Why would they *spoilers*


They would never spend all of that money to train all of those girls just to have them killed off in exercises. Plus as they got older they could have taken out those guards.

reply

You're right. As I sat here watching the film's beginning, I found myself figuring that -- if I was a billionaire, I wouldn't fund presidential campaigns. What I would do is fund experiments like this one. (Though perhaps of orphans rather than kidnapped girls.) But not to kill off the gals. I'd be building up an ever-growing army, not whittling them down. I grew up in the love generation, not the death generation. Movie-makers continue not to think like me.

reply

Very inefficient. Tactically stupid.

reply

they were trained to be ASSASSINS! ruthless, emotionless assassins. even though they had all the other skills on point, if they were never able to actually kill someone, what were all those other skills good for? by killing the other girls they had lived with/bonded with for all those years, it desensitized them. at least that's how i see it justified.

reply

No. You can get the best people in the world combat each other and someone will lose. Even though they are extremely skilled someone has to lose and killing them off is a waste. That would be like killing Michael Jordan when he was in high school for losing a game. It was just bad writing to get rid of the extras in the movie.

reply

Jordan is deemed "better" the more he scores, right? Isn't that also the case with an assassin? He's better if he kills more people?

reply