SPOILER! The absurdities that ruin 'Shattered'
-
hitch369 — 18 years ago(March 25, 2008 09:53 PM)
Sure, you have to kinda take this film with a grain of salt, but at the same time I don't think you can go so far as to say it's absurd. I know people that have had major surguries and been hospitalized for months and when it's all said and done they are a completely different person. My grandpa is a perfect example of this.
Before his stroke he was a 250pd full of energry tough as nails farmer, after open heart surgery and a 6mnth hospital stay you wouldn't even recognize the guy, and yes, his voice was different, his mannerisms were different, he most definitely was not the "same" person, but I never doubted his identity, nor did anyone else.
In this film you have to remember he was in rehab for a long time and Judith forbid anyone to see him in all that time, so I don't think it's unrealistic at all that people would believe he was Dan Merrick, any difference's could just be chalked up to what had happened to him. -
NotASpookyGhost — 18 years ago(March 27, 2008 05:00 PM)
I just watched this movie and the wife said that Jenny was starting to figure out that something was different that's why she killed her. So it's not like no one noticed. I agree with you on the voice but that could be explained by damage done to his vocal cords in the accident.
-
realplayer54 — 17 years ago(September 30, 2008 08:42 AM)
All of you that talk about how these flaws ruined the WHOLE movie are looking way too deep into it. I figure only SURGEONS would actually cringe at the Dan Merrick we got after his surgery, not CASUAL VIEWERS. Other than these so-called "glaring errors", the rest of the flaws were not enough to deter it's entertainment value. It's no Citizen Kane, but it's a nice thriller.
I spent my entire childhood growing up. What a waste. -
kingaliencracker — 16 years ago(October 17, 2009 11:17 PM)
To the movie's credit, it does explain a great deal throughout via clues provided that you don't really think about the first time around.
First off, Judith checked herself out of the hospital. That's what Gus tells 'Dan' at his office. Even if the hospital wanted to keep her, they couldn't force her to stay if she didn't require immediate medical attention, which she didn't.
Second, there are subtle clues throughout the movie that indicate 'Dan' has changed. The concierge at the Hacienda notes that 'Dan' looks thinner. Jenny - who was noted to be a semi-Astrologist of sorts - looks at 'Dan's' palms funny shortly before she's murdered. Gus, despite vividly remembering the case and it's specific details that Dan hired him for, didn't immediately recognize 'Dan' when he went to the pet shop to ask him about the invoice.
Third, if someone is 6'4" and someone else is 6'3", are you really going to notice the difference between the two, or would you assume both are relatively the same height? Generally speaking Jack and Dan could have been a mere inch or two apart in heigth, if they weren't exactly the same height, anyway, and no one would have really noticed the difference.
Fourth, as far as 'smell'generally speaking your smell would be determiend by the types of soaps and cologne one uses. Considering Jack was living Dan's life using Dan's items, he could have smelled like Dan easily and no one would have been the wiser. Besides, outside Judith and Jenny, would anyone really pay attention to Dan's smell THAT much?
FifthJack had amnesia and presumably brain damage, thus explaining away any differences between he and Dan in mannerisms and even speech patterns.
Sixththere would have been no need to do a blood test or a fingerprint analysis since no one ever assumed 'Dan's' identity was in question until well after he had been released from the hospital. His identification was in the pocket of his jacket, and his wife didn't deny it was her husband when questioned.
Now, the only thing that can't really be explained logically or conclusively is the actual voice itself. The movie seems to indicate that Dan and Jack had a near identical voice, which most know is impossible because although one can sound like somebody else, speech is almost as distinct as a fingerprint. I can't really comment on some of the explanations provided, because I don't know how a voice can completely change unless damage is done to it, and there was no indication that was the case.
As far as the doctors being able to tell the difference in muscle and structure between Jack and Danperhaps. Then again, tissue and muscle were clearly badly damaged and I'm sure he broke bones everywhere, making any kind of recognition difficult. One could also assume that 'Dan's' restructured face wasn't perfect by any stretch, and people didn't question it because they figured any differences were the result of the surgery, and not him being a completely different person. -
dcavalli — 15 years ago(August 07, 2010 03:20 PM)
For the convenience of the plot, I'm guessing Dan's parents are dead, and he doesn't have any siblings to visit him (or they all hate him) and notice any changes that might indicate that it's someone else with his face. Blood relatives who saw him grow up might pick up things that friends don't. In 1991, DNA wasn't widely used, so the deception could last longer.
-
mcfly-31 — 14 years ago(September 04, 2011 09:14 PM)
Everyone loves to claim "I figured it out!" like they want a medal or something. I saw it in theaters and remember NOT TRYING to figure it out. Just go with it. It's upon multiple viewings that it becomes more ludicrous. I'll take my turn:
- If Judith paid off Klein, why not remove all evidence of his services from Dan's work office? How did she even know of Klein? Who's dumb enough to not use a Kinko's fax machine and not her husband's?
- Dan borrows the maid's car so Judith won't noticing him following her? Wouldn't she also recognize the maid's car???? Why was Judith driving so erracitcally? What was the point of her speeding and cutting across lanes if there was nothing to be rushed to?
- Why is this toxic ship sitting there for 9 months?
- Why fire shots to "scare you"?; Judith is one hell of a stunt driver.
- The performances were fine, except for Kilmer, she sleptwalked through the whole thing. Though the New Year's flashback at the end was painfully overacted. Why they all decided to talk like they were in a soap opera is beyond me.
- The voice thingwell, you'd need a an extra 20 minutes of start to show us Merrick before the accident. Then you could alter his voice and say the accident effected his speech, I donno.
They didn't think we were stupid. It's called stretching credibility in order to make the film last. They knew of the countless fruck ups in the screenplay (Peterson adapted the book himself) but they just had to laugh it off to get to the big payoff. Which was great ("I'm holding my own dead body!"), but hardly enough to save all the contrivances.
"If I had ya where I wanted ya, they'd be pumpin your ass full of formaldehyde!"
-
stayup_all_night — 14 years ago(September 10, 2011 09:57 AM)
It's a catch-22. You could make it more believable by showing his face more deformed and scarredbut that would totally give away the ending. They showed his face totally deformed at the beginning, so much so that it was surprising he ever looked normal again. Well I guess he really didn't. That's good enough for me - good movie!
-
-
RSBonos — 13 years ago(August 14, 2012 11:38 PM)
The leap of faith could have worked if the protagonist had a mutilated face from the accident. No plastic surgery could have reconstructed someones real face like that, let alone transform it from a strangers face. This is in the same universe as Face/Off.
The film was still entertaining. -
htownsteve — 11 years ago(May 22, 2014 10:02 PM)
Wow. You folks sure have spent a lot of time and effort to deconstruct a movie that no-one has seen, will probably never see; and, never come HERE to read about it. Congratulations on wasting all that time!
I enjoyed the movie. Reminded me of a Hitchcock flick. The ending was no dumber than 80% of EVERY MOVIE I've ever seen.
Son, you can't polish a turd -
franzkabuki — 11 years ago(November 27, 2014 02:55 PM)
There probably are movies with a more ludicrous "twist" out there, but at the moment at least I can't think of any. The idea that a face as disfigured as Berenger's in the beginning can be restored to look as smooth, is unbelievable in itself, but the fact it's made to look like a spitting image of another man, is taking the bullsh-t onto an altogether outlandish level. And, yeah, then there is Hoskins - whose "comic relief" character was kind of out of place to begin with - with his supposed "aqualung" Shattered is very much a plot driven movie and thusly, despite some moody direction and reasonable amount of suspense before the final act, such utter absurdities DO matter - a great deal.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan