# Movie scenes / plots that you've never understood **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [December 27, 2010, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517 "2010-12-27T15:09:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/81 "2010-12-29T06:02:25Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > That’s supposedly true of the version that was released. But the original version of the film make things much more clear. It also lacked some of the best scenes (Bogart and Bacall discussing horse racing, for instance 🙂 ). The studio wanted more scenes of them together, and the addition of those scenes (and the deletion of others that helped explain the plot) made the movie more convoluted. Sounds like the original version would have been clearer than the book, then: it’s said that Chandler himself couldn’t figure out who offed one of the characters. ---
**Author:** ![eenerms](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/cdc98d/32.png) [@eenerms](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eenerms)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 10:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/82 "2010-12-29T10:33:42Z")
In\*\* Michael Clayton\*\* why does he throw his watch and wallet in the burning car? The fire was hot enough to distroy them and there is no body. So what was his thinking behind this? ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 10:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/83 "2010-12-29T10:35:18Z")
> [@CanvasShoes](#): > > OH! I thought Brad Pitt’s character was the one that they killed. At any rate, I thought that the rest of their crimes were caused by them being on the run after killing the guy and not having money with which to be on the lam. > > To be fair, I’ve only seen it once. Because of the ending, I absolutely HATED it. Just as a matter of curiosity…what kind of ending would you have liked? They make to Mexico and presumably live out their lives robbing liquor stores? Would you rather they were caught and sent to prison for 20 years? ---
**Author:** ![Strassia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e8c25b/32.png) [@Strassia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Strassia)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/84 "2010-12-29T16:45:09Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > One thing I didn’t pick up on at first, but I think is pretty strongly implied: Bunny doesn’t know her husband isn’t rich. She’s clearly supposed to be a gold digger, right? But if there’s no gold to dig, why hasn’t she split already? The Big Lebowski has been lying to her about how much money he has, and borrowing from Jackie Treehorn to cover for it. He concocts the fake ransom plan specifically to get the money he needs to pay off Treehorn. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > This is rapidly becoming a Star Wars thread! > > I may be wrong, but it seems like it was only natural for each successive Sith apprentice to turn on his master. Vader turned on Sidious who turned on Plagueius, and I think others followed this pattern too? Much has been made of the fact that there’s always one Master and one Apprentice. Given that, why did each Sith attempt to find an apprentice? The Emperor seemed fine ruling a bunch of non-Siths, what was the point of having Vader around? Don’t forget that Vader is the third apprentice Sidious takes that we know of. Before him there was Maul and Dooku. In ROTJ his intent was to have Luke kill Vader and take his place, not have Vader kill him. After all, Vader had killed Dooku, and it was hinted at that Sidious was immortal, so he probably planned to go on replacing his apprentice in this manner forever. > [@jsc1953](#): > > When i saw the thread title, I assumed the second post would be about Godfather II. I’ve had it explained to me here a few times, and I think I get who’s whacking who, and who Frankie Pentangeli is, and why his brother’s presence at the Senate hearing is important…but it’s all so confusing. It’s a matter of honor and a changing of style. The whole point of the second movie is to show how different the mob is under Michael. Michael is not about relationships and family. He is about power. Frankie was Vito’s guy and played by Vito’s rules. He could not dishonor his brother, even with Michael in charge. ---
**Author:** ![thinksnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thinksnow/32/2849_2.png) [@thinksnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thinksnow)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/85 "2010-12-29T17:27:01Z")
> [@eenerms](#): > > In\*\* Michael Clayton\*\* why does he throw his watch and wallet in the burning car? The fire was hot enough to distroy them and there is no body. So what was his thinking behind this? Worried they might have a bug or tracer in them, so he shedded everything he could reasonably drop given being in the middle of nowhere. ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/86 "2010-12-29T17:29:15Z")
In a lot of the movies that I see, the plumber or TV repairman will just take off their pants and start having sex with a woman that there’s no indication that they know. Afterwards, the movie will just move on to another scene, without any narrative about the characters’ relationship. ---
**Author:** ![HeadNinja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b4bc9f/32.png) [@HeadNinja](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HeadNinja)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/87 "2010-12-29T17:49:39Z")
> [@Joey\_P](#): > > I wonder how he cashed those checks? The check from GMAC would either be written to the dealership or the manufacturer, depending on who owned the car. The only way I could see it working is if the check was cut to the dealer and he had set up a bank account in the dealers name and put himself down as one of the signers. That would make sense. If he is an F&I Manager he may have signing rights for the dealership. If he does and is responsible for keeping the books he may just be using the dealerships accounts anyway. Either way he is boned once an auditor shows up. Which is actually one of the confusing things about the movie, since we are on it. Is there any way for him to actually get away with it in the face of competent auditing even if his plan worked? He probably would have done better emptying the accounts and heading off to Mexico. Though it would have been a less good movie. ---
**Author:** ![GreenHell](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ea666f/32.png) [@GreenHell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenHell)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/88 "2010-12-29T17:50:14Z")
I have to disagree with FerretHerder. I’ve thought about the “there are always two” angle before and what this means with regard to the fact that recruitment means that someone is going to meet a bad end. But, I don’t think either the apprentice or the master are acting in anyone’s interest but their own. Who cares if the Sith as a collective rule? The Dark Side is such that its agents only care if THEY rule. If that means (because they are Sith) that the Sith rule, so be it. But, why would they recruit then if there can be only two? The apprentice and the master are each working in their own interest. Though they collaborate to groom a new recruit, they have disparate goals. The master takes an appretice because that gives him more power. Even an apprentice who is much inferior to the master is still much better than a lieutenant who is not a force user. While he may turn on this master to usurp his power, this is regarded as an acceptable risk. The apprentice may not have as much power as the master, but he still has more than he would have without him. Now for recruiting another: The master hopes to find a new apprentice who is more powerful than his current apprentice. This increases his power. Meanwhile, the apprentice hopes to find someone who is less powerful than himself, but powerful enough that together they could destroy the master. What’s more. I think that both master and apprentice KNOW that this is the case. This wouldn’t necessarily change any of the behavior involved. After all, I play poker with the full knowledge that the people I’m trying to beat out of their money are also trying to beat me out of my money. I’m confident enough that I will win and am willing to accept the risk that I will lose. While the stakes are much higher for the Sith (galactice domination, murder, or death at the hands of treacherous pupils), that high risk tolerance in the pursuit of power seems consistent with the characterization of Dark Side Force users. ---
**Author:** ![pbbth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f9ae1b/32.png) [@pbbth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pbbth)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/89 "2010-12-29T17:59:29Z")
In the movie Never Let Me Go there was one huge thing that bothered the hell out of me. It is a relatively new movie so if you haven’t seen it and want to (though I don’t recommend it as it was not very good) don’t read the rest of this post. SPOILER ALERT! We learn as the story progresses that the children we’ve been watching are, in fact, clones being raised to have healthy organs to harvest at later points in life. They know this about themselves and that they are slated to die in their twenties as their organs are taken one by one. Then they are given access to cars and such and live on their own with other clones and not one of them ever tries to escape. Seriously, they are on a beach with a fucking boat and none of them pushes it out into the water and tries to sail somewhere they won’t be known as clones and possibly have the opportunity to survive? What the hell is wrong with their survival instincts and why don’t they fight back or run? ---
**Author:** ![Swords\_to\_Plowshares](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b38774/32.png) [@Swords\_to\_Plowshares](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Swords_to_Plowshares)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/90 "2010-12-29T18:18:34Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > The plot of [_The Big Sleep_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Sleep_(1946_film)) was so convoluted even the **actors** complained they had no idea what was going on. What didn’t you understand? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/91 "2010-12-29T19:40:42Z")
I think the genre known as “erotic thrillers” (best known of the group would be Madonna’s flick “Body of Evidence” and possibly “Basic Instinct” as well). The genre features some movies that most would identify as mainstream and that play in theaters, to full-out softcore porn films that show up only on late-night premium cable channels. Here’s an example from a review I did of “Forbidden Sins” an erotic thriller in the softcore end: > [@](#): > > “Sins” completely ignores all of these questions in favor of pursuing a murky trail of clues to a conventional whodunit ending. Unfortunately, they blow the straightforward suspense line, too, because the plot is filled with a series of unnecessary and unbelievable coincidences that do not advance the plot, and whose improbability detracts greatly from its credibility. > > To wit: David, the strip club owner and bondage fan, was Hill’s lover. The cop investigating the crime (Detective John Doherty, played by Myles O’Brien) is the defendant’s attorney’s ex-husband. David was previously charged in the murder of Maureen and John’s niece. Everybody is screwing Molly, or Molly is screwing everyone, depending on your point of view. There’s more, but by this point, who cares? Almost none of these coincidences are necessary to carry the plot forward, they’re just there. It’s as if the script were written by someone who really liked Ross MacDonald’s mysteries, in which a series of apparent coincidences is revealed over the course of the book to have their origin in some ancient crime. As you progress through the book, your deepening understanding of the story keeps changing the nature of the mystery. > > Whoever was responsible for “Sins” apparently enjoyed the improbable coincidences, but completely missed the point about the coincidences having an origin that’s filled with meaning. ---
**Author:** ![Capitaine\_Zombie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e95f7d/32.png) [@Capitaine\_Zombie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capitaine_Zombie)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/92 "2010-12-29T19:51:55Z")
> [@Darth\_Panda](#): > > In a lot of the movies that I see, the plumber or TV repairman will just take off their pants and start having sex with a woman that there’s no indication that they know. Afterwards, the movie will just move on to another scene, without any narrative about the characters’ relationship. Don’t. I too started a completely bogus question, just for laughs, and there are \*\*\*\*\*\*\* here still commenting on it. ---
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/93 "2010-12-29T20:08:19Z")
> [@CanvasShoes](#): > > No, and that’s what Obi Wan explains to Luke when Luke asks him the same question. Ah, so what you’re saying is that Obi Wan spoke the truth…from a certain point of view? On the subject of Beetlejuice, the one part I don’t get is that Beetlejuice wouldn’t tell his name to Lydia because, as he explains, “if I tell you, you tell your friends… your friends are callin’ me on the horn all the time… and I gotta show up at shopping centers for openings and sign autographs and shit like that and it makes my life a HELL. OK? A living HELL” So his solution to that is to…show a picture of a beetle and some orange juice. Because I guess Lydia won’t tell her friends after having to struggle for ten whole seconds in a game of charades. ---
**Author:** ![Ferret\_Herder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e47774/32.png) [@Ferret\_Herder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ferret_Herder)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/94 "2010-12-29T20:24:11Z")
> [@Enderw24](#): > > So his solution to that is to…show a picture of a beetle and some orange juice. Because I guess Lydia won’t tell her friends after having to struggle for ten whole seconds in a game of charades. My admittedly vague recollection/interpretation is that he was full of shit, that he really wanted to get her to say his name 3 times but was forbidden to come out and say it. He used the whole “coy” bit to make her more interested in his name, then resorted to a rebus to skirt the rules and give his name without saying it. ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/95 "2010-12-29T20:39:26Z")
> [@Capitaine\_Zombie](#): > > Don’t. > > I too started a completely bogus question, just for laughs, and there are \*\*\*\*\*\*\* here still commenting on it. So you’re trolling then. And insulting people it seems like. In BeetleJuice I believe it is against the rules for him to tell Lydia his name directly as he was in a prison of sorts. ---
**Author:** ![StusBlues](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@StusBlues](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StusBlues)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/96 "2010-12-29T20:43:59Z")
> [@Tahssa](#): > > So you’re trolling then. And insulting people it seems like. Well, in fairness, it really was pretty obvious, and most of the responses were equally tongue in cheek. ---
**Author:** ![Swallowed\_My\_Cellphone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@Swallowed\_My\_Cellphone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Swallowed_My_Cellphone)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/97 "2010-12-29T20:48:53Z")
> [@Ferret\_Herder](#): > > My admittedly vague recollection/interpretation is that he was full of shit, that he really wanted to get her to say his name 3 times but was forbidden to come out and say it. He used the whole “coy” bit to make her more interested in his name, then resorted to a rebus to skirt the rules and give his name without saying it. You’re remembering correctly. He doesn’t tell her outright because he _can’t_. Beetlejuice is a bad dude who ultimately wants to marry Lydia in order to re-enter the world of the living. There is a curse that restricts his abilities to create mayhem. Saying his name three times is an invocation that breaks the cruse that is binding him. He can’t say or, IIRC write out his own name. He has to trick you into doing it, or help you figure it out. ETA: Saying his name three times again will re-bind him. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/98 "2010-12-29T21:13:28Z")
> [@Capitaine\_Zombie](#): > > Don’t. > > I too started a completely bogus question, just for laughs, and there are \*\*\*\*\*\*\* here still commenting on it. > [@Tahssa](#): > > So you’re trolling then. And insulting people it seems like. Please don’t insult any other posters - both of you. Don’t call other posters names or publicly accuse them of trolling. ---
**Author:** ![expectopatronum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/expectopatronum/32/173_2.png) [@expectopatronum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/expectopatronum)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/99 "2010-12-29T21:27:19Z")
> [@CanvasShoes](#): > > 🙂 Well, I realize that, my issue with it is that they chose death over life, when they might have had a chance to have served SOME time, after all they shot the guy in self-defense. And they had that cop on their side, so they had some hope of things turning out okay, even if it did involve having to do some time. i don’t agree. they know, and we know, that louise shot the man in self defense, but there were no witnesses to attest to that fact, so it would be up to a jury to believe the word of 2 women who committed armed robbery, blew up a truck, and left a cop to die in the trunk of his car, in addition to the shooting. they weren’t going to do a measly 5 years or so. and yes, the one cop seemed to realize they were good people who had gotten in way over their heads, and was trying to help them, but he’s not going to be the one sentencing them. i wonder the same thing as stoid, what ending would you have liked to have seen? the only other options i see is to turn it into a lord of the rings length film with the second half being a courtroom drama, or have a lifetime movie-esque scroll at the end somberly informing us that they got sentenced to 20 to life. yes, they chose death over life, but what kind of life would they have had rotting away in prison? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Excellent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f19dbf/32.png) [@Mr.Excellent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Excellent)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2010, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517/100 "2010-12-29T21:27:58Z")
> [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > The part that is the retcon, I think, is the idea that “Darth” is a title rather than Vaders name. Recall in the film when Kenobi and Vader are dueling, Kenobi says something to the effect of “…only a master of evil, Darth” as if Darth is his name. Further, correct me if I’m wrong, I don’t think the Emperor was ever refered to as Darth Sidious in the original trilogy and wasn’t given that name until the new trilogy, or perhaps somewhere in the extended universe. So, I guess the fanwank/retcon for that Kenobi line was that Kenobi was emphasizing that he was only a master of evil by refering to him by his title. I don’t know - it doesn’t seem all that much of a fanwank. If “Darth” is a legitimate title, akin to “Doctor” or “Pastor” or “Duke” (it isn’t clear whether it’s a religious, aristocratic or professional title), then it’s not so strange he’d be addressed using it. When I speak to my physician, he’s not “Doctor Smith” - he’s often just “Doctor.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movie-scenes-plots-that-youve-never-understood/565517.md?page=6)