Does anyone have a good explanation for how there are no external markings on the outside of the witche's body? This is obviously the major question throughout the film and seems to later be answered. However, I have a bone (or technicality) to pick about it...

As the autopsy progresses it's discovered that her wrists and ankles are completely broken, lungs are burned, organs have scar-tissue as if they had been stabbed, eyes are gray as if she's been dead for a long time, etc. This all appears to be explained when they peel back her skin to find black burns underneath (and symbols on the inside) and deduce that her skin had been removed before this trauma had happened. Later on it's definitely confirmed that she is in fact a witch, and had underwent some sort of brutal ritual. There's suggestions made by some of the characters, but it's up to the viewer to decide whether this ritual turned her into a witch or if they were trying to kill/subdue her.

So it seems to be explained that the witch has no external markings because her skin was removed, BUT then why does she not have any surgical scars or obvious markings that her skin was removed? Her skin was definitely removed and but back on because there are ritual markings underneath her skin, similar to the ones found on the cloth in her stomach.

Near the end the witch does show that she has regenerative powers, but this also doesn't explain why she has no external markings. She has the damage from her ritual since the beginning and if she had used someone to regenerate then she wouldn't have any internal or external damage at all.

Edit: I'll add that the witch appearing healthy on the outside and messed up on the inside is definitely a metaphor used very well in the film. Jane Doe is a physical manifestation of depression (suffering on the inside, can't tell from the outside) and later the Mom is revealed to have killed herself due to depression. This is also a theme used well for the entire scenery of the morgue at the beginning the house looks beautiful from the outside, but inside there is some nasty stuff going on. I say all this because I understand that Jane Doe not having any markings on the outside is good for the themes of the movie, and perhaps my question is too technical with the unknowns.

  • 1
    This is one good movie ! I think there are no markings on the outside since it would be a good plot. Adding to the suspense as we keep discovering one by one the horrid things that happened to Jane Doe. Apart from that shes a supernatural witch-body, she could have made her skin look neat if she wanted to (like how she could make them hallucinate).. plot wise i think a mutilated body would have been less scarier and expected than a plain body with twists as we continue with autopsy. – Anu7 Oct 17 '17 at 3:39

I don't think there is a completely rational explanation as to why she has no external but only internal markings but I assume it is because of her regeneration powers. Since nothing can really kill her, her regeneration serves only as a beautifying mechanism; she regenerates only externally to appear human/appealing. Additionally, since she is briefly healed from everything when she kills the dad (even her eyes turn brown), we can also assume that, maybe, the ritual done to her did not manage to kill her completely but put her in this semi-dead state where she is able only to briefly regenerate and gain satisfaction when she tortures someone the way she was tortured, and then she returns to the same state, waiting for the next victim.


I assumed that the evidence of Jane Doe’s injuries were visible because they happened prior to death. So when Jane “healed” herself, she was resetting her body to the state it was, or as close as human biology allows, to when she died. As we can’t grow back skin when we’ve been flayed, that skin was grown via her magical abilities.

It’s a similar trope I’ve seen used in some vampire stories: an amputee who becomes a vampire can’t regrow the limb they lost as a human, but could regrow one that is cut off after they became a vampire.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .