I watched it last night, and I couldn't understand why the copter just didn't go lower so Randall wouldn't have so far to drop. He would have lived. Was there a good reason, or just a way to get him dead?
I have the same question. Can't figure out why they didn't lower the helicopter.
shareThat would have jepordized the entire helicopter and the crew. The waves and the cross winds make it dangerous enough to be out there, going near the surface is suicidal
---------------------------------------
Anime is Forever
The reason was because of speed, the situation was going so fast and the cable was untying too fast, so Randall made the decision to kill himself to take the strain off the winch so Fishcer could be pulled up, however there was not enough time or communication to lower randall to a safe free-fall height, and even if he had he would not have been rescued as we learned earlier that the helicoper he went out in was the last avaible helicopter, and that winch line was broken
shareJames has it right.
I just wanted to add that the reason they killed him, instead of going with the alternate ending, was because they wanted to drive the point home that Pararescue Airmen train "So others may live."
Kevin Costner's character gave his life so that his replacement (Ashton K.) could continue saving lives... Costner was finished with his time in the CG and he had always known the potential that (Ashton K.) could reach, if only he could grasp what it was all about.
That was his final lesson.
FYI, I don't like Ashton K. (he's a self-absorbed idiot), but I did like this movie.
another thing to add to what others have said.
HAve you ever seen a helecopter land? well the wind the propellers blow is extremely strong, and it could possibaly create a whirlpool in the water, making it even worse then it already was
How do you spell school? P-R-I-S-O-N
[deleted]
It's because the cable broke and they only had the one cable left. I thought this movie was amazing until they killed Randall.
shareThe movie was great and I liked the detail they show the situations, I can only guess that based on the last mission you saw in the early part of the movie they didn't want to get swiped by a wave.
Now on to the next problem, Should probably put a spoiler warning in the title since this did have a ending spoiler in it.
stupid was a crime most would get double life and the electric chair
It was just a way to kill him! They felt he had to die! Which I hate movies that feel they HAVE to kill someone! THe alternate ending had him living! Fisch held him by the finger tips until they pulled them both up, like the woman told the story in the bar about Randall doing!
shareAH! Did it? That would have been a much more dramatic and much more moving ending.
I was wondering if a resuce helicopter of the Coast Guard would not have another contingency for just such an occurence of a cable snapping; I don't know. The movie had me vaguely pleased (though not on the edge of my seat) until they pulled that far too predictable 'tug at your heartstrings' move.
there wouldn't be a point of this movie being called "the guardian" if they didn't kill costner. in the beginning of the movie, he tells the story about the legend of the man beneath the sea who helps people in the water. then when costner had died and kutcher saved that other man and the other man said "what about the other man? there was another man in the water." of course there wasn't literally, it was costner and HE was the man who lived beneath the ocean who helped people in need. he was THE GUARDIAN. so if they did not kill costner, the movie would have had the ending everybody expected to, and there would have been no point of the whole movie basically.
shareTo answer your question- yes, they would have a contingency plan. My fiancee was in the Coast Guard for 10 years, and when we watched the movie, the first thing that he said after that happened was "They would have had a backup cable".
shareI know this is an old thread but here goes. They have a built in device to cut off the cable at the winch. The helo carries a quick splice clip that they can then fasten to the end of the remaining cable. Why didn't they fly lower? It's a movie; not real life!
shareThe alternative ending may well have been a better one to match the story the woman in the bar told about Randall.
However, given the opening lines about the guardian in the water, I felt it was always gonna kill him off to explain that opening quote
Both the "Guardian beneath the waves" story as well as the Story told by the Barkeep of Randall not letting go, ARE BOTH SERVED by the ending as is, with Randall dying.
Fischer tells Randall, "I wont let go!"
To which Randall replies, "I know." and released himself to fall.
The "Alternate Ending" may serve the story about Randall but does NOT serve the title of the movie. And it does reinforce their motto "So others may live"
I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!
>> "Which I hate movies that feel they HAVE to kill someone! The alternate ending had him living! Fisch held him by the finger tips until they pulled them both up, like the woman told the story in the bar about Randall doing!"
To be honest, you nailed it exactly: the Bar story of "holding on by the fingertips" was probably meant to set up a parallel ending where Kutcher saves Costner by holding on to his fingertips. And that's so the ending would show you (in a cliched and heavy handed way) that he had now matured into becoming Costner. So without owning the DVD or listening to a Director's commentary, I'm guessing that really was the original ending.
Then again, it's not at all unusual in Hollywood to have some Brainiac walk in and say, "Hey! Why don't we completely change the ending? Wouldn't it be MORE shocking or MORE heartfelt if we killed him off completely?" That could have happened because the Director, the Producer...heck, even the studio itself...came to believe that the movie felt listless at the end, and that it lacked any real emotional punch with both of them surviving. In other words, it left you feeling TOO good.
OR...it could have come down to something incredibly stupid (which is usually the case in Hollywood) like mere ego getting out of control and (as an example) Costner walking in one day and saying, "Hey, wait a minute! You're telling me I get saved by the young punk AND he gets the girl TOO? So he gets BOTH emotional pay-offs at the end of this thing? Who's the bigger @#$% star here?!"
So, whichever ending was actually intended by the writer is up for debate -- well, unless someone could get a copy of the original first draft screenplay. But as someone else noted, I'm sure they VALIDATED Costner's death by saying "Hey, great idea! If we do that, then we really ram home the whole POINT of the motto 'So others may live.'"
Bottom line: they obviously filmed it both ways, and studios love to test these things out. So for some reason the test focus groups must've liked the death ending better. Or even nuttier, they tested it...people SAID they didn't like it...but instead of listening to the people and going with the more upbeat ending, the Director (or someone) said "Ah, screw it. This is what I like...I think it's stronger with him dying...so let's roll the dice and see how it does at the box office."
In the movie, they mentioned if I remember the numbers...if the fall is 90 feet tall, feels like landing on cement, and if more than 90 feet it is usually fatal. The helicopter was way up high and can see the ocean so far down as Ashton was holding on Costner. And the copter said later, no swimmer in sight. Later on in movie, they said they performed the largest search party ever for a single person.
I agree with one other person on the responses, that the movie title The Guardian would be best fitting is Costner passed on and when Ashton's charcter pulled out the man later on, he said "the man, the other man is in the water and he said never let go" the same words Ashton said to Costners character. and Costner words from long ago.
That was a very very hard ending to watch. An fantastic and awesome movie overall.
This is one of the few movies where I was close to tears by the ending.
Scifiguy above have one of the answers to the OP's question, but I'm surprised nobody heard the real reason why they didn't bother going down for him right away.
One of the guys on the helicopter who saw Costner drop said something about him landing on debris. A 90 foot drop with debris as a landing pad = he's dead for sure.
There weren't any plot holes that I noticed, and the movie tied together very nicely.
I give it a 9.5/10 :-)
The crew of the helicopter had no way of knowing that the cable was breaking. It was too far away to see, especially wearing Night Vision Goggles (which they would be in real life). There is a means of salvaging a broken cable with a plate with grooves cut into it, which you wrap the cable around several times (in a particular way), and the plate has another hook on it.
Oh, and to the guy who talks about a "whirlpool" in the rotorwash... I HAVE been in the water below an H-60, and your theory is ridiculous. Although a decent amount of wind below the tips of the blades (not enough for a "whirlpool"), directly under the aircraft is relatively calm.
[deleted]
there were two reasons why they did not save costner at the end. One the cable was broken and they did not have a spare. Two, if you listened to the movie, they said that the copter will drop from 15 feet. Costner fell from over eighty feet. Even if they did have an extra cable, he would probably have died from the fall. They said earlier in the movie hitting the water from fifty feet or above is like hitting concrete.
share