MovieChat Forums > Los cronocrímenes (2008) Discussion > How did the young woman end up naked in ...

How did the young woman end up naked in the original timeline?

posted 9 years ago by eolloe
9 replies | jump to latest

Was this ever actually explained in the film? Or was it just left to the viewer's imagination?

reply

[–] K_Sear 9 years ago

There is no original timeline, only one timeline like what is shown in the movie.

reply

[–] huntsvillenews 9 years ago

It's called a causal loop, or the bootstrap paradox.

Why does Hector see her naked? Because, future Hector made her take off her clothes so that past Hector would see her naked. The cause and effect get blended together.

Imagine you're sitting there right now and your future self walks in the room and says, "I'm you from the future. Take this device, it's a time machine. One week from now, you must travel back to this exact time and give this box to yourself with the same instructions I'm giving you now." So you do, closing the loop.

Where did the time machine come from? It has no origin.

It's really cool and fascinating stuff.

Does your mother sew? BOOM! Get her to sew that!

reply

[–] padzok 9 years ago

Where did the time machine come from? It has no origin.

That is a logically different scenario to the one shown in the movie though.

In the movie, the time machine was built without Hector, and turned on without Hector.

reply

[–] eolloe 9 years ago

Because, future Hector made her take off her clothes so that past Hector would see her naked.

The future Hector we saw had himself seen her naked. That's why he wanted past Hector to also see her naked, and why he made her take her clothes off.

My question is, in the very first timeline, before any Hectors traveled back in time, did that original Hector see her naked as well? And if he did, why was she naked (since there was no future Hector to have made her get naked in that timeline)?

reply

[–] padzok 9 years ago

before any Hectors traveled back in time

The girl stripped AFTER Hector travelled back in time. That is AFTER the time traveller(s) had (each) emerged from the time machine.

She did strip BEFORE Hector got into the time machine. He got in twice. Her strip happened before both of those entries.

reply

[–] view_and_review 8 years ago

My question is, in the very first timeline, before any Hectors traveled back in time, did that original Hector see her naked as well?

Your question is genuine and is one of the paradoxes of time travel. What came first, the chicken or the egg?

The only reason Hector sees the girl naked is that Hector 1 made her strip.

The only reason Hector 1 makes her strip is so that Hector 2 will go investigate and end up in the time machine.

But what was the original impetus for getting Hector in the time machine? That's the paradox. Because if the original cause had nothing to do with the girl, then the timeline is different, almost like a parallel universe.

If the girl stripping was the original impetus, then why did she originally strip?

reply

[–] Mrpinkeye 8 years ago

Paradox. Ruins the movie for me

reply

[–] rainofwalrus 8 years ago

These paradoxicals are the selling point(s) for all time-travel fiction. And you don't need imagination, just pen and paper:

1. Time-Machine is turned on. (No greater catalyst.)
2. Time-Traveler exits. (Second greatest catalyst.)
3. Time-Traveler's Local Double enters. (Completing the Loop.)

There are only ever two catalyst:

Time-Machine==ON && Future-Traveler(Arrival)==YES.

...

Moving foward, there can only ever be two flavors of Time-Travel:

Permeable-Past==YES && Permeable-Past==NO.

...

In Timecrimes, there is very little evidence that the past can be changed (# of Spook Attempts && Position of Discarded Battery) and far more evidence that the past cannot be changed. If the past cannot be changed, then Hector 3 always exits the time-machine, followed quickly by Hector 2.

Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.

reply

[–] chilone (17234) 7 years ago

I don't know, but I'm SO glad she did!!

reply