MovieChat Forums > Prisoners (2013) Discussion > Parallels between the two kidnapping plo...

Parallels between the two kidnapping plots

posted 8 years ago by lemming11
5 replies | jump to latest

I wanted to talk about the strong parallels between the two kidnappings that take place in the film, the off-screen kidnapping of the two girls and the on-screen kidnapping of Alex Jones. Both of these abductions involved a merciless kidnapper motivated by rage (Holly/Keller) and a passive witness who can't bring themselves to speak out about what they know (Alex/Franklin).

The parallels between Holly and Keller are the obvious. Two parents who became monsters because their children were taken from them. Back when she lost her son, Holly waged her war against God by kidnapping Alex when he was just a child. Keller has been told by Loki that Alex has the mind of a ten year old, which I believe is true. I think the trauma he's suffered due to his abduction trapped Alex in a state of arrested development. Keller refused to see Alex as a child trapped in a man's body. He refused to even see Alex as a person. He dehumanized and demonized Alex waging his own war to find his daughter.

I wanted to talk more about the interesting parallel between Alex and Franklin, because I've seen comments from a lot of viewers who don't seem to understand why Alex wouldn't just tell Keller that the girls had been taken by Holly. I think it's basically the same reason Franklin didn't tell the police that Keller had kidnapped and was torturing Alex, even though Franklin believed what Keller was doing was wrong. Franklin kept silent due to his familial bond with Keller, knowing that if he did go to the police or free Alex, then Keller would go to prison. I think Alex was silenced by the same fear that Holly would go to prison if he revealed the location of the two girls. I believe that Alex has severe Stockholm syndrome. He'd spent most of his life dependent on his kidnapper, who has drugged him so much since childhood she has rendered him mentally impaired.

Alex has probably been conditioned through years of abuse to never say anything that would implicate Holly and get her arrested. He is so deeply traumatized and brainwashed that it'd probably take intensive therapy to get through to him - not violent torture. Alex never hurt the girls, just as Franklin never hurt Alex, but he didn't help them either because he was too loyal to Holly, just as Franklin was too loyal to Keller. Franklin was also struggling with the trauma of losing his own child when Keller made him an unwilling accomplice in his kidnapping plot. I think Franklin and Alex are witnesses to a crime which they don't think is right but they are unwilling to stop because they are both closely bonded to the person committing the crime.

[–] edinabb 8 years ago

Keller's authority is a logic of vigilante justice. The police are too slow & ineffective, so the rise of the civilian (or the face of populist rage supporting torture chambers) is necessary.

Franklin doesn't have the extent & history of bonding with Keller comparable to Alex/Holly's (check their fantastic acting as she leaned into him struggling to sign his name for release. She's all he has in the world!)

Franklin is probably closer to pack mentality and bystander effect.

[–] lemming11 8 years ago

I agree about that moment signing the release forms. Alex actually hands the form to Holly first and has to be told to give the form to Loki.

I agree that Franklin is more guilty than Alex of bystander effect. Franklin is suffering from the trauma of his child being missing, but he's not mentally impaired, so he was more capable of making moral judgements.

And while I do think that Franklin and Keller had a close bond, you're right that it's not on the same level as Holly/Alex where she has completely isolated him and had him conditioned and under her control.

[–] henrimaine 7 years ago

Interesting analysis. There are a lot of kidnappings in this movie. The on-screen kidnapping of Alex by the grieving father. The off-screen kidnapping of the girls. And the even more off-screen kidnapping of Alex and the other creepy guy. It is interesting to note that Alex was kidnapped twice.

[–] fillshertease 7 years ago

I wanted to talk more about the interesting parallel between Alex and Franklin, because I've seen comments from a lot of viewers who don't seem to understand why Alex wouldn't just tell Keller that the girls had been taken by Holly.

Sorry, but with all due respect you seem to be one of the people who doesn't understand why Alex remains silent. Alex doesn't tell Keller anything because he doesn't know anything. Alex is completely innocent. He didn't kidnap the girls and he doesn't know Holly has them. THAT is why he doesn't say anything.

There really aren't any parallels between Alex and Franklin. Alex doesn't remain quiet to protect Holly; if he knew something he would have said it. As for Franklin, he didn't stay quiet out of familial bond with Keller, he stayed quiet initially because he wanted his daughter back. Then, when he started to have doubts because Alex remained silent - and let's face it, NO ONE could or would stay silent after brutal torture like that - he was actually going to let Alex go. However he brought his wife in and she said that the torture should continue; which is one of the reasons the statement the movie makes about torture is so powerful once we learn that Alex is completely innocent...

It's the whole point!

What I find so interesting is that when Prisoners came out at the cinema, a number of us came here to the IMDB boards to talk about the film. It was obvious to everyone that Alex was completely innocent and we discussed all the things he did and why he did them. However I recently watched the movie again, but when I came here afterwards it now seems that no one understands that Alex is innocent.

I find the whole thing incredibly interesting - and a bit weird to be honest - and I can't quite fathom it because the movie makes Alex's innocence so clear, and the movie is so much more powerful once you realise he's innocent. It's like both Fight Club and The Sixth Sense, in that you make a number of assumptions the first time through, then when you learn the truth, you watch the movie again and many of the scenes take on a whole new meaning once you realise what's actually happening.

The first time through Prisoners we are led to believe that Alex is guilty - as is Keller - and then the torture is, of course, completely justified. Anyone who says they wouldn't do the same thing in Keller's situation is deluding themselves. However we start to have some doubts because Loki - who we are specifically told is a brilliant detective who has solved every case he's ever been assigned - starts to have doubts, and even says that Alex isn't involved. Then we find the girls were NOT kidnapped in the RV; that if they were taken in the RV it was voluntarily. We find out that the RV was parked outside the house where Alex lived when he was a child named Barry, and it's far too improbable that he would be parked there randomly; which means that Holly was in the RV with Alex, or was by herself. Then Alex goes through incredibly brutal torture but doesn't say anything, when obviously NO ONE would be able to stay silent through that if they knew something. Then, when he finally does say something - out of complete desperation - he doesn't offer any useful information, he make some cryptic statement about "the maze". Then Holly tells Keller that Alex was innocent. THIS is the thing that I find so strange; the fact that we are pretty much told - straight out - that Alex is innocent but people still don't follow.

Then, when we watch the movie again, knowing now that Alex is innocent, we realise that ALL the different things which pointed to his guilt have alternate possible explanations. THAT is when we suddenly understand the very powerful statement the movie is making about torture...

We're from the planet Duplon. We are here to destroy you.

[–] lemming11 7 years ago

Alex doesn't tell Keller anything because he doesn't know anything. Alex is completely innocent. He didn't kidnap the girls and he doesn't know Holly has them. THAT is why he doesn't say anything.

No, Alex was a witness to the girls kidnapping. There are several lines/moments that confirm this. Such as -

Alex saying "They only cried when I left them"
Alex singing the Jingle Bells song that the girls were singing
Holly saying Alex only wanted to give the girls a ride in the camper

It's hard to say for sure, but I would guess what happened was that both Holly and Alex were in the camper, the girls started climbing on it again, Alex (who has the mind of a child) saw the girls as playmates, Alex wanted to go for a ride with them, sing with them, etc. Then when they got to the house, Holly must have sent Alex away and that's when the girls started crying and it became a kidnap situation. I think there's a good chance that Alex did NOT know where the girls were taken after he left them in the camper. Alex has clearly been in the pit/the maze himself but as he was most likely drugged like the other victims, so he doesn't necessarily know that the pit/maze is right under his aunts driveway. So when he does finally tell Keller the girls are in the maze he can't actually tell Keller where the maze is. He doesn't know.

So I think we can assume Alex did lie to the police when he denied having seen the two girls and I think Alex's only motivation for that can have been him protecting Holly, either out of fear, conditioning or some sort of stolkholm syndrome loyalty. Holly says later to Keller that Alex started to choose his words very carefully after an "accident" with a snake when he was a child. I think what's implied here is that Holly and her husband tortured Alex with snakes (and God knows what else) until the boy was so traumatized that he was completely under their control. If Holly had given Alex instructions not to talk to the police then he wouldn't talk to the police. Alex was the only kid that Holly and her husband kept alive (as I presume Bobby would've been killed if he hadn't escaped) and she allowed Alex to walk around free so Holly must have felt certain that Alex was never going to tell anyone about his own kidnapping or other kidnappings he'd witnessed. I think he was so damaged he didn't fully know what was going on. Like Loki says when Alex was being interrogated and given a lie detector test, a lot of the time Alex didn't even understand the questions.