The Missing Puzzle Pieces

I agree with you that there was a lot, possibly jus ta bit too much that was left up to the viewer to put in. I mean, i do enjoy that, it especially helps to separate the regular movie buffs to the people that need to be fed EVERYTHING to follow a basic plot.

Anyway, enough ramble, in reply to a couple of you points

2 - I think the photo spiked his interest a) because of the gun obviously, but he also saw someone standing in the corner of the photo that wasn't Lucky Phil, although it was only part of the person, he still seemed to recognise him.

3. - Completely agree

4. - I think....That she was killed as the killer was the guy that she got with to make her fiance jealous, and then when she "left" him, he killed her, in turn flipping him out and causing the train incident.

8. Tell me you didn't feel a little bit happy inside that the a**holes ute got burnt after he beat up phil....hehe

I was wondering if the face of the killer that the police had made was a combination of a few of the actors who played various male characters in the film. Like the eyes were from one character, the nose from another and so on. Did anyone else find that when a new male character was introduced they had a suspicion that he was the killer, and every time this happened I would look at the poster of the made up guy and think it could be him. I may just have imagined this though.

Anyway my thoughts about your ideas are...

1) I don’t quite know what you mean about the killer being agile later. If you mean the guy who shoots graham at the end I didn't think this guy was necessarily the killer from the train. It was my understanding that we were suppose to be suspicious about him but it was never absolutely clarified that he was the killer. Also I didn’t think that the Train killer and the killer of the fiance were necessarily the same killer either.

2) I haven’t quite worked out what the dog photo was about, or what the character of Phil had to do with the story, but I do think these aspects have a lot to do with solving the case. I think all the evidence is somewhere in the film for us to try and workout and i think the photo will tell us something as will Phil. I'll need to rewatch the film but maybe there is someone wearing the same shirt as the person in the photo that i have missed.

3) I agree with this which makes me think that maybe there was someone there watching him the whole time or that it was a setup, maybe even by someone from the police force.

5) I think the tinnitus was trying to force the audience to pay attention to the sound and "noise" in the film, I think the sound or lack of sound also holds some knowledge to solving the case. Also yes i think it does just add to the storyline and make graham seem more isolated.

6&7) yes i agree with this to same extent but the "generic" aspects were done in an unconventional way. And i don’t think that it was just as simple as the weird kid knowing all the secrets. I think he had some secret which leads to something else which will lead to something else and so on. But also he did help make the film very enjoyable and interesting. And maybe he was deliberately put in to confuse people and make them think he knew all the secrets. Maybe it isn't as conventional as it seems but maybe by using these cliches it was a way for the film maker to put the audience of the trace.

8) yeah i dont get this scene either, my only thought was perhaps if we could see the number plate it would be noticeable somewhere else in the film. And what was with Phil having all those records of numberplates?

I’m also wondering why the girl on the train who survived couldnt remember what happened to the killer after he held the gun to her head. I think there is more to her story as well, and i think she knows more then she said.


Anyway they are only my thoughts, and perhaps i am just reading way too much into the film.

))<>(( Forever.

Lucky Phil's notebooks filled with car registration numbers and sorted by colour (focused on yellow cars at one point, and the killer drove a yellow car) - the film seemed to be building this up to be a major plot point or clue that never led anywhere.

Great film, nevertheless.

Totally agree; great film but a lot was left unresolved.

1) It is implied, though not confirmed (to my knowledge) that Craig was the train killer and i wouldn't have said he was more calculating and agile later. I mean the guy couldn't think of a better insult than *beep* had a poor memory and was often slow to understand and respond to things Graham said to him. He was calmer later sure, but you would have to be somewhat mental to hang out in a police caravan if you'd killed all those people.

2) The photo of the dog dressed as the hunter had someone in the top left corner of the picture with a black t-shirt with an orange design on it, the first time Craig went to the caravan he had a t-shirt with the same design on it (though the t-shirt may have been white?). Not that this was conclusive evidence he was the killer but another hint.

3) The killer might still have left the picture if Graham was in the caravan but if he did it quietly there would still not have been anything Graham could have done.

4) I agree with ian_white83's suggestion that the woman was having an affair with Craig to make her fiance jealous, she broke things off and so he killed her, possibly triggering him to go on the train rampage.

5) It did seem like a bit of a plot device to get Graeme into the caravan but i think it was used to good effect at other points in the film.


My main questions are around the girl on the train, she didn't really seem to have much of a purpose other than to introduce the photo. I also wonder what happened after the killer put the gun to her head; did she just not remember? was it something that was hinted at in the rest of the film? or was it just there to keep the viewer off balance?

The person in the background of lucky Phil's photo is definitely Finlay. I have seen this twice now and it's the same shirt he was wearing when he first met Graham.
What this means, I don't know.

1 - He would have been more psychotic on the train because he was in the element of a massacre! His adrenaline would have been going through the roof. Besides, who knows why he did it!
2 - I think that's where he finally realised that the guy was the killer (same shirt) and he had just left the caravan, and of course was just about to come back
3 - He wouldn't have been given the photo, but he probably would have met the killer (even though he already had) who could have given any sort of evidence, or possibly even wanted to confess so any progress in the case could have been made. Besides, he was carrying a bloody big picture frame.
4 - Like the other guy said, perhaps he was the one she was cheating with (it was that guys fiancé wasnt it? And perhaps lucky phil was friends with the killer. after all it was lucky phil who was standing at the train line staring (where the mannequin was put) AND he had the other guy in the corner of his photo
5 - because its a major theme of the film and main protagonists often have a key flaw or something that holds them back (think when that girl is going on to him about not knowing whats going to happen and wish someone would just tell her - it could just as easily have been about him waiting for his cancer test results, he is staring at the ground after all)
6 - not really, i think u were expecting way too much from it in terms of being non-mainstream
7 - like i said for 6. also if the viewer can do that, then let them!
8 - movies always have subplots

What I'm really wondering is what happened on the train that made the girl so very reluctant to talk about it afterwards.

But wow, what a great film! I love the way it shakes up the audience and works on aural techniques to throw off your sensibility. Really feels like the kind of film making that suits the Australian market.

A few of my thoughts...


Noticed the girl on the train has headphones on and was oblivious to the events around her till the body falls... kind of a recurring theme there with Graham not hearing the fight later?


I think the kid was supposed to show that Graham's tinnitus and cancer fears made him preoccupied, not noticing things which were vital. Phil gives him a numberplate right before asking him about whether they knew who was the murderer - haven't checked but I guess that's the killers car. Yes - a little of a cliche if it is, but it would fit with the hunter photo and the kid knowing the facts but no-one noticing.


Also - In the earlier conversation with Graham the killer is complaining about people not being bothered about the murders etc. So I think this and the fact that it was Christmas Eve was supposed to highlight how desperate the killer was for the attention - as why else would he be out? Graham makes no effort to actually investigate anything really... just looks at stuff because he's bored (which happen to be clues) and the killer reveals himself on his own desperate for a perverse kind of attention.


Anyway - I really liked this film a lot.