I've been thinking about what the public is actually going to say when the girls come home, and I think there's a pretty horrible irony waiting for us.
They're a high school soccer team that survived 19 months in the wilderness. You already know what the headlines are going to be. Teamwork. Sisterhood. Unbreakable bonds. These brave girls never gave up on each other.
And technically, that last part is going to sound believable because they really did function as a team out there.
That's what makes it so disturbing.
They assigned roles. They followed leaders. They made collective decisions and convinced themselves that everyone had to participate for the good of the group. Even the hunts became an organized activity with rules, rather than random acts of violence.
The same qualities that made them a successful soccer team helped turn their worst decisions into something everyone was responsible for.
But here's the part that really gets me: Natalie only manages to contact the outside world because she breaks away from the group and acts against what its leaders want.
The person who potentially saves everyone is the person who stops being a team player.
So my theory is that when they're rescued, the public narrative will be almost the exact opposite of what actually happened. The girls will be celebrated for sticking together, while the thing that finally saved them was someone having the courage to go against the others.
And I don't think the survivors will even need to invent that narrative themselves. Reporters, families, the school, everyone will be desperate for an uplifting story about these girls who overcame impossible odds together.
I can practically picture an interviewer asking what kept them alive, one of the girls saying "each other," and everyone applauding.
Meanwhile, every survivor in that room would understand that answer a little differently.
I honestly think a scene like that could be more uncomfortable to watch than another hunt.