[002]
TearDrop
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Here\'s why it\'s not a contradiction: There\'s only two things we know, for a fact, about the assassin in question (well, besides the obvious stuff like \
to:
bbb
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Here\'s why it\'s not a contradiction: There\'s only two things we know, for a fact, about the assassin in question (well, besides the obvious stuff like \
to:
Here\\\'s why it\\\'s not a contradiction: There\\\'s only two things we know, for a fact, about the assassin in question (well, besides the obvious stuff like \\\"Middle Eastern male, black hair, tattoos, prone to violence, etc.\\\"):
1. He has the tattoo of the order that guards the dagger, \\\\\\\\
2. He is currently an assassin employed by Nizam.
Certain things can be inferred from those two pieces of information (and, indeed, that\\\'s what Tamina does; recall we don\\\'t have confirmation of her theory either). However, we don\\\'t know anything about him beyond the above facts. Most pertinently, we don\\\'t know:
A. his personal beliefs about the dagger, its powers, and the Hourglass,\\\\\\\\
B. his personal beliefs about Nizam and his scheme, \\\\\\\\
C. how and why he went from being a Guardian to being an assassin.
The \\\"contradiction\\\" relies on facts about those three points, which we don\\\'t have because they never state them in the movie. You can\\\'t have a contradiction if there\\\'s nothing stated.
You say that he\\\'s \\\"helping Nizam to destroy the world,\\\" when we have no evidence that that\\\'s how he looks at it--you\\\'re assuming he does. Tamina says that\\\'s what would happen, but Nizam clearly doesn\\\'t think that\\\'s the case, and it\\\'s Nizam, not Tamina, that hired the assassins. Ergo, even if he does let the Assassins in on the details of his EvilPlan (which we\\\'re not shown and he has little, if any, reason to--hell, telling them the details would probably be detrimental to the whole deal; for all we know, he just told them, \\\"Kill this kid and bring me his dagger, he went thataway,\\\"), the presentation would have ended, \\\"And I will reward you once I\\\'m king,\\\" not \\\"And then the world will end.\\\"
As for the BatmanBegins example, fair enough, the \\\"at all\\\" was a bit much. However, there\\\'s obviously degrees of grey between \\\"decent city with a few inevitable criminals\\\" and \\\"so many criminals the city just implodes on itself.\\\" The League of Shadows clearly thought Gotham was closer to the latter, probably somewhere around \\\"So many criminals it\\\'s not worth it to fight them directly,\\\" and gave them a push; Ra\\\'s doesn\\\'t take credit for even the majority of the criminality in Gotham, just for pushing it further than it had been. Also, run-of-the-mill criminals aren\\\'t the only thing the League of Shadows takes issue with in Gotham; I believe Ra\\\'s goes on about decadent aristocracy, corruption (i.e., less obvious and economically motivated criminals), and such as well. (This bit of the discussion, of course, would be better placed on that film\\\'s page rather than this one.)
I was saying that you\\\'re clearly more invested in pointing out the flaws you see in a movie you don\\\'t like than one you do.
For #1, we don\\\'t necessarily \\\"need\\\" it, no. It\\\'s a HandWave because if it wasn\\\'t there, you would likely be asking, \\\"How did Nizam know about all this stuff these people were supposed to keep secret?\\\" and I\\\'d be here saying \\\"Well, maybe he bribed one of the Guardians\\\". Secondly, as I said, we don\\\'t know much about him, but the fact he\\\'s no longer a guardian is at least \\\'\\\'some\\\'\\\' indication that he doesn\\\'t really buy into their beliefs; as you\\\'ve pointed out, if he \\\'\\\'did\\\'\\\' believe using the dagger would end the world, he wouldn\\\'t likely be helping Nizam, money or no. So in the absense of confirmation, it\\\'s more logical to conclude that he\\\'s not a True Believer in the dagger\\\'s power.
For #2, I was stating the facts we see in the movie: He\\\'s an assassin, Nizam hired the assassins, ergo, he\\\'s there because Nizam hired him. I don\\\'t see how that\\\'s stretching.
If you think that would make a more interesting plot, then by all means write it up. I, for one, thought the writers were plenty creative, and quite good at faking the viewer out by making you suspect the brothers first, and as someone who has brothers, was very refreshed to see they stuck by each other in the end rather than pull the expected CainAndAbel thing.
How about we just drop talking about the quality of the film (which we\\\'re likely \\\'\\\'never\\\'\\\' going to agree on) and stick to the facts of the case, as it were, vis a vis the alleged \\\"plot hole\\\"?
1. He has the tattoo of the order that guards the dagger, \\\\\\\\
2. He is currently an assassin employed by Nizam.
Certain things can be inferred from those two pieces of information (and, indeed, that\\\'s what Tamina does; recall we don\\\'t have confirmation of her theory either). However, we don\\\'t know anything about him beyond the above facts. Most pertinently, we don\\\'t know:
A. his personal beliefs about the dagger, its powers, and the Hourglass,\\\\\\\\
B. his personal beliefs about Nizam and his scheme, \\\\\\\\
C. how and why he went from being a Guardian to being an assassin.
The \\\"contradiction\\\" relies on facts about those three points, which we don\\\'t have because they never state them in the movie. You can\\\'t have a contradiction if there\\\'s nothing stated.
You say that he\\\'s \\\"helping Nizam to destroy the world,\\\" when we have no evidence that that\\\'s how he looks at it--you\\\'re assuming he does. Tamina says that\\\'s what would happen, but Nizam clearly doesn\\\'t think that\\\'s the case, and it\\\'s Nizam, not Tamina, that hired the assassins. Ergo, even if he does let the Assassins in on the details of his EvilPlan (which we\\\'re not shown and he has little, if any, reason to--hell, telling them the details would probably be detrimental to the whole deal; for all we know, he just told them, \\\"Kill this kid and bring me his dagger, he went thataway,\\\"), the presentation would have ended, \\\"And I will reward you once I\\\'m king,\\\" not \\\"And then the world will end.\\\"
As for the BatmanBegins example, fair enough, the \\\"at all\\\" was a bit much. However, there\\\'s obviously degrees of grey between \\\"decent city with a few inevitable criminals\\\" and \\\"so many criminals the city just implodes on itself.\\\" The League of Shadows clearly thought Gotham was closer to the latter, probably somewhere around \\\"So many criminals it\\\'s not worth it to fight them directly,\\\" and gave them a push; Ra\\\'s doesn\\\'t take credit for even the majority of the criminality in Gotham, just for pushing it further than it had been. Also, run-of-the-mill criminals aren\\\'t the only thing the League of Shadows takes issue with in Gotham; I believe Ra\\\'s goes on about decadent aristocracy, corruption (i.e., less obvious and economically motivated criminals), and such as well. (This bit of the discussion, of course, would be better placed on that film\\\'s page rather than this one.)
I was saying that you\\\'re clearly more invested in pointing out the flaws you see in a movie you don\\\'t like than one you do.
For #1, we don\\\'t necessarily \\\"need\\\" it, no. It\\\'s a HandWave because if it wasn\\\'t there, you would likely be asking, \\\"How did Nizam know about all this stuff these people were supposed to keep secret?\\\" and I\\\'d be here saying \\\"Well, maybe he bribed one of the Guardians\\\". Secondly, as I said, we don\\\'t know much about him, but the fact he\\\'s no longer a guardian is at least \\\'\\\'some\\\'\\\' indication that he doesn\\\'t really buy into their beliefs; as you\\\'ve pointed out, if he \\\'\\\'did\\\'\\\' believe using the dagger would end the world, he wouldn\\\'t likely be helping Nizam, money or no. So in the absense of confirmation, it\\\'s more logical to conclude that he\\\'s not a True Believer in the dagger\\\'s power.
For #2, I was stating the facts we see in the movie: He\\\'s an assassin, Nizam hired the assassins, ergo, he\\\'s there because Nizam hired him. I don\\\'t see how that\\\'s stretching.
If you think that would make a more interesting plot, then by all means write it up. I, for one, thought the writers were plenty creative, and quite good at faking the viewer out by making you suspect the brothers first, and as someone who has brothers, was very refreshed to see they stuck by each other in the end rather than pull the expected CainAndAbel thing.
How about we just drop talking about the quality of the film (which we\\\'re likely \\\'\\\'never\\\'\\\' going to agree on) and stick to the facts of the case, as it were, vis a vis the alleged \\\"plot hole\\\"?
