MovieChat Forums > Dark (2017) Discussion > quite a few inconsistencies in this

quite a few inconsistencies in this

posted 6 years ago by exatera (3942)
20 replies | jump to latest

I mean, not to detract from the merits of the show, but I did notice some things that I hopefully can discuss with others:

1) Why didn't the adult Ulrich remember seeing Mikkel back when he was 16? I realize we don't remember everything from our teen years, but I would think a strangely dressed boy showing up at your house stating he lives there would have been a standout moment, not easy to forget.
Same question about Katharina, I suppose, but then to her the encounters would have been more random, so I can believe she wouldn't remember this at all.

2) Although, that brings me to Hannah - how did she not realize she'd seen that boy before when Ulrich's youngest son started growing up? Especially considering she was in a relationship with Mikkel the whole time?

3) Now, what about Egon? I watched the series twice in a row, and after the first viewing thought that it did seem like Egon remembered Ulrich from 1953, since he seemed prejudiced towards the teenage Ulrich in 1986. But upon the second viewing, I am not so sure... I mean, if Egon did remember him (AND connected the dots about time travel and stuff), there certainly wasn't any kind of giveaway.
But then, how would it have even been possible for him not to remember? Any cop would remember a child murderer (especially in a boring town like Winden) even if it is from 33 years ago. Especially when that child murderer talks of some song from the future and quotes a couple of lines from it in English, and tells Egon about his own future life.

4) Did no one notice after Helge's car accident in 1986 that the old man who crashed into his car had the exact same mangled left ear? (and scarring on left cheek)

5) Why would the 49y.o. Jonas write down "WHEN is Mikkel?" on his board? By then he had known for 33 years already what year Mikkel traveled to. He wasn't investigating anything, he already knew precisely what happened.

6) How did the dog open the door? Twice?? That's not to mention that the strong wind when one does so would have just carried it off.

7) This one is not terribly important, but still stuck out like a sore thumb (to me): how would they have known in 1953 that Yasin was Middle Eastern? He is light-skinned, and it wasn't something immediately apparent even when his eyes were intact. From a mutilated corpse that would have been impossible to infer.
The police also actually mentioned the brown color of the eyes, which was bizarre considering they were melted.

8) One more: Ulrich's mother Jana told him that she remembered a priest arguing with a man with a mangled ear 33 ears ago, and that the other day she saw that man again and he hadn't aged a day.
This is what I don't get: she'd lived in Winden her entire life, how would she not have known exactly who the man with the ear was??

[–] DarthRoger (867) 6 years ago

1) I can remember any number of moments from when I was 16 but the older you get, the more vague memory becomes. You would think he's remember a crazy kid showing up at his address, thinking it was his home but it only happened once.
2) Good point but most people who are adults are so involved in the everyday "give and take" of life that they would not notice something so obvious to a casual or neutral observer. How many of us don't notice things all around us that should get our attention? Just think about it. And since it seems implausible, the logical mind would not make the connection. Again, human nature.
3) The fact that Ulrich the teenager of 1986 and Ulrich the adult, charged child-murderer from 1953 have the same name isn't that odd. Charles Manson had a common name (Charles), so you wouldn't automatically think that a kid in the future is a teen Charles Manson, even though they have the same first name. And a guy from the past wouldn't be a teenager 33 years later, so again the logical mind would never make such a leap.
4) That is because the old man was Helge from the future. He was trying to stop the chain of events and stop himself. How did you miss that part?
5) It was just a play on words, more for the audience watching. Of course, it was the right question too, as opposed to "where" is Mikkel.
6) Good question. I don't think the dog let itself through. I think one of the central players - Jonas, Noah or the future version of the female plant manager (can't remember her name) - let the dog through.
7) I didn't get that at all. I think they were just trying to determine his background. His skin was darkened but likely from the process that Noah has been using in trying to perfect his time machine. The skin was probably sunburned by the process that destroyed his eyes.

[–] exatera (3942) 6 years ago

"4) That is because the old man was Helge from the future. He was trying to stop the chain of events and stop himself. How did you miss that part?"

What I am wondering is, how did you miss the meaning of my question so entirely?..

[–] DarthRoger (867) 6 years ago

Okay, sorry about that exatera. I was reading though a bit hurriedly and didn't get it right. All I can state is what I stated earlier. They wouldn't make the connection but I imagine they could fingerprint 86 Helge and 2019 Helge and find out they are the same person. I mean, surely they would as there would be a police investigation of any serious traffic wreck involving fatalities. Maybe that is something they are going to follow up on in season 2.

Again, apologies for not reading the question right the first time. LOL!

[–] DarthRoger (867) 6 years ago

Here's my only pressing issue with DARK:

Why did the future Mikkel (Michael) hang himself? What purpose does that serve in the chain of events? Why did he have to die?

[–] exatera (3942) 6 years ago

It was only on the second viewing that I noticed the older Jonas say Mikkel saved his life, but he didn't understand that until much later.
I suppose there is more to come about that.

[–] DarthRoger (867) 6 years ago

Let's hope so. That part still is perplexing to me.

On the issue of Jonas and Noah: Is Jonas the Messianic figure and is Noah supposed to be a kind of Anti-Christ figure?
What do you think? I've not been able to engage many watchers with this viewpoint and I'd like to see what you have to write on the matter. Clearly Noah is evil as his time travel experiments involve killing innocents in his quest to perfect his time device.

Here's a thought to cook some mental noodles. What if the worlds from DARK are in a triangular time loop that is within another time loop? What if their lives are happening across 3x33 spans of time while an even bigger time loop scenario goes on outside of their lives and their worlds. Like multitudes of cells in a body, all a part of a bigger whole.

Just out-of-the-box philosophical thinking on this last question.

[–] exatera (3942) 6 years ago

What I realized at the end of the series (or that was my interpretation, anyway) was that the entire season was only setting the stage for the REAL plot - apparently there are "guardians of time", so to speak, and they are at war with each other.

As of right now we do not have enough information to answer this question definitively. Noah does seem evil, and I actually did not understand the point of his and Helge's experiments with the boys - so that they can travel in time all the time and not only every 33 years?.. I mean, my understanding was that it's the end on 2019 on the show already, and the moment 2020 starts - that's it, the tunnels are of no use to them until 2052, since the wormhole only works in 33-year intervals.

But who is evil here might turn out to be a matter of perspective.

It only dawned on me during the second viewing, btw, that Tronte is Noah's son! I don't know how I missed that initially.

And why is the show called DARK in all caps as though it's an acronym for something? I mean, it could very well turn out not to mean anything in particular, but I did wonder about that.

[–] DarthRoger (867) 6 years ago

Interesting thoughts. I too have wondered about the title of the show, thinking it might be referring to dark matter or dark energy, two forces that astrophysicists theorize shaped the universe. And I completely forgot about Tronte's connection to Noah. I'm trying to recall when that was established. Might be time for a second viewing for me!

[–] exatera (3942) 6 years ago

Aha, so I wasn't the only one!

In the episode where Ulrich time-travels to 1953 and encounters his grandmother Agnes (the beautiful lesbian woman) and his father Tronte as a boy, Agnes later says to her landlady that her ex-husband was a priest, but she wouldn't call him a man of god. And then the next scene is Noah taking confession from Helge's mother - the connection was actually obvious, I just probably wasn't paying sufficient attention the first time I watched.

So yeah, Noah is Tronte's father, Ulrich's grandfather, and Mikkel's great-grandfather. And Jonas's great-great-grandfather.

[–] DarthRoger (867) 6 years ago

You are correct! I do remember that now and thought to myself at the time (Tronte's Dad is Noah?) but I didn't want to make that jump until I knew more. Tronte hiding the coat with the rust-red soil, his secretiveness... all of it makes sense now.

Parts of this show even remind me a bit of the book THE TALISMAN, co-authored by Stephen King that deals with alternate dimensions. In some of Larry Niven's works, continuous time travel mucks with the continuity of events on a minor scale at first and later, on a major scale if the same people keep traveling in time to the same places and events.

So many possibilities but I agree with you. I think season 2 will get even wilder.

[–] exatera (3942) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] subratjain1 (202) 6 years ago

That's what implied.. But hear me out.

Noah is the only person whose versions are not shown as per the year we are in. I.e. 53/86/2019/2052.

So, if Noah = Bartosz, then what we seem him is his version from 1952. He screws the the lesbian lady when he travel back in time and Tronte is born. That means he travels back to 1953-12 = 1941 or so. Isn't it? Would that be possible.

I was thinking about it last night in bed, and something doesn't add up

[–] exatera (3942) 6 years ago

I watched this show over six months ago, so I don't remember every detail on who is who, but I suppose we'll see next season.

[–] exatera (3942) 6 years ago

What did you think was the purpose of the experiments?

[–] pixeltrance (2) 6 years ago

I would like to add one, well maybe not so much an inconsistency as just being plain wrong. When Jonas goes back to 1986 for the first time and visit the school, he asks Regina which date it is and she says the 9th of November. The bell then rings and the hallway is filled with kids.
Later that very same day we see Egon at the AKW and Egon asks Helge to come into the station for further questioning on Tuesday the 11th. In a later episode, we even see Egon looking at a calendar which shows that Helge is supposed to show up on Tuesday the 11th. This means that Jonas was in school on Sunday the 9th and schools in Germany were certainly not open on Sundays.

[–] exatera (3942) 6 years ago

Well, that's just a technical error, then, not an inconsistency.

I mean, I don't see what kind of discussion one could have out of this.

[–] pixeltrance (2) 6 years ago

Errrrrr... I already mentioned that it wasn't an inconsistency and I hardly expected a discussion about it.

[–] R_Kane (15828) 6 years ago

DARK

I love this series. I love its devotion to the circular, circular, circular (reputation every 33 years, as the orbits of the Sun and the Moon coincide, an amalgam of Astrology and Astorophyisics., Metaphysics and Quantum Mechanics and circulation of time, and its stance that past, present and future are both an illusion and a delusion, because life is not linear. Life, and reality, are a Gestalt. I love how European the series is. As a German-American who is both proud of and troubled by my heritage, I am fascinated to see what a rich, nuanced and thought-out TV series my Fatherland (and, yes, I completely understand all the overtones there are to that word, and I accept them, disgrace and glory, both) has offered to the world. What I reject about Dark is its devotion to
Determinism. I understand its arguments that there are outcomes (not events, but outcomes, results) that MUST happen, and that free will is an illusion. I applaud the series’ arguments in this regard. They are logical and compelling. My spirit rejects them. I once had a Japanese girlfriend, whose mother was from a Samurai family, a very old family. She was a student of palm-reading. She did a reading on me, and told me that I would
die when I was young. She saw that this reading upset me; as who would it not? She then said, “Do you know what the Samurai would do when they did not like what the lines on their palm foretold? They would take their katana (Samurai sword) and cut new lines on their hand.”

That was more than 30 years ago. I hope for a Season 2 of Dark. I would not be at all surprised to see that my issues have been addressed. Bravo to this.

PS If you enjoy this series, you may also enjoy Counterpart on HBO, which has ended Season 1.

[–] exatera (3942) 6 years ago

You should have opened your own thread if you are not responding to any of the points I brought up.

[–] R_Kane (15828) 6 years ago

I put it here to share it with you. You are right. There are inconsistencies, seemingly, in the story, but I expected there would seem to be. Like you, I always though this season was a prelude to what will follow. I am therefore keeping an open mind, until the conclusion. Sometimes that approach works well, e.g., Counterpart, Westworld. Sometimes It doesn’t, e.g., Twin Peaks. Time will tell, pun fully intended.