Howard's reactions: justified?!
-
timax_911 — 9 years ago(December 07, 2016 01:13 AM)
All the points you have made are justifiables in crisis times.
1.You can be strict over someone until you can trust the person.
2. You can defend yourself if someone is being aggresive or did plan to take over you and your proprety.
3. You can defend yourself if someone is conspiring on you based on assumptions. -
Stovepipe99 — 9 years ago(December 07, 2016 02:17 PM)
I'll just keep asking this, because everyone who seems to think Howard was in the right always ignores it:
Why, after
killing Emmett
does Howard say to Michelle "Now it's just you and me, the way it was always meant to be"?
Dude is a kidnapper. Period. His intentions toward Michelle are unhealthy and (probably) dangerous. Period.
So many people on this site seem determined to see him as this good citizen with a few quirks who "saved" Michelle.
I stand pretty firm by my opinion that he is a mentally ill kidnapper (and probably also murderer) whose priority is taking someone captive and who just happens to actually "save" her by coincidence.
And if you're going to defend Howard (which I can just barely understand), I don't see how you (not YOU specifically, Timax_911, but the many people who do defend him) can then turn around and act like Michelle is irrational and evil. If Howard's actions are understandable in the context of the movie, I don't understand why Michelle's aren't. -
timax_911 — 9 years ago(December 08, 2016 01:31 AM)
Why, after does Howard say to Michelle "Now it's just you and me, the way it was always meant to be"?
Howard- He was making a weapon, he was gonna hurt us. It's okay.
Fact: Emmett told him he was going to steal his weapon and take over him. His reaction is justified.
Howard- This was the way it was always supposed to be. You are safe. Now it just you and me.
Fact- Howard has faith and the director shown it many times in the movie. Howard is a believer and he talked about redemption, the Bible and the Ark. When someone believe in fate and believe in a almighty God, he believes that even the worst must happen for a reason. It's the same thing with the girl who tried to enter the shelter. Michelle didn't open the door because she knows the girl will had contaminated and killed everybody. It was meant to be, it was always supposed to be this way. Now that Howard killed the threat in the shelter, she is safe and this is only her and him in the shelter. Those are facts.
Dude is a kidnapper. Period. His intentions toward Michelle are unhealthy and (probably) dangerous. Period.
Saying period isn't proving or helping proving it.
What is proving that he is a kidnapper?
What is unhealthy and dangerous?
Period?
So many people on this site seem determined to see him as this good citizen with a few quirks who "saved" Michelle.
I could say the same to you. This is mistery movie and your stand isn't even proving a point of the movie. Are you afraid that everything you were thinking about this movie was false? Did he saves her by bringing her in the shelter? Yes, and he even bring another person.
I stand pretty firm by my opinion that he is a mentally ill kidnapper (and probably also murderer) whose priority is taking someone captive and who just happens to actually "save" her by coincidence.
What is proving that he is a mentally ill kidnapper? oh and probably a murderer, is he or isn't?
I don't really understand your logic. ''whose priority is taking someone captive'' Did you watch the movie? He save her by bringing her into a shelter otherwise she will have die on the road by being not aware of the catastrophe. He did say her accident was his fault and to be forgiven, he saves her. This was not a coincidence and he explained himself in the movie.
And if you're going to defend Howard (which I can just barely understand), I don't see how you (not YOU specifically, Timax_911, but the many people who do defend him) can then turn around and act like Michelle is irrational and evil. If Howard's actions are understandable in the context of the movie, I don't understand why Michelle's aren't.
I don't defend Howard because this is pretty clear that the movie shows nothing to prove a murdering.
From the beginning Michelle is skeptic. Firstly, his boyfriend call her and said
-Look, we had an argument. Couples fight. That is no reason to leave everything behind.
Doesn't that prove that she is unstable or she is jumping on conclusion really quick. She is making assumptions in the entire movie. Those assumptions is making her aggresive and unstable. She first acted with a survival instinct but even after everything was explained she was unstable. On the other hand, Howard was not aggressive but on defense. He clearly was calm because he was ready to this.
Again, i want to hear those arguments that prove a kidnap has really happened in the shelter in this movie.
I did wrote a thread on this forum:
So a perfectionist, disciplined, strict and wide-awake guy forgot to check the second entrance where his air is purified? According to the assumptions of Michelle he didn't see, in the last 2 years, the bloody carved HELP in the window. He didn't see the obnoxiously and obvious forgotten clue, right at the bottom of the ladder, that could only be associated to a missing girl that wear those earring in a particular photo hidden in a book that she analyzed for a couple of seconds and a couple of days before. Assumptions isn't making a person bad. -
abbadon-hades — 9 years ago(January 21, 2017 04:47 AM)
Emmet confirmed that the girl in the photo was a girl that had gone missing two years before the events in this movie. There's the scratched help on the airlock, and the necklace at the bottom of the ladder. All pretty strong indications of Howard being a kidnapper.
There's also the moment during the quiz where Howard refuses to acknowledge even the possibility of the answer to the question being "woman", rather than princess or little girl. There are secrets here, and it doesn't look like Howard is all there.
Based on these factors I think Michelle's behaviour is quite rational.
Maybe poker's just not your game Ike. I know, let's have a spelling contest.
(Tombstone) -
Stovepipe99 — 9 years ago(December 08, 2016 01:32 PM)
An etched "HELP" with a bloody earring apparently is not evidence of anything.
The fact that the bloody earring matches another girl (either his daughter or another girl), who was in a photo with Howard doesn't mean anything.
And those saying Howard was too fussy to leave it there for two yearswell, wouldn't that same guy have at least checked that room as part of routine maintenance? That would mean Howard hasn't checked his own air filtrationor whatever it wassystem in that amount of time. Also, note that just because someone
disappears
at a certain time, doesn't mean they died that same time. Who knows how long a kidnapped girl might have been kept in that bunker before being killed? For all we know, the message could have been scratched into the glass days before he takes Michelle, with no time for Howard to properly change out the hatch.
A man who conveniently has the means to
chain someone to a wall
is probably, just like, you know, being prepared for if someone goes crazy in the bunker. He's just being prepared, guys!
Also, it's totally normal to yell "NO TOUCHING!" when someone goes to help someone else who is falling. That's a normal thing to do when you have a healthy relationship with that person.
Just poor, innocent, logical Howard's bad luck that he rescued such an ungrateful sociopath. -
timax_911 — 9 years ago(December 08, 2016 05:26 PM)
You don't seem to realize this is not reality but movie's characters. This is a mistery movie, we are supposed to question everything and everything will never be answered.
An etched "HELP" with a bloody earring apparently is not evidence of anything.
It's an evidence but it prove nothing. Here an example, i put a bloody knife in your room, did that prove that you are a murderer? So this is why everything must be seen as a IF.
The fact that the bloody earring matches another girl (either his daughter or another girl), who was in a photo with Howard doesn't mean anything.
It means something. It means that it belong to someone who has been here.
Here what we are being told throught the movie by only deduction from characthers, not a narration or someone in charge of the law.
Howard said he has child that live with his mother. She is named Megan.
He showed a picture of his daughter to Michelle.
Michelle found a earring and a message carved inside the air filtration room.
Emmett look at the photo and said this was not his daughter but someone who went to highschool with his little sister.
Every rational question is skipped and Emmett and Michelle are now assuming that Howard is a murderer.
A man who conveniently has the means to chain someone to a wall is probably, just like, you know, being prepared for if someone goes crazy in the bunker. He's just being prepared, guys!
You just answered yourself by being sarcastic. What do you think prison are for? This is the reality we live in. We trap and chain criminals in a confined room before we can trust them to return to the civilization. Howard was prepared to eventualities that someone needed corrections before trusting them.
Also, it's totally normal to yell "NO TOUCHING!" when someone goes to help someone else who is falling. That's a normal thing to do when you have a healthy relationship with that person.
That is a normal thing to do when you think of every eventually that could happened between a woman and a man in a bunker. He first said ''keep your hand to yourself'', it is totally normal that he don't want them to help each other before he can trust both of them. This is the first day in the bunker and he and she has already try to escape and made a mess in the bunker.He want them to listen to them because they need someone to rule, someone who need to be listen because if both of convince one another to plotting over Howard he is numerically disadvantage. This is his bunker and his rules. ''no touching'' it means what it said. You don't want people to fornicate in a bunker for three reasons. This is not a healthy place for a baby, relationship can create problem and this is the last thing you want in a small bunker for 2 to 10 years and this is another mouth to feed.
Now What if:
the girl on the photo is really Megan and Emmett is mistaken the girl for someone else.
What if the girl who went missing is just a red herring.
What if Megan was there in the bunker with Howard, Emmett and Michelle and she did try to escape and put at risk everyone in the bunker. So Howard did kill her to save them. Hence this is why Howard didn't respond to Michelle when she said:
Michelle- You don't know there gone
Howard- Anyway, at least i tried to help them. -
Stovepipe99 — 9 years ago(December 11, 2016 03:31 PM)
It's an evidence but it prove nothing. Here an example, i put a bloody knife in your room, did that prove that you are a murderer? So this is why everything must be seen as a IF.
I would argue that sneaking inside Howard's bunker and up into that room (which we are told is really hard to do from the inside and I doubt Howard leaves the hatch unlocked), etching the word "HELP" into the inside of the glass, and planting a bloody earring (and blood!) that just happens to match a girl who is in a photo with Howard (seemingly in the bunker) is one hell of a frame job. I find it really unbelievable that Howard would have given Emmett access to the hatch in that room, and it's established that it takes a smaller frame to get through the ducts.
Yes, we are allowed to question everything. Technically everything could be an if. Like, what if Michelle found the earring in the bunker, crept up into that room, etched the HELP herself, snuck back out, and then repressed the memory of ever doing it? Technically, that is a possibility. But it's not at all plausible, IMO. As an audience we need to make deductions, and the fact that the earring on the girl in the photo matches the earring up in the room says a lot to me.
Flip your example: if someone has been murdered and a bloody knife found in the room of a person who had means and opportunity to kill the victim, then without a
plausible
explanation as to how the knife got there, I'd say the bloody knife is good evidence of guilt. And given how controlling Howard is about his bunker, I'd say that just casually sneaking in and planting evidence there would not be easy.
the girl on the photo is really Megan and Emmett is mistaken the girl for someone else.
It doesn't change the fact that someone climbed through the ducts to that room and carved the word "HELP" into the window. The earrings match. I think it speaks very negatively of Howard if his daughter got to that point of desperationit would imply he was holding her hostage in the bunker.
What if the girl who went missing is just a red herring.
You mean there is a missing girl but she's not connected to the plot? To me the only thing that matters is that the girl in the photo carved that message.
What if Megan was there in the bunker with Howard, Emmett and Michelle and she did try to escape and put at risk everyone in the bunker. So Howard did kill her to save them.
Emmett would be aware of her being there (because he arrives as the disaster is happening). I find it really weird he wouldn't mention Megan being there. Do you mean he'd been keeping Megan there for a long time, or that he just brought her in when the disaster happened?
In any event, I don't think there are any
plausible
explanations for the message and the bloody earring. I admit there are many possibilities, but none of them seem likely enough for me to take seriously.
''no touching'' it means what it said. You don't want people to fornicate in a bunker
There is nothing sexual (or even romantic) about keeping a woman with a leg injury from falling down. The idea that helping an injured person is just one step away from fornication is overdramatic. Anyone living in such close quarters is going to end up touching each other. I mean, I shared a house with two guys and of course there was a ton of non-sexual touching. He's within his rights to quash any romantic/sexual stuff, but that is so clearly not what Emmett is intending. And Howard has no problem with touching Michelle or getting into her immediate physical space.
And I know a ton of guys on here are like "It's his bunker! He's the alphahe gets to be bossy and in their faces!", but frankly all I see in Howard's actions is just a typical pattern of abuse and control that he probably exhibited before it was bunker time. -
ConnerForReal — 9 years ago(December 14, 2016 05:23 PM)
IMO, Howard planned to kidnap Michelle from the beginning. Remember at the beginning Michelle stop at the gas station and she notice there's another car pull-in behind her with big headlight like a truck? I think that's Howard and he was following Michelle after that and ram her car when he saw a chance.
So i think, Howard did not planed to save her. He was always planned to kidnap her and it's just happen that the invasion happen right after that.
Just my opinion -
aweir14150 — 9 years ago(January 10, 2017 09:01 PM)
Number 1 is plausible. What if she wakes up, panics and leaves the bunker? Chaining her up and then explaining the situation as soon as she comes to. Instead we get the usual Hollywood-style frustrating "slow disclosure in short order".