
Does Akash really have his sight back?
As Akash walks away, he is holding a walking stick with a rabbit engraved on it. He then hits the can out of his way.
My first thought was that he did give himself away. The movement looks very intentional, and it is hard not to link it to his sight. After everything we have seen him do throughout the film, this small movement makes me suspicious.
However, a blind person can use a walking stick to find things and avoid obstacles. This doesn’t prove he can see.
If I had no prior knowledge of what had happened, I probably wouldn’t have assumed he had given himself away.
Overall, I don’t think the can proves anything. It leads you to think one thing, but then you start questioning yourself.
Did he really take up the offer?
This is the theory that I struggle with the most.
Earlier in the film, Dr Swami offers Akash the chance to get his sight back. However, it involves Simi’s corneas in a transplant. This makes Akash seem reluctant.
However, maybe he changed his mind?
If he did take up the offer, then this makes the ending quite dark. He could have gotten his sight back and continued to pretend to be blind.
This makes me feel a little uncomfortable. His initial lie was to help his music career, however, it becomes a survival tactic. If he is still pretending to be blind at the end, he hasn’t really changed his ways; he has just become more cautious.
Just because he survived doesn’t mean he has become a better person. Throughout the film, he has tried to get out of situations that could put him in danger. Whether he has a clear conscience is questionable.
However, there is a big issue with this theory. We never actually see him having the transplant. It could be possible, but we aren’t given any confirmation.
Why is the rabbit mentioned?
The rabbit is mentioned early on in the film. Then again when Akash is telling Sophie how Simi died. Finally, it appears again as the engraving on his walking stick.
I noticed this, however, I don’t think it gives us a straightforward answer. It makes the beginning and end link together in a more eerie way.
The rabbit plays a key role in how Akash survived, according to him. It gives his story a bizarre twist. However, we are left wondering whether he was truthful with Sophie, especially as the rabbit appears again.
Maybe the rabbit symbolises luck. Something unexpected happened, changing his fate and giving him a second chance at life.
However, I prefer to think it carries a slightly less positive message. It reminds us that we are still seeing the ending from Akash’s perspective. We don’t know what really happened, and this is what makes the ending stick with us.
The director has mentioned that the ending was intentionally left open. He has also discussed the rabbit and how it links to the idea of a blind animal being hunted. His comments in this interview with Scroll offer an interesting insight. I think this is a more believable explanation than treating the rabbit as a simple clue about Akash’s eyesight.
Is he lying to Sophie?
I think he is probably hiding something. However, I’m not sure everything he said was a lie.
Akash tells Sophie that he survived, didn’t take advantage of Simi’s death and is back to playing music. Overall, he looks like a pretty good guy.
If he did get his sight back, pretending to still be blind would help him avoid questions. He could keep his secret and appear as though he hadn’t sacrificed someone to regain his eyesight.
However, it could be that he is still blind. He may have come to terms with what happened and found a way to carry on playing. The movement could just be a normal action, and we are overanalysing it.
I don’t want to rule this out just because the other theory is more exciting. There are reasons to doubt Akash throughout the film, but nothing proves he is lying to Sophie.
Overall, I think this makes me question whether we have become too much like the other characters in the film. We are so determined to work out what Akash is doing that we assume everything he does must mean something.
What did the director mean?
Whilst I don’t think we should take what the director says as fact, his comments do help. They explain why the film leaves us with no clear answers.
In the interview with Scroll, Raghavan discusses the symbolism throughout the film, including the rabbit and the idea of a blind animal being hunted. This connects with how Akash spends the film trying to escape people who have power over him.
However, knowing what the image means doesn’t necessarily tell us whether Akash has regained his sight.
This is what makes the ending enjoyable. We can consider what the filmmaker intended without assuming that his comments settle every question.
So, what does the ending really mean?
My favourite theory is that Akash has regained his sight and chosen to continue pretending. The movement with the can supports this, and we know from his past that he isn’t always trustworthy. However, that still doesn’t make it certain.
We can’t be completely sure from the film. He could still be blind, and the movement with the walking stick might be exactly what it appears to be. We are probably overanalysing it.
Overall, I think the Andhadhun ending explained debate comes down to whether Akash has changed or whether he has simply become better at controlling what others think of him.
I think it’s the latter. It brings his story full circle, and it makes his survival feel less like a happy ending. It feels as though he is still putting on a carefully planned performance.
As for the can… I still think he could see it, but I can’t prove it.
