Alan never saw Bannister do anything bad with the daughter. When Bannister was about to, Alan deleted it, and no one ever mentioned it in Alan's life(of what actually happened with Bannister and his daughter). So the murder of Alan was pointless.
shareIt's been quite a while since I'v seen the movie, but perhaps you don't see what Alan sees, or maybe Alan has gone through this part before and knows that he doesn't want to see it again? Or maybe he's seen simiar parts of Bannister's memory before... but I dunno if it was pointless :/
shareall im sayin is that we never saw alan hear or see anything that would prove without a doubt the guy molested his own child. Alan never saw the actual act and the daughter never said anything. the whole point of killing alan was to see the head of the implant chip corporation molest his own child. but alan never saw or spoke about it.
sharethats the whole point of the film. to show that he never watched the bad parts of peoples lives!
shareThat's not the point, he usually watched them and deleted them, this time he deleted without watching. They killed him because they thought he saw what happened in the bedroom with that guys daughter, but that's the one time he didn't want to see it.
shareyou have no idea if he saw other episodes or not. In all likelyhood bannister molested his daughter many times. It is most likely that alan had seen this already and knew what was coming. rather than watch it again like some perv he just deleted it. I think the point being made was that alan already had seen this and did not want to see it again. molesters don't just do it once. they do it over and over and over. alan had seen this and he was just deleting what he already had seen.
shareWhether Alan watched the actual molestation or not, we saw him watch beyond the point that he deleted, and there was enough there to look really suspicious.
Semper Contendere Propter Amoram et Formam
... so they killed Alan so they could get his Zoe chip and see the things that he saw (including the molestation by Bannister) ? Whether Alan ever saw it or not doesn't seem to matter to the killers. They know he saw the data and wouldn't have believed any of his denials about what exactly he saw. Especially the psycho who seemed to enjoy killing.
The movie does leave it slightly ambiguous. There's enough in the film to suggest that the father molested the daughter and Alan had seen it, however it took care to not even get close to it. The whole film does this with sexuality in general. Notice that Alan has that woman come over twice, and twice there's a hint of sexuality, but nothing that couldn't be shown in a G-rated kids film. I don't think the film shows even one kiss (except from the first person perspective which is essentially just a girl slightly leaning towards a camera). Maybe it was intentional to be thematic with Alan's loveless life.
Yeah I agree. He didn't see anything, just some very 'suspicious behaviour'
Even though the movie implies that he molested his daughter, it could have easily just been a one time attempted molestation or something.
Then again, he should have told the bad guy he saw nothing if he actually saw nothing..
I disagree.
Alan did see the abuse. The audience did not see it for obvious reasons.
Are you saying just because we did not see it, it could not have happened? This is like saying: Because we never saw Alan go to the bathroom, he never took a leak!
There was CLEARLY a scene showing Alan watching the footage that followed the father holding the daughter's hand (the audience saw the back of the screen), right before he goes back to delete it from the beginnning.
The girl WAS abused; that was the whole point of the film.
"Champagne for my real friends, and real pain for my sham friends..."share
Thats not true, unless he watched it some other time.
In what we saw the father shut the door and the girl said she wanted to go back to bed. The Dad said no then Alan rewound and deleted. It certainly looked suspicious, but was not definitive.
I concur with your take on this, MrCottonParrot.....I have a question: How did Jim Cavaziel's character even KNOW of this molestation? If that was the motive to kill Alan?...but how did they know what Alan had seen? I can't recall Alan telling anyone, not even the mother of the girl...Thanks, in advance, for clearing this up for me.
shareIt doesn't really matter if Alan saw Bannister molest his daughter or not. I'm sure the anti-Zoe group would have more than enough footage of other people's crimes that Alan has seen during his career. Alan was a veteran cutter who specialized in making rememories for awful people. He probably has seen the worst crimes committed by humanity. Yes, the anti-Zoe group would be most interested in Bannister's life, but I'm sure they would use the other footage also.
share[deleted]
We only see him delete one memory (after avoiding watching it) but it probably didnt just happen once. He probably did see some other event of molestation and knew to just delete the next few minutes. Plus, that woman seemed to know what happened to the point where
she sued to keep her husband's memories private. I would imagine the abuse was ongoing and Allan saw every bit of it along with the whatever the wife may have discovered along the way.