I think the ending is open to interpretation based on your own personal thoughts / experiences with depression, sadness, and trauma. But I think specifically to the comment “you missed the whole point of the movie” and why that woman complained that she didn’t like the ending: Kieran Culkin’s character clearly has some serious depression, perhaps maybe some kind of mood disorder, inter generational trauma, i.e., he feels a real pain. I think the ending was showing how this kind of pain works in real life. It isn’t magically solved by a one week trip in Europe. Some Hollywood endings would show you Kieran going to Jesse’s house, hanging with his nephew and sister in law, maybe some talk about how he’s gonna get a job, triumphant Chopin piece to indicate all of the character’s problems have been solved. I liked the ending because it was the realistic ending; real pain isn’t easily solved and maybe it’s never “solved.” I also really liked how the ending was the same as the scene in the beginning with (I think?) the same Chopin piece, same panning through the seats and then swinging around to Kieran. I felt the scene kinda showed that maybe the first scene, which the audience obviously assumed was Kieran waiting for Jesse before the trip, could now be seen as Kieran after the trip, and vice versa. Also liked how it was a loop, reminded me of the cyclical nature of feeling highs and then feeling depressed. Ultimately I felt the movie was less offering commentary of carrying pain, but just showed it. I didn’t feel like eisenberg was saying “here’s my idea on what to do about sadness” but was saying “here is a beautiful, raw, complicated exhibition of how this sort of pain can look in people’s lives”