MovieChat Forums > The Lookout (2007) Discussion > The real blame in the car accident

The real blame in the car accident


There's a lot of discussion about whether or not Chris was punished enough for his part in the car accident at the beginning of this movie. Everyone seems to dump the blame solely on Chris and continue the debate from there. In all these threads, I've only read one post (that I can no longer find) that accuses someone else -- the combine driver.

Think about it. That farmer had a giant piece of machinery completely blocking the entire road and shoulders WITHOUT A SINGLE LIGHT ANYWHERE. For drivers moving at county highway speeds, say 50-60 mph, even with headlights there would barely be time to skid to a stop. That farmer needed to turn on every battery-powered light the combine had, set road flares, and call for assistance. There is no justification for that to be left there, largely unattended, in pitch blackness. It's a death trap.

Had Chris been driving responsibly, using his headlights and keeping his eyes on the road, there's a very solid chance he'd still have crashed into the combine. It's not as if driving blind caused him to roll in the ditch or hit a tree. Sure he was reckless - he's a teenager. But the farmer, an adult who should know better, was fatally irresponsible.

reply

I agree. The farmer probably argued "It was just for one night till I could get it repaired, no one drives down that way anyway..." blah blah blah. But that is extremely unsafe. I can see why Chris did not receive harsh punishment. He wasn't drunk, and he didn't actually drive off the road. Everyone would have been perfectly fine if not for the combine.

Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal. [dinosaur]

reply

I agree, my brother just crashed my car for the same reason, thankfully he's ok, he was driving responsibly and with the lights on, but there was a truck fixing something on the street on the left lane with no signs at all, no flare, no lights, no blinkers and it was late at night, I was really upset about this, but here in Mexico this is standard procedure. I still think they should be held accountable, but the insurance company does not.

----------------------------
WHAT THE FVCK IS A BIEBER????

reply

Exactly what I thought after it was revealed he hit a combine(whatever that is). I thought to myself, who the hell would not have some lights or flares or something out to warn others!! It sort of made thee whole movie seem like a fraud. It was too much to over-come. Why couldn't they have made it happen a different way? It's like the write had this great idea but he couldn't make it play out without leaving in this unbelievable part about a truck driver who forgets to turn on his hazard lights! It would be similar to expecting someone today NOT to have a Cell Phone to call in an emergency when we all know that EVERYONE, from kids to illegal aliens to damn near homeless bums, HAVE CELL PHONES, except that one fool who we BASE AN ENTIRE MOVIE PREMISE ON!! LMAO!

It was a nice movie but the set-up was a MAJOR FAIL.

reply

stop rambling!

I think Chris didn't do any time because they let him off. It wasn't entirely his fault also. He blames himself for enjoying that night and being cocky. Yes, he was driving recklessly, and that's what made him not see the hazard on the road. First I thought he went off the road or into a farm, but if the combine was on the road then that seriously was a major hazard that the combine driver caused.

I disagree with the OP, the real blame is the drivers, both Chris and the combine driver. It was Chris's responsibility to drive safely and notice any hazards. Fine he was having fun with his friends, but he left his lights off for too long and people died. They all wanted him to turn on the lights too.

reply

who's rambling! You are making the same points we did! lol

I am saying that the premise was a little "shaky" and not totally believable. That's all. It was expecting "everyone" involved to do something sort of stupid, like, like the combine not having hazard lights or flares out, the kid turning off his lights.etc..


all that in order for this to happen so we could get to the "feel-goodness" of the movie..

a better "set-up" is all I am saying is what was needed and with all the talent in Hollywood, you think they could of done a better job!

Ok, THAT is rambling!

reply

I agree it was both drivers fault. At first I thought it was just the farmer's fault, but if you think about it, it was a farm road where 800-1000lb cows walk across at all times of the day and night. Since Chris was from a rural area he should have know about that and been on the lookout(no pun).

reply

His family was also pretty rich. Our laws do not apply to them.

reply

50/50 fault, I'd say. Not that this is the way the law does work, but losing some of your best friends and having a traumatic irreversible brain injury is a form of punishment too.

reply

Well, since I live so far "out in the country" you wouldn't even believe it, I'll throw in my two cents on this. Rural driving has a few extra considerations that urban drivers never need to bother with. In the first place: deer.

When I was young, the main fun of driving on these blacktop county roads was maxxing out your speedometer. But the deer population has skyrocketed now. (I think hunters kill something like 800,000 in my state every single year.) I creep along the ten miles into town at <35mph, when I used to go 85. About every third or fourth trip, I stop and watch the deer running across the road in front of me. (My idiot friend, who lives a few miles away on the same road as my house, is too impatient to drive that slowly--she's hit seven deer. Her insurance premiums are large.)

Also, combines are so rarely on the actual road--maybe 1% of the time they're operating. It's a huge hassle since the machines are usually wider than a single lane, so everyone is inconvenienced and annoyed when they get backed up behind a large piece of farming equipment. The equipment driver has to keep finding spots to pull over and let people go around him, and when there's a mailbox or something on the shoulder, he has to pull out and block both lanes. Suffice it to say, no one drives their equipment any farther on the roads than they absolutely have to. And moving equipment at night from one farm to another is never done. The only reason I can think of would be a huge storm front moving in and leaving only a few hours to try to harvest and save whatever you can, by headlight. Plus, farmers are going to have every inch of the limited storage space filled with tools, hoses, duct tape, etc. They'd laugh at the suggestion they should take up room with flares.

Maybe everyone who drives on a public thoroughfare should carry flares in the event of a total electrical failure where you're stranded without lights or blinkers--but I don't have any flares in my car and I don't think most people do.


Anyway, it seems to me the combine driver got caught in an EXTREMELY rare set of circumstances, to be broken down, at night, on the road, without any hazard blinkers or tail lights. While Chris was both incredibly reckless and foolish . . . well, although I guess that's why kids do it--because it's fun to scare yourself silly by taking risks.

But I can't really assign liability 50/50 on the situation. A measure of culpability to the combine operator, but mainly on the guy zooming along with his headlights off, with a car full of people shriek-laughing that they can't see what's in front of them.

reply