How did Fermat left without paying?
When Fermat was in the Gas Station he discoverd he has lost his wallet. He has no money and the clerk tell him that he cant leave. Later we see him leaving .
So how did he?
We have to assume he convinced the man he would return to pay, he later says 'I have to go back and pay'. The film-makers wouldn't reveal it so we would suspect him of being a murderer or something.
share[deleted]
Au contraire, it was obvious the killer was one of the 4, as in many other films.
Besides, I still think the premise was too fantastic. The 4 (the 3, really) should know better than go without cellphone and that it would be impossible only 4 people would solve such easy a puzzle.
[deleted]
You're wrong on both counts.
It was *INSANELY* predictable who the bad guy was. The moment they discussed the fact that their ages match the death ages of the mathematicians, nobody mentioned the old guy. This was just so stupid it was obvious they're keeping it as a "surprise" for the end.
Terribly done.
Second, it's one thing to ask people to turn their phones off.
It's completely absurd to tell them not to bring one at all.
Second, it's one thing to ask people to turn their phones off.
It's completely absurd to tell them not to bring one at all.
To be honest, this isn't the movie's fault. It's something that every horror movie has had to deal with since around 2005 - everyone carries a cell phone with them. Filmmakers have been trying for over 10 years to find plot devices which render cell phones useless and every single one of them is not believable or too convenient. Oh no, we're out of range (even though it's a rich person's country estate probably on Long Island); or oh, all five of us dropped all our phones in the water (and they're not Samsungs), etc. This is just another instance of that.
In my opinion, the best way of solving the problem is just to set the movie in the 1990s - then you have most of the technology but no bothersome cell phone dilemmas. :) share