The movie Tin & Tina follows a young couple, Lola and Adolfo, who lose their children shortly after their wedding (two bassinets in the nursery suggest she was expecting twins) during Lola’s pregnancy. They receive the unfortunate news that due to a medical procedure, Lola will never be able to have children of their own.
This leaves their new home empty, which happens to be the house Adolfo grew up in.
Tin & Tina (2023) Ending Explained
Lola has been feeling depressed. Adolfo convinces Lola to go with him to the local orphanage, run by Catholic nuns, so that they can adopt. Lola is initially against the idea. However, Lola sees two older kids, siblings Tin and Tina, who sing beautifully but religiously recite and follows the Holy Bible to the letter. The couple adopts the children but soon finds their lives in danger.
Are Tin & Tina evil?
Tin and Tina are not evil, but the answer is more ambiguous than you think. These young children are aware of their actions, and this horror thriller is a commentary on the socialization of children raised under the banner of religion. Tin and Tina are innocent and take the interpretation quite literally when reading the Bible.
An example is when they kill the couple’s dog because they learned about anatomy in class. Another is punishing a bully in school, but since he’s a sinner, they use God’s will to punish him. Even the attempted drowning of Lola’s baby could be viewed as a child sacrifice, which is often talked about in the Bible.
Are Tin & Tina a product of their environment?
This brings up the classic nature versus nurture debate, where I would argue it’s the way the siblings were nurtured by the orphanage and given rules of the Bible as a guide to live their lives. Many religious scholars say it is a product of when it was written.
We can also view Tin and Tina’s behavior through the lens of Erikson’s psychosocial stage of Industry versus Inferiority. Tin and Tina could be using religion to cope with the failure of finding a family. Also, using the excuse of doing things the Bible approves of to prevent feeling inferior to others who could look at their actions disapprovingly.
How does Adolfo die?
Adolfo dies from what appears to be a lightning strike during a thunderstorm. After returning the twins to the orphanage, the couple enjoys television when the set stops working. Adolfo leaves the room to check on the antenna (and yes, during the storm), but the lights come back on shortly after.
Lola hears Tin and Tina’s laughter and the baby crying, but lights and appliances turn off and on. Lola goes outside because she hears a noise and hears Adolfo screaming. He is holding onto the antenna and being electrocuted. (You’ll notice the way he has the antenna, it looks like a cross in flames).
Lola runs inside when Adolfo falls, hits the ground, and crawls toward the door. Lola goes to grab a blanket, but he comes inside the house, which then bursts into flames.
How does Lola save her baby?
Lola saves her baby by seeking guidance from God, wrapping her face in a sheet, and causing asphyxiation, just like Tin and Tina taught her. This grants her the strength and guidance to locate Lola in the crib and carry her through the burning home filled with smoke. Lola then finds her way outside and passes out while holding her baby in the rain.
Why are Tin & Tina innocent?
Tin and Tina are innocent, according to Lola and the head of the orphanage. After Lola wakes up, the nun visits and reveals even though we see little footprints around the home that we assume could be Tin and Tina’s, the siblings appear to have never left the orphanage.
What did you think of the ending of the 2023 Netflix film Tin & Tina? Comment below.
S**t
The children are guilty. They were definitely in the house that night as seen crossing the road when he almost hits them. How else did the music turn on? And no it couldn’t be from the power outage. They also had made that drawing of themselves killing the father. And the mother sucks in a crisis.
She wandered around the house instead of saving her husband and finding her child, then stops to asphyxiate herself. So, they finally did away with him. And the ending sucks. They got away with it, and stupid mother takes them back even after the near drowning of the son. A bad ending and I’m sorry I watched it.
I remember the kids asking about the distance by foot. I think they were in the house that night.
The couples keep changing sides. When the husband was furious with the kids, she defend them. When Lola was paranoid and wanted send them away, the husband refuse. Then Lola claims husband keep siding them? LOL. Then Lola did silly things at the end by having them back despite the music play by its own? Obviously the kids are at it. It’s not a boring movie but it’s illogical.
Very stupid movie,extremely Annoying and the ending sucks!!! Total waste of my time
Tina and Tin are definitely evil but are parroting biblical verses they learned from the convent to allow them to carry out their evil. They are obviously two sociopaths brain groomed by the mother superior.The plot is disturbing because it does not seem real. Lola does not seem like a real character. I would have thought the first thing she would think of at the time of Adolpho’s death if the children were in the house would be to check on the baby. The whole ending was illogical. It was a disturbing movie and may have appealed to some but the story in itself is evil in the way it portrayed true spirituality which sees “Truth” as it’s main stay.
Since the plot lacked truth it was disturbingly evil, unreal, and while portraying the belief in the written word it was actually mocking it. Similar to all the lying in the world today. It might appeal to sociopaths and other evil people in the world whose numbers are growing day by day.
New comment! Tina and Tin are definitely evil but are parroting biblical verses they learned from the convent to allow them to carry out their evil. They are obviously two sociopaths brain groomed by the mother superior.The plot is disturbing because it does not seem real. Lola does not seem like a real character. I would have thought the first thing she would think of at the time of Adolpho’s death if the children were in the house would be to check on the baby. The whole ending was illogical. It was a disturbing movie and may have appealed to some but the story in itself is evil in the way it portrayed true spirituality which sees “Truth” as it’s main stay.
Since the plot lacked truth it was disturbingly evil, unreal, and while portraying the belief in the written word it was actually mocking it. Similar to all the lying in the world today. It might appeal to sociopaths and other evil people in the world whose numbers are growing day by day.
What exactly was that huh?
Expensive joke right?
Difnt like the movie I wouldn’got rid of the kids 1st day the way they were acting. I believe they put their father on fire and doubt it was lightning. They killed the dog they knew what they were doing. And why would she take them.back after they try to kill the baby? There was music in the house footprints. And the baby wasn’t in the crib who else could have done it
Honestly I wasn’t sure if the twins maybe really were innocent since Lola didn’t really seem sane. But thinking about how they asked about the distance and the footprints in the house I’m not sure anymore. The movie was something else but very suspenseful. I like movies that have their own different style and I would recommend it.
Anyone who buys into the meritricious nature of the story is sadly unaware of spiritual truth and is there fore in jeopardy!
The interesting thing to observe is how people respond to the story and in the disturbing nature of it may actually
make people consider what is right and wrong so in that way the story could serve some good. It does not erase the
disturbing untruthfulness of the plot and the paranormal ignorance of the character of Lola. It is a very unsettling concept.
This movie left me with a lot of unanswered questions!
1. what was that in the road that Adolphus almost ran over?
2.How did the baby appear back in the crib?
3. Where the twins in the house that night, and how did the music start playing by itself?
4. Was the nun in on it?
5. Was he punished because he burned the Bible? #CrazzzyMovie
It was great, different, interesting, creepy and not predictable until the last 20 minutes, then it just get down right illogical, slow burns then nose dives into disappointment. It should have ended differently, ruined the movie!
I believe the twins are guilty. They did as they were taught. They were taught wrong. The Bible verses were misinterpreted. Where’d the baby go?? Where’d he end up?? WHERE’S THE BABY?? I can’t believe I actually have googled this – wow. LOL…laughing at myself!
Since the baby was never seen in the hospital AND neither the mother or nun make reference to the baby…did Lola even take the baby with her? How’d she even get to the hospital?
2 fvcking hours
The ending is a question of innocence itself and gives cyclical, right vs wrong, generational, magical realism. Are the twins innocent? It depends how you view it. The twins were devoted to the mother, and everything they did was to their ideals of “greater good”. They killed the dog because it bit the mother, they baptized the baby to “purify” him for her, they killed the father to free the mother from him. She deems the children “innocent” in the end because in albeit, twisted way, the children were trying to protect her, release her from her fears and let god in. Through out the entire movie, the mother is playing along with the children and their games, in the end she succumbs to their innocence and greater good.
Good concept. Rubbish ending! The twins are guilty:
1. They asked the distance fr the convent on foot and knew how to get there & back on foot by morning.
2. They were seen crossing the road that night.
3 Their little wet footprints in the house.
4. They turned on the music.
5.The dad burned their Bible so burning him was retribution.
6. They took the baby, but when the mother suffocated herself, they saw this as an act of religious surrender & chose to spare her
7. The nun lied / doesn’t give a fvck because the twins are the psycho & she wants them to be someone else’s problem.
Was that the baby in the casket ?? or the husband because the casket looked very small.
Was that the baby in the casket ?? or the husband because the casket looked very small
One of the worst movies I have ever seen. This mother had no maternal instinct. She walks around the house forever while it’s on fire not even checking on the baby. The kids play the game where they put the pillow case over the others head on an attempt to get close to God. She doesn’t tell them this is wrong and dangerous, and she ends up doing it herself?? I wasn’t expecting much from the movie, but it was really bad. The kids haircuts looked like Village if the damned children. These kids knew right from wrong, they were just demon spawn lol
The kids knew enough about what they were doing to drug the dog to sleep and drag him into the house. That much is concrete, even if everything else can be debated.
It’s obvious the twins did it. The only other additional fact I noticed that the comments left out was that the nun was nodding off while she was sitting down.
The twins obviously snuck out when she fell asleep and got back before she woke up.
The movie had a horrible ending and a poorly founded suspense which wasn’t necessary. These children are definitely guilty. The movie should have continued to atleast showed how they get caught for their bad actions as well as get disciplined for all the wrong doings. Shouldn’t have let them go free. They need some time in juvenille detention.
Yes, the children were innocent… at least in the eyes of the nun.
Remember hiw she spoke about the “wrath”of God. The children were pure and the instruments of God’s wrath.
My only question is IF the kids killed the father… how? They couldn’t climb to the roof I am sure.
Also a tv antenna does not carry sufficient electric current to cause a person to burst into flame. Lightning can.
Also, even if the kids messed with the antenna, how would they be sure the father eould be stupid enough to go out on the roof in a thunder storm, even he was watching the World Cup.
I think the ending was a ruse.. to make you think the kids were evil.
More likley, due to her odd behavior in the movie, SHE was by then psychotic and paranoid. The footprints and the music playing was in her own mind after seeing her husband burn and die which was the straw that broke the camel’s back.
That’s why she didn’t bother to check on her baby for a long time and at first didn’t see the baby in the bassinet.
Of course, the children did kill the bully and the dog, but since they believed they were doing God’s work, were innocent in that respect, and innocent because the movie was in the pov of the mother, so what she “saw” can’t be trusted.
The ending is really 50/50. There’s no concrete evidence to prove the kids are good or bad.
1. Asking the distance to the convent doesn’t prove they went to the house.
2. Killing the dog can be seen as evil or a cleansing for biting the mom.
3. They don’t show what really went into the milk.
4. They held the baby in the water pretty long but they probably didn’t know what they were doing. They’re just kids after all.
5. The drawing of the kid doesn’t prove they did it.
6. The nun falling asleep doesn’t prove they left.
7. Something crossed the road and it could’ve been them or an animal or a person or anything.
8. Them looking at each other in bed suggests they were planning something but it could also mean they were scared like how they ran to Lola when they first met.
9. The footsteps could’ve been them but it also leads to the dad.
10. The baby was moved but it could’ve been the dad before he went outside. He did say he was gonna change regarding caring for the baby.
11. Power fluctuations could’ve started the music.
12. We hear alot of thunder so the dad could’ve been struck by lightning or burned like how he burned the bible.
13. The nun saying she woke them up in the morning doesn’t prove they stayed.
Everything has an explanation but no clear answer so it pretty much boils down to what you believe, just like with religion.
They were evil and yet they weren’t evil. They were obviously abused in the orphanage and they were already strange seeds so ended up psychopathic religious fanatics and yet they know not what they do. They were protecting their mom but they were also psychotically vengeful under the brainwashing of the orphanage abuse. In a way they were insane and seem to not know right from wrong but believe they were acting under God and in a way, they were because everything happens for a reason, what isn’t God? God created all, even the night mares of what we call reality are just part of God’s dream of life. In the end, she surrendered to it all. Sometimes people get so scared they come into harmony with what scares them, they in sense lose their sanity to stay quasi-sane. The kids were in the house and it doesn’t matter if they set fire to him or lightning struck them, it’s all the same end (fate, karma) and the bridge of incidents that led to it doesn’t matter. They spared her because they realized she has crossed over to their way (when she asphyxiated herself to be in touch with God, something she learned from them earlier). What she wanted most was her baby and she got her baby safely and the kids knew she in tern would be their forever mommy. When she was asphyxiating herself she found her baby but there must’ve been some revelation to stay with the orphans. When she came to at the hospital, she still had a trace that the kids were bad and to blame but when the nun declared they were innocent and not there (even though they couldn’t have snuck out), she simply broke to all the craziness and started to feel there is Godly power at work. So whether her baby lived or not, doesn’t matter, it’s God’s will and instead of perishing, she flowed with it.
I see people asking how did the baby appear back in the crib. When the mom went into the room to check In the crib the baby was not in the crib. She found the baby in the bassinet inside tin and Tinas room. Which was separate from the baby nursery room. The crib is where the baby would sleep inside of the baby room and the bassinet is the basket they would carry the baby around in which is what was found in tin and Tinas room on the side of the bed.
Are the twins albinos? What happened to their parents? Why were they in an orphanage? Where did they come from? This movie really sucks! And the ending double sucks! I didn’t understand the movie. What was the plot? Where was the baby? Did the baby die when she got out of the house and just dropped on her back? More and more of these movies are coming out with no ending and no comprehension of the movie! I am left flabbergasted.
@Eri stop with your stupid nonsense of God and religion. Ever thought being a little logical in life? The children literally killed a dog and their classmate. They almost drowned their little brother and now you saying it’s god’s will. Sometimes I am really proud to be an atheist after seeing people like you packed in a flock of some stupid believers who just behave like sheeps. Copy each others’ behaviours, opinions and arguments. Because you don’t have common sense of your own to apply for create your own fundamentals and logics in life.
This is one of the laziest ending explained pages I have ever read. I agree with the commentors that the kids were evil, they knew what they were doing was wrong but they used bible versus to justify them. They lied, murdered and committed other sins that they justified with the bible versus. And the mom taking them back in was ignorant at best. smh
I JUST HATE THE MOVIE. MOM IS STUPID, FATHER IS STUPID. EVIL KIDS ARE SMARTER. WHAT THE HELL. DEFINITELY GOT A THUMBS DOWN FROM ME. IF THERES A DOUBLE THUMBS DOWN I WOULD GIVE IT.
This movie was too long for such a corney ending.
Really? The Kids were innocent? Are the viewers stupid? They led us to believe otherwise and the ending denied it. The writer of this movie needs a health check. What child would willingly cut up a dog?
The mother has no character always crying and wailing and cannot act in a crisis. She didnt even try to save her husband. She accuses him of coming into the house while he is on fire and seeking help.
The kids and Lola deserve each other. The last 30 minutes of the movie ruined it, I wish I never started watching this movie. Zero stars.
Why has nobody ever mentioned the fat baby in the birth scene?
Whoever wrote this movie is sick upstairs
What did I just watch
What message is the movie passing
To do evil things and back it up with the scriptures
I wasted my time on this movie
“Lola, they’re just kids, they were trying to do something nice for you…by tying you to the bed and trying to force-feed you poisoned milk.”Right. Sure. Not frightening at all. Normal behavior.
The film would have been better if the kids were caught in the end and punished. I definitely believe they were mad and evil. Some parts of the movie were unrealistic like the kids killing a dog and not knowing it was wrong, putting the baby under water for a few seconds and not knowing it could kill it…too stupid not to know that. The ending was terrible…both kids were really scary though.
The funniest and weirdest thing I’ve seen is that, why in the world would adolfo fix the antenna outofnowhere? Like, lola and him was just talking sincerely and then adolfo suddenly wants to fix the antenna?? Lmao. Weird and funny s**t.
The end of the movie didn’t add up at all. The kids can’t be innocent. Interpretation the Bible literally and using the Old Testament ways of cleansing is insanely not normal. But how was she able to get pregnant? Was it God answering the children’s prayer it shows how God honours his words more than his name. Yes the kids innocence is arguably true because of how they were taught.
It’s possible that the husband was struck by lightning but I suspect it was Tin and Tina up to no good confirmed by the baby missing from the moses basket before being returned for mum to find again. She would have been found by the fire service presumably which would have been called by neighbours and she wouldn’t have remembered anything being unconscious until she woke in a hospital bed. All in all the film was OK but as usual the female lead was not believed by her partner until it was all too late. And as for the ending… Really, would you?
They were obviously psycho. The movie didn’t just say that you could end up doing crazy stuff by misinterpreting religion but also get used to the craziness and justify it too. Now, the ending: she obviously doesn’t believe they’re innocent, after their heinous activities. Yes, she’s greatly disturbed since a long time which could lead to: does she accept the kids (and faith) so that they don’t further ruin her life, which is now her baby (she long wanted one of herself) and finally start to live.
@LeanneJones Sure the last part showed Lola to be goofy in crisis and that spoilt my experience as well. Also, they had a first warning and a chance to act right when the kids killed the dog. But, you don’t get this one part right and it’s that they’re not disproving spirituality or “Truth” the reason shown for the kids to act this way is according to a specific religious text and that’s what it is about not what you’re saying.
yall are not getting it, what if the reason why lola took the children back is to exact her revenge on the kids?