DESERVES BIGGEST PLOT HOLE AWARD!!!!!!!
-
ashleydykeman — 18 years ago(September 30, 2007 08:22 AM)
I personally loved this movie, and have watched it more than once. I absolutely adored the girl who played Jesse, and that one kidnapper that was so nice to her. Sean Bean, as always, was amazing, and Brittany Murphy was entertaining and believeable. If I ahd the oppurtunity to watch it right now, I so totally would. I love that movie, and plot holes or not (which by the way, most of them were actually explained in the movie, but you might've missed them) this movie was one of my favourites of 2001.
-
skulk — 18 years ago(October 14, 2007 06:18 PM)
Gary Fleder, in the director commentary, basically admits that sometimes a plot hole is fine as long as the movie keeps moving and keeps the audience interested. He is clearly amused that the last scene, which shows Aggie smiling at Elizabeth even though she doesn't know who she is or that the character even exists, was a reshoot dictated by test audiences that wanted a happier ending. When even the director is making fun of the plot holes, then you know your watching mindless tripe (although enjoyable mindless tripe).
-
Jeffthinx — 18 years ago(October 18, 2007 02:27 PM)
I gotta agree with you Missy. But I read your post after I watched the movie. I tend to like Michael Douglas and I thought the filmmakers did a good job of generating suspence. So I liked the movie anyway5 on a scale of 10.
-
vocklabruck — 18 years ago(November 23, 2007 12:05 PM)
The first time I watched this movie it was entertaining and it caught me really bad. I didn't see the plot holes, and it put me in tears when the girl had those flashbacks to her father's death. But when I re-watched it a couple times as a translation exercise I saw all that stuff that doesn't make sense and it bothered me.
I found ONE MORE plot hole you didn't list. The bastards were stupid enough to throw their only key under the subway??? I couldn't believe that one. The only guy who knew where the ruby was was Russel and they killed him? Ok, he also had his buddy but why to lose chances killing the father's girl? -
tammytkspr — 18 years ago(December 28, 2007 01:07 PM)
Missy6612
How do the kidnappers know the girl has hidden the diamond? How does the girl know what the kidnappers want (hence the famous line, "I'll never tell" and "You want what they want")? This number is a distant memory in the mind of a mentally ill girl, and there is no reason for her to associate this number with a hidden diamond she shouldn't even know exists.
Uh, dear, she knew the jewel exist. She saw her father put the jewel in her doll, Mishka, about 1:16 into the movie. And when she saw the men beat her father and kill him in the subway, she knew they would be after her eventually. She also threw the doll in with her father's coffin, and traced the coffin number with her finger. I also assume they have tried to get at her in the past, which is why she tried desperately to stay in the mental hospitals. It was the only way she knew to stay alive. Also, the criminals would have figured out as much by reading the same articles that we seen in Elizabeth's file.
How is Dr. Conrad able to completely diagnose her in about 30 minutes when 20 other psychiatrists never even came close? Why do the kidnappers give Dr. Conrad only until 5pm to pry the information out of this girl when she hasn't opened up to anyone, ever? They've waited ten years, why not just give him more time? Oh yeah, because they're just EVIL and dumb. It's probably the same reason why they took their masks off during a bank robbery and never put them back on so everyone could see them.
First, that is why Dr Conrad is a top paid psychiatrist, he's smarter and more talented than the rest of his peers. Even his buddy claimed he went to him because he was better. The 20 other psychiatrists were probably state paid, and quite frankly, in this day and age, it's not the tops in their field that stay with a state pay. The 5 pm deadline was explained, or did you not hear it. Sean Bean's character is quoted that he finds that people are at their best when facing unrealistic dead lines. As for them taking their masks off, that's not a plot hole, because dumb ass bank robbers do that all of the time in real life, and real life isn't a plot hole.
The timeline is really messed up. Dr. Sachs was already put in the same situation as Dr. Conrad and he was unable to deliver the goods, so they kill his girlfriend Sara. Sara was killed before Dr. Sachs got a chance to even work with the girl. That makes no sense of course. Well this absurdity makes it even more absurd that the criminals would hatch a new plot to do the same thing with Dr. Conrad, especially when it had failed with Dr. Sachs. But they do.
Dont know what's confusing. I just think you're not a smart person. Dr Sachs was running out of ideas, so he goes to his smarter and more talented friend, and Conrad is the first person to get her to speak. The criminals were probably getting tired of waiting around for Dr Sachs to get any results, so disposed of his GF prematurely. WHen they see that Dr Conrad has made progress in his very first meeting, they switch tactics to their advantage and use Dr Conrad's expertise and any means neccessary to yeild it, like kidnapping his daughter and using her for collateral.
The original plan to get the number somehow involved an orderly who the girl had cut up. I assume (the movie doesn't really tell us) that this orderly was sent to kidnap the girl so the bad guys could torture the number out of her. Well this failed because the girl beat up the orderly, at which time she is promptly transferred to a new hospital under Dr. Sachs' care. How could they have come up with their new plot (to use Dr. Sachs to get the info from the girl) so quickly after their first plan with the orderly failed? It's impossible!
Where in the movie did it say the orderly was involved with the criminals? Your own assumptions is what is messing you up. There is nothing that shows the orderly to be involved with the criminals and that it was failed attempt at all. The girl snapped and the orderly was the result of it. He could have attempted to rape her for all we know. That scene was to show how dangersous she could be, and was the bait Sachs used to reason with Conrad to see her before they had her chained to a bed for the rest of her life. The criminals were using Dr Sachs because when they finally got her whereabouts, he was her treating psychiatrist at the time. Not plot holes here, you're just not paying attention.
How in the world were they able to plant all of that surveillance in Dr. Conrad's apartment when he and his wife were there? And then why did these idiots choose to keep the kidnapped little girl in an apartment adjacent to her own, where her mother could easily hear her? How did they plant surveillance in the mental patient's room in a heavily secured psychiatric ward? And if they could get in, why didn't they just kidnap her right then and there and torture her to get the number?
IDK, how did the gangsters sneak up that horse's head into the producer's bed without him -
squirmy_monkey — 17 years ago(March 16, 2009 12:46 PM)
"A plot hole I saw was when Elizabeth was telling Sean and Conrad with what she did with Mishka, and Sean's character was like shocked at what he was hearing, in disbelief. I'd figure he's know where the doll was, but didn't know which coffin, so I'm unsure why he was surprised. Where else would he have thought the doll or the numbers represented."
Patrick/Sean thought that the girl's father had the diamond on him, and that after he died he was buried with it. That's why he went to Potter's Field when Conrad said "you know where to go" and also told Conrad he was right that the number signified a grave. They didn't know the whole twist about the man putting the diamond in the doll, and the daughter throwing her doll in the coffin. But Patrick had seen the news article that Elisabeth had been found on Halt island. Because when Conrad was on the phone with him he said "you already have the evidence, it's right under your nose" and right after that Conrad found the news article in his colleague's office. Patrick probably assumed (correctly) from the news article that the girl had accompanied her father's body to be buried and had seen where it was buried. -
revivebill — 17 years ago(May 25, 2008 10:48 AM)
Any1 found it stupid that Dr. Conrad threw away the red duby at the end of the movie?!?!?! first of all, it was evidence for the case and also, it was obiosuly worth alot of money, so is there any sense at all of throwing it away??? I also hated how Dr. Conrad didnt wanna hurt or kill the main bad guy, so he just threw him in the ditch. And, coincidently, there was a gun there that dr. conrad didnt know about. TYPICAL HOLLYWOOD MOVIE!
-
becwalker — 17 years ago(August 28, 2008 04:52 PM)
I agree with what everyone is saying - it does have a lot of plot holes and when you come to think of it, a lot of things didn't make sense.
BUT, the bottom line is, IMO, the film held my attention all the way through and sufficiently distracted me from work I was supposed to be doing on my computer and it was enjoyable in a forgettable kind of way.
It's not the kind of film I'd choose to watch again but if it was on TV again (like it was tonight), I'd probably have it on in the background. -
nobiggie — 17 years ago(December 11, 2008 05:16 PM)
I loved watching the movie in the theater when it came out and I still enjoy it whenever I catch it on tv and I would even buy the DVD and what the OP wrote makes all the sense in the world too.
"Empire Records, open 'til midnight". -
canuckteach — 17 years ago(January 25, 2009 06:18 AM)
it's Sean Bean versus Michael Douglas, villain vs. hero. the
diamond
is the 'MacGuffin'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacGuffin
, the term coined by Alfred Hitchcock to designate a device that drives the plot. it's a suspense film. if you want gritty realism, watch '48 Hours' or 'Cold Cases' on A&E TV.
Both 'leads' are great - who cares about plot holes? Sean Bean is the perfect villain: rugged but charismatic and charming. He does the same thing in 'National Treasure'. Michael Douglas is imminently watchable, when he's 'on'.
Speakin of MD, try him as a hunter in 'Ghost and the Darkness' - before you start hacking at the premise of that film (lions eating railway workers), check the History books: the screenplay is based on an incident that took place in Africa in the late 1800's (no, it's not a documentary, and no, there's no live archival footage, but, yes, you can go see the actual lions in Chicago. sorry - they're dead now).
but if you want to tear up plot holes, switch over to 'Panic Room' at imdb - it holds an Olympic Gold Medal! lol
canuckteach -
Mex5150 — 16 years ago(May 10, 2009 07:44 AM)
Hi
DON"T SAY A WORD
If
you
hadn't you would seem much more intelligent LOL
How do the kidnappers know the girl has hidden the diamond?
Ruby
NOT
Diamond.
How does the girl know what the kidnappers want (hence the famous line, "I'll never tell" and "You want what they want")?
If she watches her farther die pretty much at their hands after watching him put the ruby in her doll, it should be quite easy to work out.
This number is a distant memory
It's the last interaction she had with her dead farther, hardly an unimportant distant memory.
in the mind of a mentally ill girl,
She is
NOT
mentally ill.
and there is no reason for her to associate this number with a hidden diamond she shouldn't even know exists.
re-read the above.
How is Dr. Conrad able to completely diagnose her in about 30 minutes when 20 other psychiatrists never even came close?
Because we are led to believe he is the best of the best coming to the case completely fresh and not just running a production line of the standard illnesses the other doctors would have been.
Why do the kidnappers give Dr. Conrad only until 5pm to pry the information out of this girl when she hasn't opened up to anyone, ever?
Not directly answered but they obviously want their loot sooner rather than later, Sachs who was also involved presumably told them about Conrad, and may have suggested a possible time-scale knowing his past performance on other cases.
They've waited ten years,
While they were locked up.
why not just give him more time?
Exactly how long do you think they should be happy to wait for their ill gotten gains?
I could continue, but just can't be bothered, it's people like you who would rather point out non-existent plot holes than actually think about what you have just watched that is ruining cinema. I'm not saying this is the best movie ever, it most certainly is not, but it doesn't make you big to point out holes that just aren't there. This is exactly why hollywould has to dumb everything down and spoon-feed the audience every answer no matter how unimportant now. To hell with making good movies, they better not do that, some idiot who can't think their way out of a paper bag will make such a brouhaha complaining there just wouldn't be a point.
~Mex
Did you ever notice that people who believe in creationism look really un-evolved? -
FishHeadSweety — 16 years ago(July 11, 2009 05:40 PM)
I'm about to watch it. maybe it's supposed to be supid so we can make fun of it, like DAY AFTER TOMORROW where global warming causes an ice age and ships float around New York City and magic tents save Dennis Quaid from flash freezing.
Ask a fish head anything you want to, they won't answer. They can't talk.