johnral's Replies


Vampires. Fascinating. About as good as the cult theory. I would say that Vampires would not need so many victims and that this would be wasteful... but then again they don't explain why the cult needed to kill innocent people... Ummm. I guess. By the same token, however, maybe it's a good way to go to get shot by a sniper in the head while eating your favorite ice cream. But I don't think nobody wants to sign up for that... Yes, this is a bit odd and is not explained. I thought maybe it was the police who had found a dead Choi and were looking for clues. The only explanation would be that it was other cult members touching base or something; but what a bummer to have to organize your mass killing by going door-to-door, as phones don't work there. well yes, that was weird. Like why would this guy open up with some personal stuff around strangers. But to the broader point, who would play a "game" of "I want," i.e. stating something they want to do? That's just stupid. The first girl saying she wants to say "I love you"; that's pretty meaningless. Then the dude wanting to tell them about the wife he loved and yet killed. And then the hostess saying she wanted to kiss that other dude. I liked it when that one lady said that she wanted to just leave; good for her (just don't let the creeps follow you out). Agreed. I am often miffed when characters in movies do dumb or unrealistic things; but everybody here was pretty much on-point. I never said, "Oh my god that's so stupid,"or "somebody would never do that." The cult-people were odd of course, but that's in line with the plot. And I thought the main character (guy) had this weird flat look throughout the movie, but maybe that's just his personality, and in reality not everybody goes around with a dumb smile on their face. So I actually found his flat affect realistic and novel. I wondered the same thing. I was guessing it was food. Maybe granola. I think this can be explained (as others have said) with that he raised her arm and put the knife there. But, the scene is a bit odd. Also: (1) There is something like a bandaid on her hand. Did I miss an earlier scene explaining that? It's right in the palm of her hand where the knife goes. (2) Her sister stares at the knife in the air for a good 3-4 seconds and during this time Cecilia just keeps rambling on, rather than looking at the knife in front of her suspended in mid-air. The other comment here is good too, regarding how she would have the strength to kill him. I don't think the suit made the wearer strong, but many think it did. That final scene could be explained by him just being caught off-guard; but yes, that's a bit odd too. (And now that we're talking about it -- doesn't it really take more skill, time and/or finesse to kill someone by cutting their throat? I mean, cutting the windpipe would not do it, he would have to hit the arteries.) That's a good question. It is one of many aspects of the movie that is not explained. But that does not mean that it is a plot hole or a movie flaw. It might take another 60 minutes to explain everything. He had several days to plan the scheme. So he could have gotten a body at a morgue, or could have murdered somebody. He had lots of money and was ruthless. His body was cremated and so they did address that. His brother could have identified the body and that would be it. But yes, one does wonder this during the movie... This is a good question. When Liam tells them that he planted a bomb, he does so almost as if he won't get in trouble for it; but I was thinking that he's basically writing his death sentence. I don't see how this could be a legal defense. He was not insane when he planted the bomb, and he's not insane at the end of the movie. As for the moral issue, it's similar to these people on death row for 20 years who really become different people; the 40 year old is simply not the same person he was at 20 when he committed a dumb murder. But we generally don't view that as a legitimate reason to not follow through with the sentence (either death penalty, or life imprisonment). This death was not that stupid. She too must have started to have a change of heart in some respects, as she tried to help Liam by suggesting that he retrieve the briefcase (and not turning him in at that moment). At the hotel she says that there is no more need for an explosion at that point (because at least most people have left the hotel), and she does not want this on her record. (And even though they are evacuating the hotel, it's possible that innocent victims are still around.) She made a cost-benefit analysis. It looks like all she had to do was to pull one of those wires, and she thought she could reach it. (But note that she would have to either leave the bomb behind, or try to take it out with her. Not great options.) From a plot perspective, they might have wanted to kill her off; it's cleaner that way, as she and Liam had some sincere feelings for each other. This is a good point. Perhaps they could have fixed this by suggesting that Martin started to change before he had the accident, and the accident and new identity sort of pushed him over the edge, into being a good guy. But yes, it seems strange that a trained, cold-blooded killer could turn 180 degrees so quickly. That's not a memory issue; that's a fundamental personality/morality issue, that would not typically change with a bump on the head. Similarly, toward the end of the movie the 2nd Martin Harris comments that Liam has forgotten his fighting skills, and this seems basically true throughout the movie. There are other movies where a super-spy has amnesia but then has these remarkable abilities; but that does not happen here; Liam seems like a true professor-type, and not an assassin. As for point number 2, I had a similar thought. Martin Harris is supposed to be some world renowned expert in his field, and has even spoken with Bressler over the phone. A person can fake being an expert for a few minutes, but there is no way he could have discussed these topics with another world-class expert for 30 minutes. It takes years to understand this type of field. (If not, then why don't we have more experts in all these fields? These guys could make more money by cranking out experts who can then develop new stuff and make billions.) They said that he trained for one year for that role; you can't learn that one year. BUT: In addition to training Liam for this, they also had to train Liam's backup!! So they got two guys up to speed to be world class experts, just in case the first guy had something go wrong (which is what -- one in a thousand chance?). These are basically good comments. But I too thought that the tape was of the husband and wife. The child said "that's not mom," but my inference was either that the mother was much younger (such that the child did not recognize her), or was wearing a costume or heavy makeup or clothing in which the child would not recognize her mother. Dem dancin seens was da bom! Both of those comments are right. As for the "revolution" part, I'm guessing that they wanted to make the movie consistent with some themes from the comic books. But yes, a general revolution, with people wearing clown-masks, is far-fetched. As for the "comedian" part, he seemed to have tremendous self-esteem problems, and serious mental conditions, and he knew that he had this "laughing" disorder. He was not so dumb to think that he did not know he was not a good comedian. His desire to be a clown (e.g. entertaining kids) is even a bit of a stretch, but this is not implausible. But to go on stage in front of adults to try to make them laugh is another. And again, perhaps they wanted to link the character to the comic Joker, to whom humor was of import; so they get this dark-comedian thing. But yes, those aspects of the movie are weak (putting aside some interest in adhering to the comic-book themes.) They were obviously trying to get the audience on Joker's side at that point in the movie. It's a classic revenge scene; victimized person takes on bad guys and wins. Many movies do this with the first rounds of violence, and then the violence becomes more unjustified. The part of the scene I could not accept was three businessmen harassing a beautiful woman on the subway. I could understand them trying to get her attention or making advances toward her, but harassing her on a subway (e.g. throwing trash at her) does not ring true. If they had those three men harassing a homeless person on the subway, that would make a little more sense. This is actually a good point. All of these players in the movie should have been aware of this issue. And this is not a trivial point to the movie; it is central to several key scenes and of course to the ending. In theory it would not be too difficult to "reverse-engineer" those leads. As just an example: Whoever generated the leads certainly would have a way to re-create the list (e.g. they would have a copy of the documents, or they would have notes from which they could re-create the leads); and then it would be simple work to wait a few weeks (months) and then call on those people on the list to see if they have been called upon. And the people calling these potential buyers would all trace back to Graf, and he would probably cut a deal and name the thief. Plus: If the list could be re-created, then is it that valuable anyway? Graf could call upon these customers, but he would run a big risk, and Shelley's company might call on them too, which would devalue those leads. You are right. The film is titled very poorly. They could have found 100 better names for the movie. The characters are predominately not angry. Good point. I think he was going to say something about negotiation. Good thing the bullet did not cause his right arm to jerk as a reflex and cut the daughter's jugular. Also: The sheik was with 3 women; how did he know which one was this guy's daughter? Could have been any of them for all he knew. This is a good point. The girls will probably go to the party; and if not, then others will. They must get into the place, and then get out with two kicking, screaming girls (or carrying unconscious girls in broad daylight -- suspicious in either event). Seems very high risk, high profile. And that apartment was really big. There must have been some place to hide, and they did not know that she was there.