The execution of Eduard Delacroix
-
strntz — 11 years ago(March 06, 2015 04:14 AM)
And the fact that roughly 20 to 30 seconds before the roll, Paul saw that the floor by the water bucket was not wet.
It wasn't "20 or 30" seconds, it was maybe 3 to 5 seconds on film. The reason we see it even this long is because the director shot it this way to make sure the viewers (us) have enough time to realize that Paul learns the sponge is dry right before the roll.
If he didn't realize this right before the roll, would Paul, during the horrible spectacle, look on the floor in a calm and logical fashion to ascertain why the execution was going so wrong?
It is bad to drink Jobus rum. Very bad. -
tyson6633 — 9 years ago(December 16, 2016 03:33 PM)
I don't blame Paul. At least not 100%
What I mean by that is simple. Paul obviously knew how Percy is towards the inmates, particularly his treatment towards Del. The two men (Del and Percy) have a history of hating each other. He is a cruel little pissant towards Del.
If I was Paul, I'd have been watching Percy like a hawk.
So in a way, yes, Paul should have been more responsible and more diligent in his duties here. He should've known, given Percy's cruelness, that there was a chance he could sabotage Del's execution. He should've been on Percy like white on rice.
Know what I'm saying?"97-XBam.The future ofRock 'n' Roll."
-
Rob801 — 9 years ago(January 31, 2017 10:07 AM)
Well I just mentioned this in another thread, and can see that your comment is the most recent in this one, which is more fitting so I will also say that yeah, Paul should have been keeping a sharp eye on Percy. But Harry should have most definitely noticed the sponge wasn't wet when he put the cap on when water was gushing from it in the first execution we saw.
Still one of my favorite. Films. -
ToastedCheese — 3 years ago(August 07, 2022 02:02 AM)
Yes, Percy should have been held accountable for his knowingly neglecting to wet the sponge. But, I feel Paul should have been held accountable for Percy's action as well, being he (Paul) was Percy's CO and was responsible for overseeing the execution.
Percy ended up being held accountable via the channel of John, yet I agree that Paul didn't handle Del's execution well at all and was just as responsible. It was a dark and disturbing job they had to do and the guards were all represented as decent men, with the exception of Percy.
With all the runthroughs they did, I'm surprised Paul didn't notice a dry sponge. We saw water pouring over Bitterbuck's hood when he was about to be executed. He had time to halt the execution for a double check before rolling on 2.
Paul knew that Percy and Del hated each other. He had an agenda to put Percy out front to get rid of him after the fact due to threats and blackmailing from both sides, (though Percy deserved it), yet it was inappropriate and even unfair to Del considering his circumstance, that Percy was up front leading his execution and Paul should have been aware of this too.
Norman! What did you put in my tea?