MovieChat Forums > Ransom (2017) Discussion > What I Learned from Watching "Ransom"

What I Learned from Watching "Ransom"

posted 7 years ago by GreenInkBrigade
14 replies | jump to latest

1. The way to get a job is to stalk the hiring manager.

2. You can track down a school that could be anywhere in the world with just it's athletic team colors.

3. Schools will give you a student's personal information if you pretend to be a famous person.

4. Parents with 11-year-old sons don't password protect their computers.

5. People who found and then sell software companies for $23 million suck at investing the proceeds.

6. If you hide the dead bodies in the garage, the house won't smell of putrified dead bodies, even after what can only be presumed to have been several days.

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] viewer925 7 years ago

I usually give shows 3-4 episodes to improve, so I'll do the same with this one. I agree with all your points though, I hope the writing can improve.

[–] chrisf0047-52-773123 7 years ago

I'll also cut them some slack for a few episodes. In this one I was squirming when the time came for the money drop and the entire outcome hinged on the abused criminal brother choosing to use the pepper spray instead of shooting everyone and taking the loot. This plot contrivance was just a bit too far fetched. Also, I'm still trying to figure out how the newly hired woman fits into things. It was also way too far fetched (I must really like this phrase) when she got by a cop by flashing a business card. And then no one seemed to think she was out of place in an active situation? The writers need to do better in dealing with reality.

[–] Kunovega 7 years ago

The new hire is a plot device. A crutch so the writers have a way to explain technical details to the audience by having her make "obvious" comments. The more experienced members of the team would not feel the need to verbalize as much of their activity with explanations they already know

[–] jglobo75 7 years ago

The lock of hair the kidnappers cut off to provide a DNA sample would have been useless for that purpose. DNA testing of hair to ID someone requires a root, which you don't get by cutting off strands.

[–] chrisf0047-52-773123 7 years ago

At first when the guy got the knife out you might have thought he was going to cut an ear or finger off. When I saw it was only some hair I thought the same thing you did. It would have been better if he would have yanked some hair out with the roots. Writers should know these things. Hasn't everyone in the World seen CSI?

[–] Maccadanny 7 years ago

7. You can get past cops at a lockdown by just showing a company card.

[–] HaggieMonster 7 years ago

8.) When trying to get hired, disregard the first direct order your boss gives you (Stay in the car!) that results in him getting punched in the stomach.

[–] desertskies 7 years ago

9) Cliche driven scripts tend to make the audience look elsewhere for entertainment.
I don't see this one lasting another season.

"You can run me, you can starve me and you can beat me and you can kill me. Just don't bore me."

[–] panamamike 7 years ago

10. If you are shot in the leg by your brother during a ransom exchange on the top level of a parking garage shortly after 1 am, you will still be sitting on a gurney being attended to by paramedics after the sun has come up, hours later.

And why was the kid still there waiting for his parents to arrive?
"Hey kid, we've rescued you from your kidnappers, but now we're just going to sit here for 5 or 6 hours".

[–] !!!deleted!!! (4524359) 7 years ago

The lock of hair the kidnappers cut off to provide a DNA sample would have been useless for that purpose. DNA testing of hair to ID someone requires a root, which you don't get by cutting off strands.

That's not entirely true. Certain DNA testing of hair does NOT require a root.
You can use something called mitochondrial DNA testing on cut hair which is useful if you want to find out if someone shares the same maternal line as you.
This would have been sufficent for what they wanted to know.

[–] CaptainTiddlywinks 7 years ago

1. One encounter does not a stalker make. Bold initiative can be a positive characteristic, especially for an unconventional vocation which requires a strong and confident personality such as hostage negotiation.

2. They heard the boy speak English so they knew he grew up in North America. Also they asked him where he was during the phone call, the scene cut away immediately after so it's unclear if he responded but he could have told them he was near Denver by describing the mountains/plains around him, as well how long ago he'd been taken. From there it wouldn't have been difficult to track down soccer teams with 11 year olds and that pattern of burgundy & white on the collar.

If anything what's actually suspect about this isn't how they found him, but rather that the boy grew up in Denver at all. For a kidnapping/adoption enterprise to distribute the children within the same city as they've been taken seems... unwise. But then again perhaps taking children across state lines is even riskier.

3, 4 & 5. It is naive to think mistakes in judgment of this magnitude aren't commonplace.

6. It had only been at most a day. The boy was taken after soccer practice on the first day, the ransom team entered the boys house the next day during school hours. The smell wouldn't have pervaded the house in such a short time.

[–] GreenInkBrigade 7 years ago

In Re 6: I'll defer to your expertise on how long you can store a dead body in a garage.

[–] Kunovega 7 years ago

1. She didn't stalk the hiring manager. The hiring manager is the one that rejected her. She stalked his boss. Yes, it's a bizarre way to get a job, but it still wasn't the hiring manager.

2. You can most certainly narrow your search for a High School based on team colors. And if you get lucky it will be reasonably local, which is the only reason they were able to find it and verify the information so quickly.

3. That shocks you? People are easy to fool.

4. Lot's of people don't. It could also have just been left on. My computer will not ask for a password if I leave it on. It will eventually turn off the monitor but it never puts itself to sleep and I don't always bother turning it off. I just don't need to. I walk back to it and touch the mouse and the monitor turns on and I'm ready to keep doing whatever. It's passworded if you tried to access it from the outside over a network, but if you already broke into my house while it was on, no password unless I shut it down first

5. "People who found and then sell software companies for $23 million suck at investing the proceeds" ~ not that big a stretch. Being a software engineer does not magically make you a good investor. First of all I would bet 40% of that went to taxes and he did still have $700,000 left. On top of that he probably owns his house and cars outright. So yea, he lost a few million a year over a period of 5 years (since his company sold). Not everyone is good at investing, and I can promise you will be even worse at it if you are suffering from depression (like he was from losing his son). He would probably have made at least a few safer investments if he still had his kid. Instead he went for high risk because he didn't care anymore.

6. "If you hide the dead bodies in the garage, the house won't smell of putrified dead bodies, even after what can only be presumed to have been several days." ~ You assume it's been several days. Nothing about that situation tells me it was more than a day. The bodies did not show signs of bloating or rot, there's not a lot of smell until they begin to bloat (which is the gas building up inside, which is what causes the smell). It can take up to 3 days (longer if the temperature is low) before a body really stinks. Also, the garage was separated by exterior sealed doors. Any smell would take even longer to enter the home unless the doors between them were open. It's not like they were internal doors with air gaps around it.