Challengers explained

What is Challengers about?

Challengers is about passion. One character doesn’t have enough of it. Another has too much of it. And a third is denied it. Tennis is the perfect game for this story because as much as you’re competing against someone else you’re also competing against yourself. Art’s struggles on the court reflect a collapse of confidence in his personal life. Much of the film is about establishing why his confidence has shattered and bringing him to a point of catharsis and breakthrough that ties back to his relationship with his wife, Tashi, and his former best friend, Patrick. 

The writer of Challengers, Justin Kuritzkes, is married to writer-director Celine Song. Song’s first movie, Past Lives, was an autobiographical account of an emotional situation between her, Kuritzkes, and Song’s childhood sweetheart. Now Kuritzkes first movie is a fictional drama about a woman, her husband, and her ex. Some will dismiss the connection. Or find it irrelevant or unnecessary. But putting the two films into conversation is pretty fascinating. We discuss in-detail below. 

Cast

• Tashi Duncan – Zendaya
• Art Donaldson – Mike Faist
• Patrick Zweig – Josh O’Connor
• New Rochelle Final Umpire – Darnell Appling
• Tashi’s mother – Nada Despotovich
• Tashi’s father – Naheem Garcia
• Lily Donaldson – AJ Lister
• Finn Larsen – Jake Jensen
• Helen – Hailey Gates
• Written by – Justin Kuritzkes
• Directed by – Luca Guadagnino

The ending of Challengers explained

Recap

The end of Challengers begins with the final game of the tennis match between Art and Patrick at the New Rochelle Challenger in New York. Patrick is supposed to throw the match, but make it look legitimate enough that Art would never know. Though it’s not that simple. The years of ill will that has developed between the two makes this more than a match. If Patrick is going to lose the match, he wants to win something. So, during the tiebreak, he “serves like Art” which was a callback to 12 years earlier when Art asked Patrick if Patrick had slept with Tashi. If Patrick served normally, nothing had happened. If he served like Art, well…

Art recognizes the gesture and the implication of it. At first, he’s angry enough to stop caring about the match. He lets Patrick score points until they’re tied. But he starts to feel something. Some kind of rhythm. Some kind of beat. Music that had been missing from his game. From his life. The anger unlocks a passion Art had lost. And the ultimate, tie break rally between the estranged friends becomes intense, epic, a conversation, an exchange that transcends words. All the love and hate they have for one another comes pouring out. And it ends with Art rising into the air for an epic slam. He finally beats his old friend. But the leap was so reckless that Art was in danger of landing badly. Except Patrick catches him. The former best friends hug. 

Tashi, in the stands, overwhelmed by the moment, launches to her feet and lets out a rejoiceful “Come on!” 

Meaning

There’s a lot going on in Challengers, especially in the backstory and drama between Art, Patrick, and Tashi. It’s easy to get caught up in all of that. But all of that is in service to a larger story—Art’s lack of drive. His ennui when it comes to tennis is what frames the present day story. The film makes this explicit in the first 20 minutes when we see Art dispassionately go through his routine then blow a match against an opponent he should have easily defeated. 

The entire sequence lacks music. Except in the moments right before he goes onto the court. Then it cuts to later and there’s no music. We see Art and Tashi watch the highlights of Art’s loss. No music. Art mentions it’s a confidence thing. “What do we need to do to get you to play again? What do you need me to do?” When Tashi leaves the room and Art’s alone, music suddenly starts. When Tashi returns, the music cuts off. Art reaches out to Tashi, implying something physical, sexual, and there’s a very subtle musical stirring. But Tashi comes close and it stops. She leaves the room again and what happens? The music kicks back in. 

This subtly establishes that Tashi is the source of Art’s confidence issues. If that wasn’t clear through the music, it’s a lot more clear when Art says “Hey, I love you,” and Tashi responds with “I know.” 

The dynamic isn’t clear so early, but later we realize what’s happened. Tashi was on her way to superstardom. Then a knee injury ended her career. Art has become her proxy. His success is her success. She wants him to be as good as she was. And he’s been amazing. One of the best in the world. But she needs more. Demands more. And he loves her so much he’ll be that for her. But his passion for tennis is gone. Which is why he tells her, later, that he wants to retire after the U.S. Open. Win or lose. If he gets the career Grand Slam, great. If not, so be it. 

But he says that unsure if Tashi will stay with him. Does she really love him and want a life with him, Art Donaldson? Or was their relationship only ever a way for her to have a tennis career?

Art is still in that funk. Until Patrick gives him the signal. “I slept with Tashi.” Why would Art believe him? Remember the scenes from the night before? Art tells Tashi that he’ll retire. Tashi says she’ll leave Art if he loses to Patrick. Art asks Tashi to “just hold me until I fall asleep.” Then we see her leave the bedroom, text Patrick, meet Patrick, and sleep with Patrick. When she returns to the hotel room, Art’s not in bed. He’s moved to their daughter’s room. That means that Art would have noticed Tashi wasn’t there. So when Patrick gives the signal, Art puts two and two together. That’s where Tashi went. 

After a stunned moment to process, Art yells out “F*** off!” He finally stops playing for Tashi and starts playing for himself. He wants to beat Patrick. He needs to beat Patrick. And suddenly the music is back. 

You might be thinking, “Chris, we heard the music during the match, multiple times. What are you talking about?” Yes, but it was almost always when Patrick was the perspective character. Or the dominant-perspective of a scene. Not when the movie focused on Art. This is the first time. And what’s he do on the initial serve? He blasts the ball at Patrick’s head. All that training, coaching, perfectionism is gone. Art’s in the moment. In the zone. Which is why he smiles before the next serve. 

Two bits of earlier dialogue come back to all of this.

Conversation one

Conversation two

Back to the explanation

The first conversation establishes the idea that tennis is a relationship. And that when you wind up in the zone, it’s transcendent. That’s why Tashi screamed out “Come on!” when she beat Anna Miller. It also gets at the idea that Tashi believes tennis isn’t about expressing yourself. That idea of expression is exactly what she’s coached out of Art. But it’s also something that Art had been missing for a while. Which is what Patrick gets at in the second conversation. Art never lights up. He never feels the passion. He plays it safe. Plays percentage tennis. On the court and off. 

So at the very end, once he finds out about Tashi’s infidelity, it fires him up. Which is why the music finally kicks in for Art the way it had for Patrick and Tashi at other points in the film. They’re finally playing tennis. They understand one another. They love each other again. And Tashi responds. She fully engages. Prior to Art letting go, Tashi was often not paying attention. Or was disgusted. Bored. There are several shots that show the rest of the crowd following each shot and her staring off in the distance. Her undivided attention is a sign that something special is happening. She’s not on the court, but she is. The screenplay actually says, “She grits her teeth and clenches her fists, playing at Art, playing as Patrick, playing as the ball itself.” 

Way back in 2006, Art was the one so impressed by Tashi and her scream after the winner. Now, all these years later, she roars again. But it’s because of Art. For Art. She finally feels that rush. 

The whole point of the challenger was to get Art his confidence back. And it worked. That completes the overarching story. But it does leave us with some questions. If you’re a glass half-full person, then you can argue that Tashi’s scream is her falling in love with Art the same way he fell in love with her all those years before. And that their relationship has been reborn. As has Art’s friendship with Patrick. And that Art will go on to win the U.S. Open and everything will be good. 

If you’re a glass half-empty type, then maybe you jump to the idea that Art will leave Tashi. Which is bittersweet now that she finally respects him, maybe even loves him. And that he and Patrick shared a moment but that’s all it was. They’ll go their separate ways, again, because, at the end of the day, too much has transpired for them to have a normal friendship. Then Art enters some new, empowered chapter of his life. 

You might like the idea that this is a new beginning for Patrick and Art. And what follows is a renaissance for both. Under Tashi’s tutelage. Maybe they become a duo again, reuniting as Fire and Ice, and take the doubles scene by storm. Maybe the on-court chemistry translates to regular life and the three enter into some kind of throuple situation. 

Regardless of what happens next, the key to the end is that Art has finally regained his confidence. 

The themes, message, and meaning of Challengers

Passion

In literature and poetry, you have omniscient narration or internal dialogue that allows for the author to establish core thematic topics. Like in The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck often pairs the ruination of the land from the Dust Bowl with the poor economic opportunities in the wake of the Great Depression. Theme naturally builds through the language used in description. In the last part of May the sky grew pale and the clouds that had hung in high puffs for so long in the spring were dissipated. The sun flared down on the growing corn day after day until a line of brown spread along the edge of each green bayonet. The clouds appeared, and went away, and in a while they did not try any more. The weeds grew darker green to protect themselves, and they did not spread any more. The surface of the earth crushed, a thin hard crust…. And as the sharp sun struck day after day, the leaves of the young corn became less stiff and erect; they bent in a curve at first, and then, as the central ribs of strength grew weak, each leaf tilted downward.

Just in the images and description you get the sense of giving up. Of wilting. Of the elements bearing down upon you. We then see that same thing happen to the characters in the book. Their situation weakens them. Erodes their spirit. But if the land can recover, can’t the people? That’s the hope.

Film has no omniscient narration. It has images, which can be powerful and say a lot, but they lack the directness of language. You can show healthy, green corn turn brown and wither. It conveys a sense of depletion. But the lack of a specific description means the image is, on its own, open to some degree of interpretation. Or the nuance can be overlooked entirely. 

That’s why movies rely on dialogue as the primary method for establishing and confirming themes. Once you pinpoint that dialogue, you can then apply it to imagery used throughout the film, and suddenly shots that were “open-ended” gain specificity. 

When you look at the dialogue in Challengers, things start to clarify. 

Patrick is interested in himself. He refuses to rely on his wealthy parents so lives a down on his luck life by choice. This self-expression and self-interest, this passion for himself, is why he still has that unique, sub-optimal serve. It’s why Tashi tells him “You’re not a tennis player.” And it’s why he won’t let Tashi coach him. And why he’s still single. Everything has to be his way. Even at the hotel, he tries to go against the usual procedure. It’s infuriating but also exciting. Nothing is normal with Patrick because he makes every situation his own. 

Tashi is only interested in tennis. Yes, she says she wants to go to school because she doesn’t want her only skill in life to be hitting a ball with a racket, but Patrick seems to rightfully call out that it’s really a branding maneuver. Tashi dedicates everything to Art’s tennis career. Because, after her injury, it’s the closest thing she gets to having one of her own. When Art wants to talk about anything else, do anything else, Tashi refocuses the conversation to tennis. 

And Art is interested in Tashi. He likes tennis. Enough to be good. But he loves Tashi. And he let her make him great. The only reason he’s played as long as he has is because it kept Tashi in his life. That motivated him enough to perform at a high level. Tashi’s lack of emotional reciprocation has weighed on Art. He’s depressed and it’s translated to how he performs on the court. He lacks passion. Fire. And needs to rediscover it. 

At the end, these passions collide. Patrick puts his self-interest aside and catches Art. Art finally cares about something and puts that emotion into his tennis. And Tashi finally connects with Art on a deeper level through his tennis (remember the dialogue Tashi had earlier in the film. For about fifteen seconds there, we were actually playing tennis. And we understood each other completely. So did everyone watching. It was like we were in love. Or like we didn’t exist. We went somewhere really beautiful together).  

Being true to yourself

Tashi is performative. Since she was a kid, she was aware of her brand, image, etc. So she presented herself as the ideal athlete. The young, female tennis phenom companies could invest in. Except under the surface she’s much more provocative. She says she doesn’t smoke, then smokes. She tells Art and Patrick she’s not a homewrecker, then goes over, gets the boys to makeout with each other, then tells them she’ll date whoever wins their match. She acts like she’s happily married to Art, but she cheats on him with Patrick. She tells Patrick she wants nothing to do with him, then calls him. 

What sums it up best is the conversation between the two when they’re in the car, in the windstorm.

Patrick is also performative. Sure, he’s true to himself in the sense that he plays tennis on his own terms and with his own style. And he refuses to take money from his parents because he wants to make it on his own. But he doesn’t have to live out of his car. He doesn’t have to beg for food. We have a scene where he goes on a date and woos a random woman simply to have a place to stay. Then abandons her as soon as he has money for a hotel. 

And, you know what I’m going to say. Art is also performative. Prior to Tashi’s coaching, he was never a top player. But he willingly becomes Tashi’s puppet. Because it was how he could have a life with her. But that’s made it easy for him to check out of the game. 

So no one is being entirely true to themselves. There’s all this lying and obfuscating. As close as the three main characters are, they remain distant from one another. Until the final rally. Patrick comes clean to Art. Art taps into the emotions he’s kept locked away. And Tashi’s superiority gives way to actual respect and admiration. 

Why is the movie called Challengers?

What a Challenger tournament is

The ATP Challenger is essentially the minor leagues of the ATP Tour. The ATP Tour awards points for participating in and winning tournaments. The 250 series awards 250 points. Then there’s the 500 series. The Masters 1000. And, finally, the Grand Slams (2,000 points each). There are currently 2069 ranked players in the ATP. The smaller tournaments happen more often and feature 28-32 players. While the 1000 series jumps to 56 or 96. And the Grand Slams are 128. So not a lot of room. 

Challengers are were a lot of newer players gain their initial points in order to qualify for the 250s. Then the 500s. And up the ladder. Roger Federer, one of the all-time greats, played in 8 Challengers between August of 1998 and October of 1999. He lost early four times. Made it to the semi-finals three times. And won that last one in October. He used the Challengers to help rise from ranking in the 300s to ending 1999 in the top 100. At that point, he “graduated”. 

It’s the same for the current world #1 and actual best player of all-time, Novak Djokovic. He played in 11 Challengers, from February 2004 to May of 2005. Ranking in the 600s to the top 150. Then he also “graduated”. 

The more literary stuff

So Challengers are usually for younger players to rise up the ladder. Or the place where mid-tier players end up for most of their career. Patrick, ranked 271st, is definitely the latter. But Art going down to a Challenger for a confidence booster can be seen as going back to basics. To finding himself. To a rebirth. Which is why him playing Patrick is meaningful. Patrick is arguably the most important figure from Art’s past. Someone he hasn’t really had contact with in 13 years. Someone he has unresolved issues with. Confronting Patrick ends up causing Art to confront his relationship with Tashi and himself. And there’s that emotional breakthrough that acts as a kind of rebirth. That sets Art up for his return up the ladder. 

The title also gets at the fact that both Patrick and Art were challengers for Tashi’s affection. They first battled on the court. But then the contest continued off the court, with Art using Machiavellian techniques to create a rift between the other two. And it worked. But, all these years laters, Patrick’s still shooting his shot. And achieving a limited but meaningful degree of success. 

Important motifs in Challengers

The wind storm

So the storm is not in the initial script. Meaning it was something that was added by someone later in the process. As of right now, I don’t think there’s anything solid we can point to and say “that explains the symbolism of the storm.” 

If I was going to speculate and go with my gut, then two things come to mind. Speaking as a novelist, I’m often thinking about how to elevate a scene. You need this scene where Tashi asks Patrick to throw the match and they hook up. You can make the dialogue as cool as it gets. But then you’re still left with what’s happening being pretty basic. They get in a car. Talk. Sleep together. How do you make that more interesting? 

Setting plays a big role in that. If it’s the middle of a zombie apocalypse, suddenly that conversation is a lot more interesting. Or if a meteor will hit Earth in two days. In fantasy and sci-fi films, it’s really easy to elevate the setting. In a more grounded film like Challengers, what do you do? Why not have a storm? It’s windy. It’s weird. Exciting. The world feels empty and strange. You can also make the argument that it expresses passion. And we know that passion is one of the main themes of Challengers. It adds to the pent up tension between Patrick and Tashi. As if the world itself was responding to the primal magnetism between them. 

That’s 100% a reach. There’s no dialogue in the film to back that up. But it’s what made sense to me. You have the score audibly representing the passion. And the storm becomes this externalized visual representation. 

I did find one interview that Justin Kuritzkes did with TODAY. He said, “I go to movies to be pushed towards a moment of catharsis, or a moment of revelation, or something. That’s the thing I’m seeking after: that moment. That moment should feel like a gust of wind. Once it hits you, you got what you came for. At least that’s how I feel.” 

I wonder if Kuritzkes said that to Luca at one point and Luca decided to put it in the film. The wind representing the fact that we’re at the brink of catharsis. Approaching the moment of revelation. 

Fire and Ice

Back in 2006, Tashi mentions that Art and Patrick as a duo are known as Fire and Ice. She asks which one is which. Patrick asks her to guess. As we come to know the characters, the answer becomes clear. Patrick is a wildcard. Of course he’s Fire. While Art is meticulous. Focused. Icy. But the film never confirms who was who. The script does, though. 

Of note, the conversation in the script is between Art, Patrick, and a Tournament Official. Not Tashi.

Overall, the nicknames come back to that main theme of passion. Patrick embodies it. While Art struggles to express himself in the same way. The script also makes a bigger deal about sexual performance. It sets up a juxtaposition the night before the final match. First, Art has a whole impotence scene. When Tashi meets Patrick later there’s an emphasis on his virility. One’s cold. The other’s hot. 

Earlier in the script: Tashi’s game has all the control and discipline of Art’s and all the wild improvisation and raw athleticism of Patrick’s: fire and ice in one player. 

She was passion incarnate. Until the injury. She, like Art, has been trying to find her fire. Which is why both are so enamored by Patrick. He represents what they’ve lost. But their focus and discipline is what’s been missing from his life. So that final rally is climactic and cathartic for them because it unites them. They all feel complete in a way they hadn’t in many, many years. 

The slide move

In the final rally, Patrick hits a return that catches the top of the net, causing the ball to lose momentum and land short on Art’s side. It’s a really hard ball to get to and could easily be the game-winner. Art races forward and not only gets there in time for a good return but slides to stop his momentum so he can get back into position for the next return. 

You may recognize the slide. It’s the exact move Tashi tried to do in college that caused her knee injury. The ball didn’t hit the net but was short on the return. So she had to race to the exact same spot on the court that Art does. Except when she tries to stop her momentum, the knee implodes. 

Challengers had already established that Art was playing for both of him. That his career had been her career. So him pulling off the move is redemption. But it also establishes that he is, at least in this moment, on Tashi’s level. Maybe even beyond it. That’s he’s playing “good f***ing tennis”. Which is confirmed by Tashi’s climatic scream. It’s like Art not only avenged her but finally won her respect. 

Questions & answers about Challengers

Is Challengers connected to Past Lives? Is Challengers also based on a true story?

So the writer of Challengers is Justin Kuritzkes. Justin’s married to Celine Song. Song’s the writer/director of Past Lives. You know, the 2023 movie about a love triangle. 

Past Live is incredibly autobiographical. Song was born in South Korea and had a childhood sweetheart. She, like Nora, moved to Canada at 12 years old. Then ended up in NYC for her MFA and reconnected with her childhood sweetheart via Facebook and Skype. But the long distance was too much. She ended up married to a fellow writer, a New York Jewish guy. And 12 years later, the childhood sweetheart visited all the way from South Korea. Song had to grapple with the life she could have had with him versus the one she currently had with her husband. Ultimately, she came to terms with that.

Justin Kuritzkes is that husband who was in the middle of his wife’s existential and romantic crisis. Past Lives is very respectful of its characters. It’s not a melodrama. Or soap opera. It’s a classy, thoughtful meditation on accepting the road not taken and being thankful for where you are and who you are. But it’s just fascinating that Song’s first movie is about this experience. Then her husband’s first movie is also about a romantic triangle. Except it is melodramatic and soap opera-y. It’s crude, indulgent, and sweaty in all the ways Past Lives wasn’t. But at their core…

The husband in Past Lives, Arthur, talks about his fears when it comes to his wife and her old flame. 

On the one hand, it’s unfair to read into that as applicable to Kuritzkes. Those are not his words. They belong to the character in the film. On the other hand, given how autobiographical the film is, it’s at least worth looking at what Arthur says and seeing if we find similarities with Challengers. And we do. 

In that long quote from Arthur, the core of it is a lack of confidence about the relationship. He was a fellow writer who liked the same books and same movies and happened to be there at the right time. Didn’t she imagine something more? Was this the life she wanted to live? He also feels inferior to the other guy. Arthur and Nora are writers. They love stories. They care about story. Which is why he can’t get over how much better the story is with the other guy. 

What do we see with Art in Challengers? Tashi initially dated Patrick because Patrick was the better tennis player. She ended up with Art because she got injured and Art asked her to coach her. What if the injury never happened? What if someone else had asked Tashi to be their coach? Art has trouble believing that Tashi loves him. And it doesn’t help that Tashi never says it. And he’s always felt inferior to Patrick. Patrick was the better player. The more confident person. And the one Tashi originally picked.  

Despite all the differences between the movies, Art’s issues mirror Arthur’s. It gets more interesting. 

Past Lives is from the female perspective and it brings up Arthur’s fears in order to address and soothe them. Nora does love Arthur. And to the film’s credit, Nora’s response is earnest. She never entertains the idea of leaving him. Never doubts her love for him. Because, to her, it wasn’t about which guy to pick. She had already picked. Past Lives is simply about accepting the lives you’ll never live. 

Challengers is from the male perspective. And it legitimizes the fears. But finds a way for the man to prove himself. He defeats his opponent and earns confidence and the respect and love of his wife. So both end up in the same place. Art and Arthur each win the match point. It’s just funny to me the differences in approach and tone. Kuritzkes did tell Vulture: “Challengers is an intensely personal film to me—in ways that I’m not interested in talking about.” Though, to be fair, he also said, “Once it gets transformed into a work of art, the connection between that and the real thing is irrelevant.”  

Did Art purposefully try to break up Patrick and Tashi?

Yeah. Pretty obviously. It’s relevant for the character because he had been more passive than Patrick. Someone who followed the rules. Who accepted things as they were. But he cared enough about Tashi, wanted her enough, to play the snake. He doesn’t fool either of them. Tashi knows what Art’s doing. So does Patrick. And it gives us that moment where Patrick says this is what has been missing from Art’s tennis. 

Why wouldn’t Tashi say she loved Art? Did she love Art? Who does Tashi end up with?

Patrick made everything with Tashi about short-term passion. While Art consistently made it about long-term affection. We saw this in 2006. Patrick’s irreverent and pushing buttons, not afraid to piss Tashi off. Art’s saying sweet things and obviously enamored. Then, in college, Art’s tactic to try to break the two up is to tell Tashi that Patrick isn’t in love with her. As if that were the most important thing to an 18 year old tennis phenom. Her response? “What makes you think I want someone to be in love with me?”

12 years, a marriage, and a kid later, Art’s still focused on love. While Tashi cares about being a tennis professional. Their life together has been her way of having the career her injury prevented. There’s certainly a tenderness between them. But Tashi’s still bitter about being a What If. And probably still feels superior to Art. Remember, back in college, when she tried to give Patrick advice, he told her that he’s not her student, he’s her peer. While Art willingly submitted. So there’s a power-dynamic issue. They aren’t equals. 

That does set up an arc where Art wins her respect and love. And you can make that case at the end. You could also argue that the irony is she falls for Art at the exact time that Art loses his love for her. Though finding out she cheated with Patrick might not be the dealbreaker it would be for many people. Personally, I think they’ve salvaged their relationship. 

How good was Art Donaldson?

As far as I’m aware, we never hear what Art’s rank was. But his face is on the packaging for Wilson rackets. And a graphic on the TV shows he’s won Wimbledon twice, the Australian Open twice, and the French Open twice. Never the US Open. Which would be a career Grand Slam. Only 8 players in ATP history have achieved a career Grand Slam. Fred Perry (1935), Don Budge (1938), Rod Laver (1962), Roy Emerson (1964), Andre Agassi (1999), Roger Federer (2009), Rafael Nadal (2010), and Novak Djokovic (2016). 

That would put Art up there with some of the best players in history. And only the third American to ever achieve such a feat. So he was good. Though to put it into perspective, Nadal had two career Grand Slams. And Djokovic has three. Which is absurd. That puts Art closer to Andre Agassi and Roger Federer. Federer is generally considered second or third. While Agassi floats between the bottom-end of the top 10 to somewhere in the top-20. 

It’s a worthless question to ask, but in the world of Challengers do Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic exist? If so, that makes Art’s career a lot more impressive. 

Did Art actually beat Patrick?

It does seem like Patrick gives Art some points near the end, staying true to his promise to Tashi that he’d throw the game. But, at the very end, they’re both playing to win. And that final point says everything. Because they’re each at their peak. It’s an all or nothing moment that invalidates everything that came before. Before, neither was at their best. So you shouldn’t worry about the details of everything leading up to match point. Because to Art and Patrick, the only thing that mattered was that last rally. 

Did Patrick and Art ever hook up?

Not that we’re told. There’s the story about Patrick teaching Art how to pleasure himself and both doing it at the same time. Then they make out, quite fiercely, in front of Tashi—partially due to their feelings for each other but also because of Tashi. That seems to be the last time they were ever physically engaged. Though the tension between them is definitely there. Like when they’re eating the churros. But, who knows, maybe after that tennis match they end up together and Tashi’s the odd one out.

Now it’s your turn

Have more unanswered questions about Challengers? Are there themes or motifs we missed? Is there more to explain about the ending? Please post your questions and thoughts in the comments section! We’ll do our best to address every one of them. If we like what you have to say, you could become part of our movie guide!