MovieChat Forums > Edge of Darkness (2010) Discussion > Spoilers***Why didn't the bad guys just

Spoilers***Why didn't the bad guys just

posted 12 years ago by jgain
7 replies | jump to latest

shoot Mel Gibson? I can get around the poisoning fiasco of his daughter and not shooting him at the murder scene initially. No need to up the body count unnecessarily.

But then when things are going to hell, everyone connected with the incident is dying and they end up poisoning Mel Gibson. There were a million chances to shoot him and it would have confirmed the original thought: that Gibson was the target and his daughter an innocent bystander. Case closed. No investigation of the nuke plant.

By poisoning him, the coroner will start investigating: the very reason they had to shoot the daughter in the first place. Large plot hole.

[–] LightningLad 12 years ago

OK, I was sort of wondering similar things in another post, as to why they bother with the poison when it really gives people a chance to blab before they die - I mean presumably people working in radiation know it's a death sentence, so that just seemed like an odd approach in general.

http://themortalcreeps.weebly.com/

[–] Bob_Zerunkel 12 years ago

Exactly.

[–] the_urban_prince 12 years ago

i was under the impression that mel's character poisoning was collateral damage from his daughter.

[–] inasafeplace 12 years ago

Cause the movie is plain bad and horrible. It doesnt get any crappier than this.

[–] Skullomania 12 years ago

What annoyed me was why the hell was the guy in the radiation suit wearing the key to the handcuffs round his neck when he went into that room?

John Hancock

[–] sticksstoneswwiv 11 years ago

What annoyed me was why the hell was the guy in the radiation suit wearing the key to the handcuffs round his neck when he went into that room?

That didn't bother me as it was necessarily to move the film alone.

The real problem was the second guy, he walked into a room with radiation with no protection. (The guy Cavern got a car from)

[–] cyguration 11 years ago

Sorry for thread necro but I figure more people will probably continue to pile in here asking this same question and missing a very important part of the entire movie's plot:

They had a discussion when the "middle management" flew in about Gibson's character...specifically about killing him. In fact, middle management was against it. In fact, as per the conversation, they were against the attempted killing of the Nightflower informant and they were against his daughter being killed in the way that she was.

Whole point being: They DID NOT WANT A BODYCOUNT.

When they ended up with the four dead and the one in the hospital, if you pay close attention to their later conversations, they're willing to call it quits. They were willing to just let Mel be.

However, since things were so out of hand, they didn't bother to retract the motion from the head of Northmoor to have Gibson taken care of.

This movie was basically different from many in others insofar that the "bad guys" understood that bodycounts leads to questions. Remember, in the one scene they make it known that anyone you kill will have a relative, a loved one, someone close, a friend, etc., who may continue to investigate which only makes things worse.

In real life, they don't do "murder" cover-ups anymore...they pay people off or ship them to Guantanamo Bay.