MovieChat Forums > The Collection (2012) Discussion > Let's discuss all of the faults of this ...

Let's discuss all of the faults of this piece of crap

posted 11 years ago by kenny1189
32 replies | jump to latest

1. why is Arkins wife still alive? Arkin clearly didn't bring the money to her, so she should have been murdered by the gangsters.

2. The line, 'I already told you guys everything I know' is said by Arkin when he mistakes the man for a cop. But he clearly didn't tell the cops everything, why would he leave out the location of the house of the killer? I'm all for forgiving plot holes in horror, but when the hole changes the outcome of the film, that's a problem for me.

3. Why exactly does the group need Arkin? and why don't they trust him?

4. How in god's name does the collector open fire with an ak47 and 2 dogs and not kill anyone from it?

5. So they're in a part of the city that rats wont even sh*t in (direct quote) but when a bum gets shot (who is very unlikely to have a cell phone), it only takes about 45 seconds for a cop AND an ambulance to show up. This was the moment I realized the movie was just bad and had no hope for it.

6. How are the chemicals in those glass cases putting out a fire? If anything, shouldn't they add to it?

All that, and not too mention, the complete and total abandonment of the excellent tone and feel of the first film in favor of a silly, actiony feel that ruins everything about it. I really would like to know why so many like it, especially fans of the first film.

This should've been called 'the collectors big, silly haunted house'

[–] danimal09752 11 years ago

And you missed the most glaring problem I saw.....

Where in hell did the collector get the money to do all of that work on that hotel? He couldn't get electric from the electric company obviously. The cost of a generator big enough to pump that kind of electric into that size building would be huge. Much less all his "toys" inside. He'd have had to have sunk literally millions into that place.

Then you'd have to have at least a crew to install the generator. And the crew didn't find it odd installing it into a long abandoned building? I mean come on!

[–] kenny1189 11 years ago

Hahaha, this is true.

I just don't get where all the love for this is coming from. I love the first one, but this is a piece of crap. The biggest compliment I can give it is that it's mostly watchable, but I certainly wouldn't even call it decent.

[–] CasseroleWorshipper 11 years ago

He may have inherited a lot of money.
I don't mean to impose, but I am the Ocean.

[–] Juve317 11 years ago

Just enjoy it for wat it is lol a movie. Quit looking so deep into it

[–] GeneticSugarKane 11 years ago

This complete mess of a sequel really is a shame.
I'm a big fan of the first who got no enjoyment from this piece of trash.
The lack of continuity with the previous film drove me nuts. I didn't even stay to the end because I was so agitated.
At least I'll always have the first one on BluRay. It's easy enough to pretend the story ends there.

One Life to Leave ~ My lists: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur5570856/lists

[–] NeoA4 11 years ago

Hey Kenny, STFU!

[–] vech24 11 years ago

I don't know why you'd try to defend this. I'll introduce a few that made me groan off the bat.

1. Why is someone like Arkin even brought along in the first place? If someone survived extreme trauma like surviving abduction / torture by a known serial killer then the last thing the police would do is bring him along. The movie hinged this all on the fact that Arkin had carved some sort of map into his arm.

2. Why did the initial police team not even try and act like cops? Blaming Arkin, using him to pick a lock, taking him inside. All completely ridiculous.

3. Why did the police send a small team to begin with for a known to be dangerous high priority target?

4. Why is a "hotel abandoned for years" still functioning with electricity and other utilities?

I could go on but you really have to turn your brain off for this one, much like the Saw franchise this movie obviously wants to be.

[–] HentaiGuy42 11 years ago

2 and 3 actually have answers. They weren't cops, they were mercenaries hired to assassinate the Collector and rescue the girl. They used Arkin because (to them) he was the least valuable member of the team and putting him on point served to keep them out of danger. And they were a small team probably because they assumed a heavily armed assault unit would be sufficient to take out one guy who wasn't expecting them.

But, yeah, it's a dumb movie.

[–] clickbait 8 years ago

so HentaiGuy42...how come someone could hire a team of mercinaries to kill an unknown and unheard of serialkiller just in matter of a week tops since the first movie took place? unless Arkin have been laying in that coffin for like a decade...this movie is utter *beep* and all these points are good...just tear this retarded *beep* to pieces.

~If the realistic details fails, the movie fails~

[–] Danimal_77 11 years ago

Why don't you STFU!

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] newdaddy-1 11 years ago

I liked the movie and the plot holes can be explained.

1. All the news reports about her husband made it impossible for the mob to kill her.

2. Maybe he did tell them and they thought he lost his mind or didn't believe him. Or maybe they were planning on following that lead as soon as Arkin was okay to be released from the hospital.

3. He knows what to look out for, and how the collector thinks. They don't trust him because he doesn't want to be there.

4. He wasn't trying to kill them. If he was they would be dead as you pointed out. He likes to kill slowly.

5. More time passes then shown. He film makers have already said it was just bad editing.

6. It was just water. Even if it wasn't most likely it wasn't a flammable substance.

Any more plot holes?

[–] kenny1189 11 years ago

Those were all awful explanations

why the hell would cops wait till he was out of the hospital? The Collector kills slowly so that's why he didn't shoot them?

Dude, you really are stretching with everything there.

[–] newdaddy-1 11 years ago

Just because you don't agree dosnt make them bad. I used logic. What did you use to dismiss them?

Arkin was needed to lead them to the destination. They needed to wait till he was released from the hospital.

With the gun he was using at the distance he was at could have easily killed them. He was using it to suppress them not kill them. The dogs were supposed to do that.

[–] drjekell 11 years ago

Sorry, but you certainly didn't use logic.

The biggest flaw is why the hell the police weren't immediately talking to him to see what he knew. They know the man was abducted by the killer, so it's not as if they shouldn't listen to him. And they know the killer has abducted lots of other people, including someone he took just a few minutes ago. Their very first question should be "do you know where he is?" And Arkin would say, "I know how to find the place." And then they would take a huge team in to go after it.

Just because the filmmakers admitted to it being bad editing doesn't make it awful. Then later the policeman says "we need the fire department," and the firetruck is there in the next shot, which also appears to be mere seconds later.

This movie's plot made no sense, and it was badly put together.

[–] clickbait 8 years ago

newdaddy-1...how could Arkin lead them to him and his fortress with unlimited electricity? how did Arkin know where to find him? since he have been in a box for a week or so before he escaped and he did escape from a building who wasnt even the same as the party building...such lame crapfest...riddled with plot holes...

~If the realistic details fails, the movie fails~

[–] newdaddy-1 8 years ago

newdaddy-1...how could Arkin lead them to him and his fortress with unlimited electricity? how did Arkin know where to find him? since he have been in a box for a week or so before he escaped and he did escape from a building who wasnt even the same as the party building...such lame crapfest...riddled with plot holes...

He must have illegally tapped into electrical grid. With all of his knowledge of mechanics it's not a big stretch.

As for how he knew where to find him. He was at the building we are at for most of the movie. When he was moved he cut himself so he could find his way back. So when he agreed to help her father they started at the party and backtracked from there.

[–] clickbait 8 years ago

But he wasnt at his trap house when he was in the case...he was in another area of the city...the rave party and the trap house with all the prisoners and *beep* wasnt the same building, so how could he know about the other building and lead the mercs there? pathetic movie!

~If the realistic details fails, the movie fails~

[–] newdaddy-1 8 years ago

What makes you think he wasn't at his lair most of the time? Do you think he had a second place? He was at the trap house with the other prisoners. Maybe I was wrong but that just makes sense.

[–] clickbait 8 years ago

No the traphouse and the rave house are two different houses...the rave was in the city and the traphouse in the outer parts of the city...you clearly see that when the company enters the rave in the beginning and if you think that its the same house...how big of a building do you think he have? he cant have that kinda a space and no one notice even if its abondoned and if it was the same house, sooner or later the mercs and Arkin would have stumbled on that rave room with all the dead bodies...no way the collector would have got time to clean that up before they came back...and you are talkin about sense? just read the thread 100 things I learned from the collector and you will see that nothing in this piece of crap "movie" makes any sense...

~If the realistic details fails, the movie fails~

[–] newdaddy-1 8 years ago

I agree the trap house and rave house are two different places. My point was they started following the cuts on his hand from the rave house, and it took them to the trap house.

This we agree on. I am not sure why you thought I said the Trap House and Rave House were the same place. Let me break down what I think happened:

- Arkin gets tortured at the trap house.
- Arkin gets moved to the rave house (starts cutting his arm)
- Arkin gets freed from the rave house, and is taken to the hospital.
- They take him from the hospital, to the rave house.
- From there they follow his cuts to trap house (where he was originally being kept)

[–] clever-username 11 years ago

I agree, this movie was so far over the top, it came back down on the otherside as somewhat awesome.

1. When you know the location of a mass murderer's hotel of horrors... you can either bring with you a hundred policemen or 3 incompetant mercinaries. I choose mercinaries!

2. Failed Carlin's First Law of Mass Homicide. There are always more injured than dead.

3. When injured and delerious victims rush at you.... Kill, Kill, Kill.

4. No one has a cell phone. Was this film set in 1986? The mercinaries don't even have radios.

5. The collector makes a grand show of ligting a wick that leads to high explosives. When you get out of his trap, you forget about the impending explosions that a single drop of spit could cancel.

[–] Tomthespacetraveler 11 years ago

Not to mention the stupidest character in horror history. You put your hand. Into a BEAR TRAP. You can't just use your shirt or something?

"This isn't TV, it's real life. Can't you tell the difference?"
"Sure - I just like TV better."

[–] anticaria 11 years ago

1. why is Arkins wife still alive? Arkin clearly didn't bring the money to her, so she should have been murdered by the gangsters.

where in the film do they mention anything about 'gangsters' or about any 'money' or about arkin's wife being in danger if she didn't produce said money?

all we're told is that arkin's a convicted thief arrested upon arrival at the hospital, and that, after reading the note attached to the flowers in his hospital room ('for the collection': 'get well soon. can't wait to meet the family'],' he advises his wife to go to her mom's place and hole up there..

just curious as to where you got all of the 'gangsters/money/wife-in-mortal-danger' back story..

were the flowers and note supposed to have come from 'the mob'? i assumed the flowers were sent by the serial killer.. aka, the collector..

it wasn't the fall from her 16th-floor penthouse that killed her, it was the landing

[–] GeneticSugarKane 11 years ago

Are you aware that this is a sequel? The end of the first film leaves you wondering what will happen to Arkin's wife and child because they literally have minutes to retrieve the money they need from Arkin before being set upon by loan sharks. That whole sub-plot was entirely discarded for this sequel as if it never even happened, hence the problem. Not to mention they hired a new actress to play his wife who looked nothing like the original. She was an olive skinned hispanic woman in the first one and a white-skinned german/indian woman in the second. Real quality film-making.

My IMDb lists: www.imdb.com/user/ur5570856/lists

[–] my-dog-is-lovely 10 years ago

she was not white skinned in the 2nd film, she looked hispanic to me, i dont know if she was, but she wasnt white or german?!

[–] Teamsawyer 8 years ago

The gangster story comes from the first movie. It's basically the entire plot of the movie, and the very reason Arkin goes back to the house at night and meets the Collector. He went back to rob his rich jewlery store owning boss to get the money his wife needed to pay of loan sharks. When he didn't make it to her by the midnight deadline she should've technically been killed. Therefore, her turning up at the hospital was a plot hole. Unless she was somehow evading the loan sharks, but in the first movie she was terrified. So that seems unlikely.
Like, the gangster/wife/money triangle is pretty much the basis for these two movies. That's probably where it's coming from.