|
|
Post by prometheus on Jan 20, 2004 6:53:58 GMT -5
dont knwo if this has ben mentioned before.......
the gun switch thing, maybe preston didn't swtich it at thw ware house. Before the dog killing scene, there's a scene where preston gives brandt his pistol. Now that has to be when he switched them. Then later at the warehouse when brandt gave preston his (preston's) pistol, preston simply gave it back to brandt.
Althoguht a loophole remains, why did preston switched them in the first place? he wouldn't, unless he planned to go klling the police since then. this remains a flaw.
Another thing i'd like to mention, howcome he has no emotion but has a wife and kids? to get an erection, you d need to be turned on, meaning emotion. or are you saying he had sex with his wife (which he shouldn't have in the first place) using viagra, then did it without any emotion? the only person in the world i know who can do that is paris hilton. even pornstars at least act like they got turned on. sorry if this bit offends anyone, but in order to explain i have to say it.
Also, another flaw is before he went in to meet father through the screen, he had to pass through a metal detector or somehitng. it didn't detect his gun. then, the stupid guard asks for his weapon, and only takes his sword. Now what stupid sh!t head would ask a god damn cleric for weapons and not take his gun? (the damn thing is called GUN kata, hello?
Thanks for listening, or reading.
|
|
|
|
Post by Libby on Jan 20, 2004 7:57:47 GMT -5
Hi Prometheus. Since you have obviously thought quite a bit about the film, you should register and enjoy the fun! OK, the Gun Swap thing tends to cause most of us to start throwing things and gibbering. Your best bet is to look at the threads and make up your own mind. The two most useful are: equilibrium.proboards17.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1051895953 and equilibrium.proboards17.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1049075758Your second point is a good one (although I would take issue with the fact that for men, emotion is necessary for arousal.) If you take a look at the CHUD interview with Kurt Wimmer, it brings up some interesting ideas. Although the family unit still remains, sex is not part of the deal. Here's a quote relevant to your question. Wimmer's comments... "It brings me to another small point that a number of people have brought up (so the gaff is mine) and that is the institution of marriage. ...this world was only maybe 30 years young and to my mind, this would mean that there would still be vestigial remnants of our own time. So, yes, birth is in vitro but with humans I don't think you can wipe the slate completely clean too abruptly, (the communists had to keep churches around for years, gradually eroding their power) so this shell of the family unit still existed (but, we can assume, wouldn't for much longer) kind of like certain traditions or sayings we have whose origins we no longer remember." (from CHUD Message Board) The link is: www.freewebs.com/equilibrium-movie/chudindex.htmI think the point about the metal detector is covered by the two 'plot hole' links. The general concensus is that he had to take the polygraph before passing through the metal detector. Hope this is useful.  |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jan 20, 2004 9:19:52 GMT -5
dont knwo if this has ben mentioned before....... Hi prometheus & I would like to counter Libby's welcome & inventation to register (She is too kind  . PLEASE DO NOT BOTHER!! You obviously have not taken the time to read my PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING thread or bothered to find out more about the film on my FAQ Page. I highly doubt you are actually here for informative discussion about the film since you have not taken the time to even inform yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by Witcher Wolf on Jan 20, 2004 9:28:43 GMT -5
*winces*
I hate the Gun Swap with a passion that can only be described as bordering on the fanatic.
|
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Jan 20, 2004 9:38:21 GMT -5
PLEASE DO NOT BOTHER!! You obviously have not taken the time to read my PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING thread or bothered to find out more about the film on my FAQ Page. I highly doubt you are actually here for informative discussion about the film since you have not taken the time to even inform yourself. -bwahahaha! harsh but oh so funny. -ive seen this covered like 9 times in different posts just since i have been here. look around because if you really cared, you would have found it. -TrustKill- |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jan 20, 2004 9:40:02 GMT -5
DANG!! prometheus, you already joined...  Now I dare ya to prove me wrong.... |
|
|
|
Post by Witcher Wolf on Jan 20, 2004 9:48:04 GMT -5
I double dare...
V^^^V
|
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Jan 20, 2004 9:52:51 GMT -5
ummm... double DOG dare.
-TrustKill-
|
|
|
|
Post by Witcher Wolf on Jan 20, 2004 9:55:46 GMT -5
I am not a...oh wait, yeah, I get ya.
|
|
|
|
Post by Libby on Jan 20, 2004 9:55:50 GMT -5
I spent about two weeks reading nearly every thread from start to finish before I even dared join! (Had quite a lot of time on one hand -the other being in a sling.)
I'm still not very good about spotting lazy people, trolls and suchlike (not much WolfSense!).
|
|
|
|
Post by Witcher Wolf on Jan 20, 2004 9:56:28 GMT -5
*will educate Libby in the Post Katas*
|
|
|
|
Post by TrustKill on Jan 20, 2004 9:57:01 GMT -5
I am not a...oh wait, yeah, I get ya. hehe... sorry for the near-misunderstanding. -TrustKill- |
|
|
|
Post by Libby on Jan 20, 2004 10:01:24 GMT -5
*will educate Libby in the Post Katas* *Libby bows to the Master of the Post Katas* |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jan 20, 2004 10:36:45 GMT -5
What is funny about this whole thing is that about a month ago I actually had to explain to some of the youngsters over at IMDb what "in vitro fertilization" was. What are they teaching this kids in biology these days?? How to put a condom on a banana?? ;D Its almost as if this concept never even crossed their minds as a possibility. I deducted that with my first viewing before I had ever read any comments by Wimmer. |
|
|
|
Post by Libby on Jan 20, 2004 10:50:51 GMT -5
Actually, Jen, my daughter came home last term explaining how she'd put one on an 'anatomically correct' model!  She's 14. |
|
|
|
Post by Witcher Wolf on Jan 20, 2004 10:55:21 GMT -5
Yay for real Sex Education!
|
|
|
|
Post by prome on Jan 21, 2004 1:20:52 GMT -5
this is prometheus. i'm posting this at scool soi dont want to log in and i cant use the same user name. i have read the faq, but becos i didn't have much time i only read a bit of the 'giant plot hole' or something like that. im a newbie to this board and i think you should give me some time to look at everything else i'm sorry i didn't look at it thoroughyl, i just thought that i should share my opinion with other EQ enthusiasts and the board actaully says something like to have fun. i thought i d found a place to discuss about EQ cos its a film i really like but i guess you dont think so.
|
|
|
|
Post by Walldude on Jan 21, 2004 22:36:56 GMT -5
Sometimes it just gets old answering the same questions over and over prom... Jen thinks you may just be trying to stir up trouble, like she said, prove her wrong. Plus to get most of your answers listen to the directors commentary, Wimmer discusses the family thing and the fact that a scene was cut out that shows Preston would have gone through the metal detector after the polygraph test, watch carefully, there are 2 guards in front of the exit to the left of Fathers screen, the metal detector is right behind them.. If you just want to read the commentary some members here have transcribed it and it will be posted soon, some of it is already up
|
|
|
|
Post by prometh eus on Jan 22, 2004 1:18:49 GMT -5
thanks. i haven't got the dvd but i have the vcd so i'll get them soon, for now i cant' watch the commentary yet. i have been a member of a message board for a very long time and i know there are people who go there just to cause trouble but she, or he, should look carefully first. it feels really bad when you are very excited and stuff and you post your opinion but because you are new to the board and film and don't know as much as others people just think you are there to cause trouble. and best of all, i'm supposed to prove to her that i'm not here to cause trouble? it's like you go to someone and you accuse them of something then they said they didn't do it and you tell them to prove you wrong. sure, im having so much fun here.
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jan 22, 2004 4:40:16 GMT -5
prometh eus you are very close to being banned from my board. If I say prove me wrong, yes prove me wrong. I am the god here...not you. You claim not knowing as much as others. My point was to READ BEFORE YOU POST. It is clearly stated in my "READ BEFORE POSTING" thread that if you do not I will take you to task on this matter. Your fun cannot impede upon the fun of others. The language of your first post was not one of congeniality. As I state...prove me wrong... I do not have the time for childish juveniles run amuck on my board and if you continue in the manner in which you currently are (whining about ill treatment) it only takes me a few clicks to get you to stop. This is your one & only warning...join the discussions (which you have yet to do) & enjoy the board or be gone...the choice is now yours. |
|
|
|
Post by Witcher Wolf on Jan 22, 2004 8:22:28 GMT -5
My favourite quote after working in the Game Industry for so long: RTFM...
|
|
Prometheus
Sense Offender
'but I, being poor, have only my dreams.'
Posts: 1
|
Post by Prometheus on Jan 22, 2004 9:05:19 GMT -5
just to make it clear, I am saying all this in a peaceful tone (so no more misunderstanding) and i'll try to type well, as i have said, the times when i am not signed in is because i posted at school and i had to hurry so my typing is a bit wrong.
look jenge, i said i am sorry i did not look at it thoroughly, and believe me that my first post was geniunely because of the love of the film and i just was excited and i had no intention to stir up trouble. I think you should be more open minded and not think that someone is always trying to annoy you. I found this place because i looked for it. i didn't specifically look for this one but i wanted to find a site about Equilibrium and i found this, the perfect site, but maybe not the most perfect people.
I know i have yet to join the discussions, because the first post I made i became a trouble maker, and after that i tried to explain myself, but this is what happens, so how can i continue on? Now i am not trying to whine but I politely ask you to think now jenge, you haven't given me any chance. You said prove you wrong, and i intended to, but i had to explain myself that i wasn't trying to cause trouble. I sincerely wanted to join the discussion but it seems that whatever I say just angers you. If you will allow me, god, I will join the discussion, but after all that i said in this post, i dont' think you'll let me.
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jan 22, 2004 9:47:10 GMT -5
...you haven't given me any chance. You said prove you wrong, and i intended to, but i had to explain myself that i wasn't trying to cause trouble. Fair enough. Maybe we should try and start over at this point.  Hi I'm JenGe & welcome to my board... |
|
|
|
Post by Prom etheus on Jan 23, 2004 5:09:24 GMT -5
Thanks, I' think i'll enjoy my time here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rymel on Jan 25, 2004 2:26:38 GMT -5
*Libby bows to the Master of the Post Katas* hey! i thought i was a candidate for the post kata as well  My favourite quote after working in the Game Industry for so long: RTFM... haha, i used that for clericcky didn't i? it makes the point oh so well... |
|
|
|
Post by rickyramirez on Jun 21, 2009 1:42:05 GMT -5
 what the hey, brant obviously knows somethings up. his intuition training and what not, he is supposed to know what preston is thinking. so preston switchs guns, probably when guns are laying on the car.{brant made this happen or allowed it or whatever,because he knew he would need it to perform sense crime} he kills dudes saving dog{however someone pointed out that he used two guns which is right and i guess a flaw} any ways preston did switch guns back at the execution scene{preston had his own gun and brant had his own gun} and after being arrested his gun was now in brants hands{because he just arrested him not because of only one switch}. so preston thinks all is well with the plan{admitting he found the hideout} and continues to deal with Resistance.brant and father know the whole time and allow preston to continue thinking hes in the clear so he will lead them to the resistance. okokok the biggest point i haven't seen mentioned is when preston is in his white suite and sword and is asked by brant "how do you get a clerics weapon? you ask for it? he was actually talking about the guns. basically brant was saying ha ha I'm smarter than you and you didn't know whats was going on ever.{knowing preston wouldn't shoot the resistance dudes at execution and switch guns back to pin murder on brant.{even if he didn't switch back it could have worked for brant} brant and father mention how the whole time it was a set up. they used preston because he had once had feeling in the a much farther past{like prequel*} and let him get in good with resistance. so this would have worked fine but yeah the question is how did he get his pistols into the room if they wanted to do poly test..pistols or not i still think he would have got one of the automatic weapons from guards where he was hooked up to poly test lol. thats how equilibrium works one minute you think everything is good and the next its all crap. preston really did have faith and prevail in the end{always do whats right in your heart kids} i mean he was considered the best right. that was cool when he did a kinda avatar state thing while hooked up to the poly test. uh oh. **both sides of equation must be equal** scary ...bad As* movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aedh on Jun 24, 2009 12:03:42 GMT -5
Welcome Cleric rickyramirez! Personally I think this comment out of all of them is the best on the subject. There's the scene of Brandt and Preston with the guns on the car. Preston hands Brandt a gun. This is the only scene SHOWN in the movie where the switch could occur. Suspend the disbelief and think that we just didn't witness the second gun being handed back. For the rest of the entire movie they were using each other's guns. In the cut clip shown as a reminder of the gun switch, the only reason that clip was used was because of the dialogue. Preston said "in the end I think it's better if you have it". It's just a reminder that at that point Preston knew the gun wasn't his. That's all. Wimmer doesn't do the best job making the gun switch clear, but the elements and explanation are there. Some writers are very geekish about providing clear and convincing explanations for everything in the story, no matter how small. I tend to not enjoy reading writers like that because the story itself starts sinking under a tide of picky details, of rationality ... and of course the very act of storytelling is done so we can escape from rationality. We listen to stories to have a good time, not to pass a class. As a writer myself I try to make everything generally credible, so as to maintain the reader's willing suspension of disbelief. In some cases I often intentionally leave an element out so that the reader can supply his own reason or idea. This, done in the right amount, helps readers engage with the story and stimulates thought. Readers who demand 'clear and convincing evidence' for everything are warned that they will not always be happy reading my stuff. I do not geek out on details except when I have to because a character is geeking out on details in-story. As jmd said, Preston hands Brandt a gun. Brandt, as Preston observes, takes a gun from Preston later. The guns all look exactly alike except for the ID on the magazine. The moment, dramatically, undoubtedly works. Given the first three things, which lead ineluctably to the fourth, it all works for me. |
|
|
|
Post by Libby on Jun 25, 2009 5:16:33 GMT -5
Welcome Cleric rickyramirez! Personally I think this comment out of all of them is the best on the subject. There's the scene of Brandt and Preston with the guns on the car. Preston hands Brandt a gun. This is the only scene SHOWN in the movie where the switch could occur. Suspend the disbelief and think that we just didn't witness the second gun being handed back. For the rest of the entire movie they were using each other's guns. In the cut clip shown as a reminder of the gun switch, the only reason that clip was used was because of the dialogue. Preston said "in the end I think it's better if you have it". It's just a reminder that at that point Preston knew the gun wasn't his. That's all. Wimmer doesn't do the best job making the gun switch clear, but the elements and explanation are there. As jmd said, Preston hands Brandt a gun. Brandt, as Preston observes, takes a gun from Preston later. The guns all look exactly alike except for the ID on the magazine. The moment, dramatically, undoubtedly works. Given the first three things, which lead ineluctably to the fourth, it all works for me. I'll bet KW never foresaw the furore the whole GS would cause. If he'd kept the scenes in the original order, rather than changing them round, it would probably all be much clearer. However, given that this is how the film was edited, this explanation works for me too. |
|
]
. PLEASE DO NOT BOTHER!! 
She's 14.
