MovieChat Forums > Child 44 (2015) Discussion > Help needed. (ending) - spoilers

Help needed. (ending) - spoilers


Hi, I think I missed something.. Why was the murderer killing the children, (did i miss a twist or something) ??

Thanks!

reply

He says he can't help himself; it's a compulsion.

reply

Ok thanks.

reply

from the sounds of things, he was an orphan, and endured abuse/punishment (likely waterboarding) which left its mark on him clearly, and now he feels a need to punish/torture/kill children.

reply

He also references the starving time (Holodomor), when some people resorted to cannabalism, as well as having to eat grubs, rats, and "if they were lucky," a cat.

Semper Contendere Propter Amoram et Formam

reply

Book spoiler: I have no idea why the movie did not stick to the book.. In the Book, the killer is Leo's (Tom Hardy's) brother. In the orphanage they had to kill a cat for food, well long story short Leo and his brother ended up getting separated at a young age. So now grown up, the killer is killing the kids like he killed the cat.. He was leaving clues for Leo, hoping he would find him. Why the movie left out this huge detail completely baffles me!!! They did not do a good job explaining motives at all.. They made the entire build up of the movie pointless..

reply

Thanks for the info,that explains a lot. How can they leave out something like that from the film.

reply

Thanks. Yes, I wondered about the killer's motives and methods too. I kept expecting more explanation of why the killer was acting in such a specific manner. Surgical incisions, missing organs, missing clothes, death by drowning? I thought these details would be more meaningful. If all these details about the murder method were included just to convince Leo and others that the deaths were not accidental, then the details were excessive, kind of a red herring for the viewer. Since it was mostly the location of the bodies left along the railway that led Leo to the killer, and the killer was dispatched before he could fully confess, even just a walk through of the cabin in the woods may have helped explain what was going on there.

reply

You didn't miss anything, except reading the book. It's much more clear and compelling in Tom Rob Smith's version. The movie glossed over pretty much everyone's motivations.

reply

Thank you last two posters! The brothers weren't in an orphanage. They lived with their mother, both boys went out to kill a cat, Leo (Pavel) was kidnapped by two people who wanted to use him to feed their boy, the boy was dead when they returned with Leo, and they decided to adopt him. The brother killed the children because he wanted Leo to return to him. He knew Leo was a policeman and would track him down and they would finally be reunited.

reply

Bump.

It's ridiculous and half-assed to have omitted these "details" from the screenplay.

Thanks for tying it all together for us.

reply

[deleted]

Was that in the book? Because that would have made more sense in the movie.

In the movie the killer tells Leo that he knows him and that he was in an orphanage just like him..blah blah blah.

You can call me 'Mayor Chapstick.'

reply

The first cut of this movie was 330 minutes long, and the final version we all saw was 137 minutes. That's 197 minutes of footage we haven't seen, so who knows what they cut?

Honestly, though, that twist is a bit far-fetched. I can see test audiences having trouble with the idea that the killer knows the detective pursuing him. It's been done in so many bad movies that I don't see it working, no matter how many plot and character justifications they can find for it.

reply

Someone, I can't remember who, told General Nesterov about Hitler giving them special drugs to make them addicted to the blood of children. It was probably BS, but it caught my attention.

"Are you suggesting that coconuts migrate?"

reply

THAT would've made more sense than killing kids in the hopes your long lost brother who's now a cop will find you when a simple phone call to him saying "Stop me before I kill again" would've sufficed.

Jamie Lee Curtis survived Halloween, the Fog, Prom Night and a Terror Train & now she can't poop!

reply