First of all, let me admit that I haven't read the book. However, I simply didn't understand why the killer was so interested in "locking in" a victim, as opposed to committing outright murder. Obviously I'm missing something very basic in the storyline here, but I just didn't catch the motivation.
Help, anyone?
"Duck, I says..."
I never got it in the end why he wanted to do it, and how he knew how? I totally didn't understand it in the end. He was saying something about wanting to save them like his sisters, but I would have thought he'd have just killed them, rather than locking them in and making them helpless?
shareThanks. I guess his medical knowledge came from working in the hospital, but yes, his motive is still obscure...
"Duck, I says..."
[deleted]
In the book Thorne didn't save the killer's life. It's difficult to explain but I think the following excerpt from the book might help.
'I can only imagine how good it feels on the machines, safe and clean, no mess, and I feel proud at liberating a body from the tyranny of the petty and the putrid. To be released from the humdrum, fed and cleaned, monitered and cared for, all our filthy fluids disposed of, and above all to be aware of those wonders as they are happening'
Obviously, this is more in context with the storyline in the book, and the emotional history of the killer.
I just finished watching the show; I never read the book. However, I think that the killer wanted to relive the feeling of his sisters' death and life. When he looked at them on the bed, he felt they were still alive initially. So by capturing these girls, he was trying to re-create something in them. To put them in a kind of limbo, being in a comatose state yet not dead. He felt he had succeeded with Alison, like she was the only one who he managed to put in that state of undead, that's why he had kept trying and trying. That's why he didn't kill the detective. It was all about a connection with his sisters. More or less I'm sure he had some kind of psychotic break when it all went down with him when he was 12 and knew what his father did.
This is my signature (opinion) and I'm sticking to it. lol
Read the book mate, it's brilliant and then you will get it.
Rush into it!
It was very easy really, the guy was a complete lunatic. When he was a child he saw their sisters dead (killed by his father), his father (who was abusing him for years) tried to kill hi as well, and then killed. The girls he kidnapped were all about a connection with his sisters. He was trying to repeat the scene he saw when he was a child, thinking he's "saving" them.
sharealbaprogni..
thanks for taking the time to economically describe the killer's motive. As mentioned by the OP, the film didn't provide a definitive reason for placing the victims into the "Locked In" state of being.
Another comment noted the book provides a explanation that didn't get captured by the screenwriters.
why no one is mentioning that doing that to someone is one of the worst things that anyone could ever do to another person.. that's really surprised me..! It's so INCREDIBLY EVIL!!!
shareYes, of *course* it is! But the OP and posters were discussing the killer"s apparent lunatic MOTIVES not the heinousness of the crime itself.
share