MovieChat Forums > The Quick and the Dead (1995) Discussion > Scabs on Cort's Knuckles?

Scabs on Cort's Knuckles?

posted 14 years ago by bra5am
10 replies | jump to latest

What are they from? I am guessing burns from revolvers gunpowder flash? I am really confused as to why they show them, but don't explain what they are.

Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bra5am 14 years ago

They show it very early in the movie.

Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.

[–] KHayes666 14 years ago

Nah, Ratsy smashed Cort's right wrist in....the scabs on his knuckles were there from the beginning.

Probably like the other guy just said, Foy probably stomped on his knuckles or something.

[–] maverick_starstrider 14 years ago

Gun powder flash? Seriously? His hands are scabbed because Gene Hackman's goons beat the crap out of him (and presumably stomped on his knuckles) at the start of the movie.

[–] riazkj4 14 years ago

Terrible makeup work by Raimi too. It looked like purple marker and obviously Raimi overdid it too by making the scabs so enormous.

Does Raimi do anything well, besides dupe producers into giving him work?

[–] hafabee 13 years ago

Does Raimi do anything well, besides dupe producers into giving him work?

Are you kidding me? Sam Raimi is a dynamic film maker. I've never seen a western with better cinematography or editing than The Quick And The Dead, it really was fantastic work (even if the story is cheesy and silly).

As for the scabs on Cort's knuckles who knows, I've always wondered that myself. They're likely from defending (or being beaten) his church before the beginning of the film.

[–] riazkj4 13 years ago

Raimi is a hack. See the 3 Spiderman movies, the 3 Evil Deads, and Quick and the Dead.

Have not seen any of his other "work."

[–] hafabee 13 years ago

I've seen them all, Spider-Man 2 was as perfect a movie as I've ever seen, it was flawless film making, and all of those movies were a lot of fun.

[–] riazkj4 13 years ago

Flawless film making? I guess if you love CGI, big budget effects and terrible screenplays.

I guess Raimi can handle a camera. He cannot tell a story and he cannot write dialogue. You think it's a coincidence that when he took over writing duties for Spiderman 3 it was an abomination (making the other two look better than they actually are).

[–] hafabee 13 years ago

Spider-Man 3's lack of cohesive structure was the result of last minute studio interference, the studio executives wanted Venom in the movie, Sam Raimi didn't, the studio ultimately won and Raimi had to shoe-horn the character in just before production started. That's always a really good way to spoil a perfectly good movie, and it really isn't Raimi's fault. Besides I quite enjoyed Spider-Man 3 despite it's obvious failings.

Spider-Man 2 on the other hand was flawless. The screenplay was tight. The multitude of story arcs and character progressions all flowed perfectly together which is no small feat. I don't think you're giving Raimi enough credit for that film but it doesn't matter, not everybody is going to like the same stuff. I have several friends who can't stand super hero movies no matter how well executed they are.