While Chris Hemsworth has been best known for playing the godlike superhero Thor since 2011, he's also proven that he's a more than adept action hero even without any superpowers. The latest film that's let Hemsworth flex those muscles (figuratively and literally) is Extraction, a thrill-inducing trip of a Netflix film from first-time director Sam Hargrave and produced by Hemsworth's old pals from the MCU, Joe and Anthony Russo (who, of course, directed Avengers: Endgame, among other films).

And while Hemsworth doesn't get to wield Mjolnir in Extraction, he does get to kick a whole lot of ass. The movie, too, gets to do something those Marvel films don't usually get to do either: have an ambiguous ending. And even though the movie has a ton of action and violenceincluding a super-impressive 11-minute single-shot sceneit's got a concluding sequence of moments and final shot that will challenge its viewers to think a bit even once the credits start rolling.

Did Tyler die at the end of Extraction?

That's a good question. Conventional logic here would give a resounding yes, and for a few reasons. First of all, while there's a ton of action, shooting, and killing throughout the film, the movie is still largely grounded in reality. No one has special powers, no one's coming back from getting shot in the head, et cetera, et cetera. So, when Tyler Rake (Hemsworthand man, what a phenomenal character name that is) is already quite injured walking that highway at the end of the movie and gets shot in the neck once more, that's a lot for a person to recover from. It looks like he's bleeding out.

There's also the matter of the recurring image of Rake's late son, who we learned earlier died of Lymphoma at only 6 years old. In Rake's conversation with Ovi, we find out that Rake wasn't even there when his son diedhe volunteered to serve in the armed forces, because he couldn't bear to watch the decline of son's health. One can assume this is why Rake's flashes of his son on the beach throughout the film are so blurryas much as he doesn't want it to happen, his memory, and, thus, his mental imagery of his son, is fading.

After Rake is shot in the neck at the end of the movie, though, he flashes once again. This time, the flash of his son is crystal clear. This could indicate one of two things: either Rake is about to join his son in the land of the no-longer-living, or he's having a near-death experience, with images of his son hitting him in that rarely achieved state.

We don't know for sure, and that's obviously by design. Once critically injured, though, Rake manages to tumble over the side of the bridge from here. Remember, we saw him do something similar earlier in the film, in his very first scene. He was drinking a beer (of all things) and jumped from a ridiculously high height into a body of water. Foreshadowing? Yes. Confirmation he's alive? Possibly, because Farhad, the boy who shot him, was clearly looking for a body, and didn't see a thing.

Who was watching Ovi at the very end?

Who the figure watching Ovi at the very end of the movie would seem to be the everlasting question of Extraction, and like the spinning top at the end of Inception, it's probably not a question we were ever meant to have a definitive answer on. That being said, despite all the logic and evidence that would seem to point toward Rake's demise...who else could this possibly be? It's clearly a white man in a jacket and hat, and, well, basically no one else would make any sense.

For the movie to end with Ovi being watched over by anyone elseafter taking a similar high jump into a body of water to what we just saw Tyler dowould make no sense from a narrative and storytelling standpoint. And with a script written by Joe Russo, of the Russo Brothers, you can feel pretty safe that he came into this film with a plan.

According to an interview Hargrave did with Collider , the movie originally had an ending where Rake much more explicitly died, and the result was a split reaction from test audiences. So the ending was changed, with the intent of hopefully leaving audiences talking at the end of the movie. What would hopefully happen is people will be discussing that afterwards, and you get to say which one you feel is right for you, Hargrave said. Mission accomplished! But the change from a more definitive gloomy ending sure seems like valid points in the other direction.

Does this mean we could get an Extraction 2 down the line? Well, we probably shouldn't get ahead of ourselves. But whenever people can start making movies again, it's reasonable to think that option will be on the table.