A casual viewer wouldn't know if what they saw meant something or was the film makers being lazy. Question : When Kimble got his foot stuck in the door and was trying to escape, Gerard shot him in the chest several times. A little excessive and unnecessary, but Kimble was convicted of murder and was running the streets, so to Gerard he could've posed a severe threat. But then once Kimble fell down and was apparently subdued, why would Gerard shoot him in the head? He was supposed to take him in, not kill him.
If the glass wasn't bulletproof, surely Gerard would've gone to jail himself. I know in action movies the characters have the right to kill whoever they want whenever they want, but this just seems way too far-fetched and actually rather comical in a really dark and sadistic way.
I'm not talking about Gerard repeatedly shooting the glass after it's clear it's bulletproof, I'm talking about before that. Gerard shoots Kimble repeatedly in the chest thinking he actually got him, Kimble fell over in shock and Gerard thought it was because of the bullet wounds, but then while Kimble's on the floor, Gerard points his gun at Kimble's head and shoots.
Answer: In this whole scene what bugs me and I consider this a major error in the character development that by the time of the attempted head-shot because it was one , Gerard had already started second guessing himself.
It was obvious that something's not right about Kimble's guiltiness even for this non-negotiating old dog and it was beautifully portrayed throughout the movie including the touching ending scene. However, at the above moment, everything fell out of character and all of a sudden, the Marshal wants to kill the man and let the mystery never to be solved.
Answer: Kimble doesn't fall from shock, he falls because his foot is caught in the door and he loses his balance. And Girard never thought he'd hit Kimble, which is why he keeps firing after Kimble is on the ground; he's still trying to incapacitate him.
He's not aiming for Kimble's head per se, it's just that on the ground, Kimble presents a much smaller target, so his head is just as likely to be hit as the rest of him his still-vulnerable foot, for example. Perhaps if the glass had not been bulletproof and Girard had, in fact, killed him, Girard would have been in trouble, but since Girard did not intend to kill Kimble, he probably wouldn't have been punished too severely. It is fairly clear that Gerard is shooting to kill. Police officers and U.
Marshals do not discharge their firearms unless they intend to kill. Upon observing that the bullets were stopped by the glass and Kimble was unharmed, Gerard shoots again, hoping that he would be lucky enough to breach the glass. Gerard is justified in shooting to kill. A convicted murderer i. That he had entered and was fleeing from a penitentiary is even greater incentive for shooting. Kimble is innocent, but that is something that the audience knows and that Gerard does not.
When Kimble claimed that he hadn't shot his wife, Gerard replied "I don't care! Tommy Lee Jones even insisted that his line "That's not my problem" be changed to "I don't care", because not-caring implies disbelief rather than willful blindness. Question : In real life, when are cops allowed to shoot people? I find it hard to believe Samuel Gerard would have been allowed to shoot Richard repeatedly in the torso just for running away from him. I know the glass was bulletproof in that scene, but Gerard didn't know that.
Chosen answer: Richard is a convicted murderer on the run. A police officer would be justified in shooting him to prevent him from injuring anyone or taking a hostage. Question : Originally, the plan was to kill Richard himself rather than his wife in order to keep him quiet about Provasic causing liver damage. But wouldn't Devlin MacGregor eventually have had to deal with the side effects anyway, especially when the wrongful death lawsuits began pouring in?
I know some suspension of disbelief is required, but this still seems like a stretch. Answer: Not really. If anybody raises a wrongful death lawsuit against them, Devlin MacGregor's high-priced lawyers can just point to their battery of "successful" test results to show that no side-effects occurred during their comprehensive testing.
If they then dig deeper into the case, then, lo and behold, it's revealed that the tests were all faked, with the fake results signed off on by Dr Alexander Lentz, who was, rather conveniently, tragically killed in a car accident. It would be easy to cast Lentz as the villain, faking the test results for his own reasons, which gets Devlin MacGregor off the hook. In all probability, the original idea was to frame Kimble for the fraudulent testing - with Kimble killed in a "burglary gone wrong", he could easily be used as a scapegoat.
When things went awry and Kimble's wife was killed instead, this gave them the perfect angle to completely discredit Kimble, taking him out of the equation, and they switched to a replacement plan of using Lentz as their scapegoat, forging his signature on the test results and arranging the car accident that killed him. Question : At what scene in the movie does Deputy Gerard know Richard was innocent? Answer: He appears to be convinced that Kimble is innocent right after he and the other agents break into Sykes house and find incriminating evidence.
Gerard realises that Kimble sent him there to prove his innocence. Answer: I don't think Gerard absolutely knew about Kimble's innocence until much later in the film when he is informed Nichols and Lentz knew each other. Kimble's visit to Sykes' house obviously was a significant moment, however there's also a short scene where Gerard mentions how much money Devlin MacGregor makes in a year and thus that makes them a "monster.
Gerard isn't going to run around accusing a major company of fraud, conspiracy, murder, etc. When he learns that Lentz died during the previous summer, but then even more importantly also is told that Nichols and Lentz knew each other This was after the U.
Marshals visited Nichols and he denied ever having known Lentz , then Gerard finally puts all the pieces together in his own mind. Unfortunately, on the way to arrest Nichols At the very least for obstruction of justice, as Gerard states that Nichols "lied to me" they learn that Kimble has been spotted heading toward the hotel and reportedly has already shot a cop on a train The audience knows Kimble is innocent of that act, but the characters in the movie don't.
Gerard quickly deduces that Kimble has figured out that Nichols was involved in the conspiracy and that's why Kimble is going to the motel, in order to confront Nichols. Question : At one point, Kimble steals an ambulance. We then cut to the U. S Marshals, who say "An ambulance has been spotted They then run off to intercept it. But surely there's more than one ambulance in that area, and surely more than one person has seen an ambulance in that time?
Answer: True, but if they cannot contact this one or it is seen driving eratically or out of it's designated area, that is sufficent to cause suspicion. Question : How does Kimble get the new set of clothes after leaving the "Men Only" hotel after the St. Patrick's Day parade? Is this an allusion to some inappropriate activity? Answer: While it is not specifically shown how he got the clothes, the "inappropriate activity" would likely be that he had stolen them.
They could also have been donated clothing that was available to those in need. Answer: He got cash from Nichols when he stopped him outside of the tennis club.
That is how he was able to buy clothes, etc. Question : What does the woman ask her son in Polish? Answer: She says: "What do you think?
I think he is going like it. Question : How much time does this movie cover? I ask because when Sykes is being interrogated, he says he was questioned about Helen Kimble's murder a year ago.
And Nichols says that Lentz died last summer, but Richard saw him at the fundraiser the same night his wife died. Is this a mistake or is there something I'm missing? Chosen answer: Murder investigations are not, as a rule, speedy processes; it's quite plausible that a year could have passed between Helen Kimble's murder and her husband's conviction for the crime. The police have to gather evidence, question witnesses, put their case together and so forth.
The main body of the film, from Kimble's escape onwards, probably only covers at most a few weeks, but Helen Kimble would undoubtedly have died some considerable time prior to that. The time periods stated in the film are quite reasonable. Lentz was alive when Helen was killed, he was killed while Richard was in prison which is why Richard doesn't realise until closer to the end that Lentz is dead.
With Sykes saying he was interviewed about Helen's death over a year ago it leads us to believe the timeline of the movie is months. Answer: Sam Gerard and his team question the one armed man in his residence, they show him a picture of Richard Kimble and suspect him of murdering his wife. He replies, he went over this a year ago with the police.
At every opportunity, Dr. Kimble denies his guilt and his denials, in conjunction with is caring actions, force Gerard to consider information he has already determined as unimportant. Kimble to help wounded police, steal ambulances, jump off dams, return to Chicago, allow his whereabouts to be determined; etc. It will also force him to consider the question of Dr. Gerard believes that the less focused Dr.
Kimble sees his seemingly unpredictable efforts as what keeps him one step in front of the law. When it is known that Dr. Kimble is indeed alive, Gerard is able to get his people moving; when it is discovered that Dr. Kimble did not die from his jump off of the dam, Gerard is again able to start up the cat and mouse game; when Gerard discovers why Dr. At the beginning of the story, Dr. However, over the course of the story Dr. Nichols unconscious as Dr. Nichols attempts to shoot Gerard.
Everyone is concerned for Dr. Will he prove his innocence? Will he expose the real murderer s? The fugitives will fall into despair at their recapture and death sentences; the humiliation or worse of having RDU90 be found to have horrible side effects; Dr. Nichols plans for the future would be dashed and he would have to become a fugitive or worse; Gerard and his FBI team would suffer self-doubt or possibly be doubted by their superiors and co-workers.
Nichols becomes a cold hearted, calculating murderer; Gerard becomes a caring person—which is not considered a plus for someone in his position; Dr. Kimble is delivered food as he shaves in the hospital; he gets a ride to Chicago unexpectedly; Dr. Nichols gets to be guest speaker at the medical convention; Dr.
Kimble gets evidence of the RDU90 test results tampering; Dr. Kimble gets some funding from Dr. Nichols must be able to maintain composure in normally threatening circumstances with the police so that they will not be able to connect him to the Kimble murder; Dr.
The FBI are generally one step behind Dr. Everybody is concerned with what happened at the scene of the crime. Who was there, what happened, who did what to whom, etc. Everyone is concerned with the progress of the fugitives. How fast are they going?
How far are they getting? How close are they to being caught? The drug company and Dr. Nichols are concerned about the future of the new drug as exemplified by the convention; Dr.
Nichols is concerned about securing his future and has the hitman Sykes try to take out Dr. Kimble; the cops are concerned with ridding Chicago of the fugitive s ; etc. Heedless of the consequences, Dr. Nichols forgets about the future and decides to risk everything by attempting to kill Dr. Kimble is—they know that—and cordon off the hotel to keep him in one place for the time being; Dr.
Kimble focuses on the moment to confront Dr. Nichols with his treachery and the drugs negative effects; etc. How did events get twisted so much that he is determined to be the murderer? Gerard yells out to Richard and tells him that he's not only trapped, but the CPD thinks that he killed an officer on the train and if he doesn't give himself up, he'll be shot on site.
Gerard also says that he knows of Richard's innocence, as well as what really happened on the night of his wife's murder: Nichols had borrowed Richard's car and he had the keys to his house, which was how Sykes got in without forced entry and he also telephoned Sykes from Richard's car. Nichols manages to knock out Renfro with a hanging gurney and then takes his gun to shoot Gerard, but Richard takes a steel pipe and knocks him out. In the aftermath, Sykes and Nichols are taken into custody, and Gerard escorts Richard out of the hotel in handcuffs.
In the back of their car, Gerard removes the handcuffs, and gives Richard a small bag of ice for his bruised hands. The car then pulls away as Richard is being driven off to be exonerated while Nichols and Sykes are taken to face charges for their crimes and presumably receive the death sentence that was originally for Richard. Die Hard scenario Wiki Explore. Speed Speed 2: Cruise Control. Recent blog posts Forum.
Explore Wikis Community Central. Register Don't have an account? Charles Nichols. Edit source History Talk 0.
0コメント