MovieChat Forums > Timestalkers (1987) Discussion > Who was that masked man -- err, I mean t...

Who was that masked man -- err, I mean the star-handled stranger?


So we never find out who the star-handled stranger was? (I mean, originally, before McKenzie steps into the part.) Or did I miss the explanation?

Also, kind of a bummer that the poor stranger gets offed by Dr. Cole's little "revision" of history and ends up just lying there dead in the dust. Rides in on a white horse, saves the day -- at least in the original timeline -- would be nice to know the hero's name and why he showed up there in the first place.

reply

Yeah when watching it I assumed pretty early on that McKenzie would be the Star Handled Stranger, but I assumed that he had always been the Stranger. It's an odd loose end that this guy is never identified.


"Unless Alpert's covered in bacon grease, I don't think Hugo can track anything."

reply

Actually if you think about it the way events play out preserve the timeline. The star handled stranger is known by that title alone because the stranger who originally owned the guns is dead and can't give his name and of course William Devane's character returns to the future (our present) and can't therefore make his name known to the authorities back in 1888 (I think that was the yr). And often with time travel programs what seems to be a change in the timeline is actually exactly what did happen. Another example of that is in Timeline. One of the scientists is excavating a tomb where a man who is missing one ear is buried. He then finds himself going back to the 1300's where he takes part in a battle and loses an ear. So if he hadn't gone back in time and fought in the battle he'd have had no tomb with the effigy of a man who had lost an ear to excavate in the 1st place. And if he hadn't decided to stay in the past again there would have been no tomb to excavate as he wouldn't have died in the past.

reply