First of all I'd like to say that this was a great film. Implausible yes...but very very enjoyable. The writers got everything "right" until the final scene...
*** SPOILER ***
I may be alone in noticing this, but it has to be said. The final scene involves the 1999 Quaid blowing the killer away with a shotgun...fine. However how stupid are the writers??? Moments before we see the killer being trailed by the cops - who find indisputable evidence that he is in fact the serial killer. Then we see a scene where the cops race to Quaid who has just been attacked by the killer...and the cops now believe to be dead...again makes sense. Then we see the (obviously not dead) killer attack Quaid and his family...Quaid then blows his hand off with a shotgun.
Ok plausible so far.
Then we see Quaid in 1999 shoot the killer dead....WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Follow me here...the killer was a cop and there was indisputable evidence that it was him. Quaid blows his hand off. So what we have now is a serial killer cop with one hand walking around....for 30 years????!!! So are we to believe that the police force took him back and said "don't worry, we know you've learnt your lesson"??????
And what about the other women???? Whats to say that they didn't still die??? Are we supposed to just think "oh well its ok because Quaid's wife survived"????? COME ON!!!
Really poor ending that could have been solved without any extra budget...Quaid should have killed him in 1969 and then walked in at the end in 1999. Simple. Effective. Flawless.
*** END OF SPOILER ***
It really annoyed me that they went to such attention to detail only to let all down in the last 2 minutes. Still worth a watch for anyone who hasn't seen it...but have a bucket ready to puke into for the crappy ending.
*** SPOILER ***
I may be alone in noticing this, but it has to be said. The final scene involves the 1999 Quaid blowing the killer away with a shotgun...fine. However how stupid are the writers??? Moments before we see the killer being trailed by the cops - who find indisputable evidence that he is in fact the serial killer. Then we see a scene where the cops race to Quaid who has just been attacked by the killer...and the cops now believe to be dead...again makes sense. Then we see the (obviously not dead) killer attack Quaid and his family...Quaid then blows his hand off with a shotgun.
Ok plausible so far.
Then we see Quaid in 1999 shoot the killer dead....WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Follow me here...the killer was a cop and there was indisputable evidence that it was him. Quaid blows his hand off. So what we have now is a serial killer cop with one hand walking around....for 30 years????!!! So are we to believe that the police force took him back and said "don't worry, we know you've learnt your lesson"??????
And what about the other women???? Whats to say that they didn't still die??? Are we supposed to just think "oh well its ok because Quaid's wife survived"????? COME ON!!!
Really poor ending that could have been solved without any extra budget...Quaid should have killed him in 1969 and then walked in at the end in 1999. Simple. Effective. Flawless.
*** END OF SPOILER ***
It really annoyed me that they went to such attention to detail only to let all down in the last 2 minutes. Still worth a watch for anyone who hasn't seen it...but have a bucket ready to puke into for the crappy ending.
Tell Your Friends