why Bobby Earl didn't just go kill Laurie Prentiss Armstrong in the first place, as revenge for his date rape trial and subsequent castration? Why did he have to kill some other girl, get caught, go to prison, find a guy to take the blame, get free, then try to kill Laurie Prentiss Armstrong?
That was the major big hole in the plot for me, unless anyone can explain it?
Because he was a psycho?
shareWell, I rest my case; the plot of this film was so weak that the only supporting argument for any illogical action taken by Bobby Earl was "because he was a psycho".
Maybe going and killing Laurie Armstrong was just too simple for Bobby Earl; maybe he felt the urge to use his vast intellect and over-engineer his revenge, to include all the members of the Armstrong family. But umm, he could have just done that straight after the initial failed prosecution? He didn't have to go and kill a young girl to do it?
Ah right, he was a psycho. :P
I thought maybe he wanted revenge against Lawrence Fishburne's character, but then why not kill his daughter rather than a girl he just treated like a daughter?
shareIt doesn't matter. Nothing about this film really matters - there isn't one, single original aspect to the the plot or story. Compare it to "Primal Fear" and "Cape Fear" and a dozen other films that utilized the same sub-plots much more effectively.
Sean Connery was the executive producer, so I'm seeing this as a Sean Connery ego trip - a plot that kept him on the screen in almost every single scene and allowed him to reprise his Indiana Jones scholarly, intellectual persona.
I found nothing to suggest that he killed the girl and went to jail as a part of an elaborate scheme to get even. Quite the opposite, killing the girl was likely an isolated crime, perhaps brought on by a psychotic episode (does it matter?). It was while in prison that he realized the opportunity for revenge, possibly by accident: while considering Armstrong as someone who could get him out, he may have discovered that he was now married to the woman who he blamed for his suffering. It's not the strongest plot, but not quite as weak as you suggest. On a lesser note: why did the castrated Bobby Earl not show more evidence of such an injury, especially after eight years?
shareI still think he was innocent for killing that girl, that was just coincidental. Yes, they say that he made a deal with the serial killer so that he "took the blame", but that doesn't mean that Bobby was the original killer, just that he saw this as an oppertunity to get out of jail. For all we know, the serial killer WAS the murderer, but it might just as well have been a random stranger.
The fact that Bobby became crazy and wanted revenge against someone that had basically ruined his life (he wouldn't even be a suspect if not for the original trial) doesn't mean that he was bad to begin with.
[deleted]