MovieChat Forums > Fracture (2007) Discussion > is this a plot hole? spoiler alert

is this a plot hole? spoiler alert

posted 12 years ago by ariellibra
9 replies | jump to latest

spoiler alert, please stop reading if u care.

other threads mentioned that how ted knew for sure that nunally would be his hostage officer, and the answer would be that ted made a phone call to police station that afternoon and was told that nunally would be on duty from 6pm, u can argue that ted probably was counting on no other hostage happened at the same time in the neighborhood that nunally was in charge and he was the only one on duty.
my question is slightly different, from the witness in the courtroom, we know that ted got home about 4pm that day, jennifer 5pm, the shooting happened almost right after jennifer got home, and i kinda remember that an officer in court also said that his team arrived at the scene at about 5:18? so it happened well before 6pm, how was ted sure that nunally would show up? since nunally did show up, does it mean that the police waited for at least 40 mins for nunally instead of the hostage officer who was on duty before 6pm?

[–] pc-daisy 12 years ago

Yes, good point. I thought the same thing. In emphasizing how fast the area was locked down, we aware certainly made aware of the time. But maybe there isn't a hostage negotiator on every shift?

Crawford didn't say I killed my wife, he said I shot her, so he knew Nunally would be the one assigned if they needed a negotiator and the gardener couldn't be sure she was dead either. Crawford shot out the high windows to create the fear outside and I think he wanted to give the impression it was a hostage situation.

[–] cmp_gr 11 years ago

Your thought is correct and I think there is another hole too. Crawford had Nunally’s gun and vice versa. Both put their guns down, but they left them in different places. How did Nunally get his own gun back, instead of the one he kept when entering the house and that was Crawford’s gun?

[–] mks099 10 years ago

They explained that in the movie. He was too busy to notice the switch because Nun was caring for the wife and in shock.

[–] tiredofdogs 11 years ago

I suppose he could have requested to speak to N, however that would later be used in court.

But then again the phone call he made to the police station earlier in the day would surely be recorded and that wasn't used.

[–] Arseweb 9 years ago

The way I see it, he just got a bit lucky with Nunally being the first hostage negotiator that contacted him. If Nunally hadn't been the first, he'd have kept the "hostage" situation going until it _was_ Nunally on the other end of the line. Either way, he'd have been able to get Nunally in there on his own, without needing to reveal that he wanted Nunally specifically.

[–] ebossert 10 years ago

It's still quite contrived and convenient that his wife was banging a detective/negotiator and that the same detective/negotiator would not only enter the house but also take his confession with no one else observing. Also, this same detective/negotiator never bothered to think for 5 seconds that the guns were swapped when the smoking gun magically disappeared from the scene.

Still, good movie. 

Asian Film List
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur10058980/boards/profile/

[–] TarkusLV 10 years ago

There WERE other people in the room when his real confession took place. It was thrown out because it may have been coerced.

[–] The LA Baker (971) 5 years ago

"It's still quite contrived and convenient that his wife was banging a detective/negotiator and that the same detective/negotiator would not only enter the house but also take his confession with no one else observing."

He found out who was banging his wife and made his elaborate plan around the fact that he was a negotiator. It wasn't dumb luck.

"Also, this same detective/negotiator never bothered to think for 5 seconds that the guns were swapped when the smoking gun magically disappeared from the scene."

What good would switching the guns right then do? It wouldn't be his gun. The serial number would link it to the lover/cop and there would be no ruse at all. Hopkins switched his brand new unfired gun with the cop's gun at the hotel earlier. Then he used the cop's gun to shoot his wife. When the cop came in he had him set his gun down. When the cop was distracted by his lover shot in the face, Hopkins switch the guns again. Now he had his brand new unfired gun and the cop walked the murder weapon out of the house, wearing it the whole trial until he killed himself with it.
Without the first switch at the hotel, the second switch at the murder scene is meaningless.
No one would suspect the double gun switch, so they didn't.

[–] SaliceMcD 8 years ago

How did Crawford know that Nunally was, specifically, a hostage negotiator? If this was addressed at some point, I missed it.

The fact that such specialists pretty regularly need to talk people out of suicide - or suicide-by-cop - made his own even more far-fetched. (IMHO, of course.)