Whenever the Reverend steals a soul, the body of the victim would have their eyes melt out of their eye sockets like vanilla pudding. And from the looks of Charlie's body; they would shrivel up "Imhotep style" like in the movie "The Mummy".
How come the little girl's eyes didn't explode out of her face like all of the other victims? She didn't even shrivel up into a prune like 100% of the other victims.
Saw it. Agree. Maybe he knew she would fight back and he might need a spare body. However, if he has been alive all that time why was it so easy to kill him. And if he died in the same place he was made soulless why was he not permanently dead.
shareHow come the little girl's eyes didn't explode out of her face like all of the other victims? She didn't even shrivel up into a prune like 100% of the other victims
The dad's face imploded as his soul was being drained. If the Reverend intended for the girl to be the "Shelter" then he would have dumped all the souls into her instead of sucking her soul out. One of the side effects of getting your soul sucked out in this movie is that your eyes instantly become pudding.
What you meant to say is...."A clear plot hole had to be made so that the little girl could be the "Shelter" for lost souls."
Haha I didn't even think about the eye thing until I read this. I agree... I supposed the girl didn't have time to decompose but I guess the eyes might have been part of the decomp according to the makeup people? Sometimes makeup departments seem to differ in how it's supposed to look. That's what I was thinking when I watched the end, but could be a big old plot hole anyhow.
shareI wondered the same thing. Her eyes should've melted right away.
shareBecause showing old dudes having their eyes turn to vanilla pudding is one thing, but showing a little girl like that probably crosses a line, and the producers probably preferred a plot hole to a panning.
share