Burn scars


I was very lost when it was revealed that Ethan's character was the same as Sarah's male one. They don't look not even close the same.

Then it's explained that John burned his face, and the recovery changed his look.

How's that possible, even more in 1985? Some surgeries could reduce the scars, but never make it look as if it never happened, or change so much his face.

Only way I see that happening is if he had a face transplant.

Kinda lame to make the same character talk to himself after both becoming males and not letting the younger one recognize himself.

reply

The doctor indeed calls it a "transplant".

reply

Filmmakers could say that a 1985 capable of placing a time machine inside a handbag is capable of doing a perfect face transplant, but still...

reply

Well, the Bureau does have access to technology (and information) from 2034.

reply

Exactly, the OP is making the assumption that the surgery was carried out in the 1970's or 80's when we are given no information whatsoever on when the surgery was done. Assumptions are never good.

It always makes me a little sad when someone says something like "Lol, as if they had lasers in 1940!" about any movie that clearly features time travel, because obviously they would have gotten those lasers from a year that they exist in. Is that such a radical conclusion to come to? Is society safe with such individuals around who fail to grasp even the most simplest of concepts? How do they feed themselves? It's worrying, maybe 'Idiocracy' really was a glimpse of our future as a species.



Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived. -Isaac Asimov

reply