MovieChat Forums > Masters of Horror (2005) Discussion > Your thoughts on 'Incident on and off a ...

Your thoughts on 'Incident on and off a mountain road'

posted 13 years ago by Agnelin
16 replies | jump to latest

What do you think is the point of the old man in this episode? Why does Moonface keep him captive? And why does Ellen end up killing him at the end?

My own answer for the last question is that by killing him, Ellen goes (for some reason) from self-defending victim to killer, and her putting up her husband's corpse up like a statue suggests that she's going to continue Moonface's killings.

What are your thoughts on this episode?

[–] BrunoAntony 13 years ago

* The old man is some sort of crazed relative of Moonface.

* Ellen kills him because a) he was in it with Moonface and b) with him dead, she can say Moonface killed her husband.

[–] Agnelin 13 years ago

Thanks for your reply! That makes sense.

[–] nascentt 10 years ago

He's not a relative. He doesn't even know him or why he's there. He calls him moonface as he doesn't know who he is.

Koalas are telepathic. Plus, they control the weather.

[–] unknown_soul278 13 years ago

I thought she was just fed up and pissed off, and Moonface picked on the wrong girl. She had just killed her husband (he deserved it) so she had no problem killing some nutcase murdering stranger and his equally insane 'companion'.

Maybe she killed the old guy just to shut him up, or as what she saw as a mercy killing.

I didn't get the impression she would continue the killings, just that her husband was a violent, psychotic bastard and she figured he belonged with the other psychos.

The wild, cruel animal is not behind the bars of a cage. He is in front of it.

[–] snowleopard 13 years ago

Agree entirely with Unknown Soul278.

[–] DisturbedPixie 12 years ago

I think it mattered less where the body belonged, but simply easy to leave him there, let MoonFace take the blame, and call it a night. Too bad that other girl got screwed though. She just didn't have the will to survive maybe.

Change American Politics through VOTE SWAPPING!
https://www.facebook.com/VoteSwap2012

[–] unknown_soul278 12 years ago

Good point on leaving him there... no questions for her if they find him. Just one more Moonface victim.

Most people have a good survival instinct, but regardless of her husband's opinions Ellen did learn skills from him that probably made all the difference. The other girl didn't have that.

The wild, cruel animal is not behind the bars of a cage. He is in front of it.

[–] activista 11 years ago

Liked this episode, mainly because the lead female character was kicking some serious a** because she had to,and did a good job of it, and it was genuinely creepy at times. Seems to me, that she would have picked up on the fact that her husband had some issues,though. It was also cool seeing the actor who played The Tall Man from the PHANTASM movies,though (since the same director of those films directed this episode.)

[–] Shimmer_Me_Timbers 11 years ago

I agree, I liked how she went from relativly unobservant (aka not noticing that her man was legit nuts) to a survivor. It's a refreshing change from the damsel in distress that usually plague the horror genre.

[–] sunezno (269) 2 years ago

It could be that her husband started off relatively okay/normal but gradually got worse (maybe due to his "survivalist" friends' influence or something). But more than likely, I think he was just a bad guy from the start but was good at hiding it. That's how abusers work. She fell in love with the good side of him, because he was able to hide the bad parts of him at the beginning. Over time, his mask chipped away (and maybe his mental health did decline a bit, too), and the abusive, controlling, piece-of-shit core personality came out.

You say that she would've picked up on the fact that her husband had some issues, but that's not necessarily true. There are plenty of good people who don't trust the government or who prefer to live in solitude/off the grid, etc., so those things alone wouldn't (or shouldn't) be red flags that he's actually an abusive piece of shit.

[–] goodbyeenemyairship 13 years ago

She needed to get rid of her husband's body. By drilling out his eyes and crucifying him like all the other victims, it seems as if her husband was killed by Moonface. The only problem with this plan is: the old man was a witness and could rat her out. She had to kill him to ensure she wouldn't be caught.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] unknown_soul278 12 years ago

I think he existed, he was just nuts after being there with Moonface for a while. Or maybe he was crazy already. I don't think he was ever really chained, he just made it look that way.

Killing her husband after he violently rapes her and then killing a psycho in self defense doesn't mean she has no good left in her, it just shows she has a strong sense of survival... apparently much stronger than her husband thought.

The wild, cruel animal is not behind the bars of a cage. He is in front of it.

[–] mrannah 11 years ago

if you read the short story this was based on, you would know that the old man wasn't there. his death at her hands was to help her cover up her own actions and putting her 'ex husband' among the victims, unknown if she'd ever bother reporting it but let him be discovered if he was to be found.

but as to why he's there in the first place? two reasons, i think. First, since Moonface never speaks, the old man gives us exposition, some background, incomplete as it may be. Second, his cooperation with Moonface, yelling for him when she starts to escape, lets the story prolong, the return of Moonface seem less a matter of 'horrible timing' to prolong the story, and keep it going that much longer.

was it unnecessary padding? i don't think so, since it advanced the story, giving us the exposition and a resolution to the story that upon reflection ties up the loose ends.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]