MovieChat Forums > Twelve Monkeys (1996) Discussion > One question that's bothered me

One question that's bothered me

posted 9 years ago by pferreira86
14 replies | jump to latest

I always thought this was a great movie but there's one question I haven't been able to answer. What exactly happened to Cole? After he's shot and dies the female scientist I'm assuming gets infected and then travels back to the future where Cole shouldn't really be because he died in the past. However, the kid version of Cole grew up and survived the virus so he should still exist in the future? Does that mean while Bruce Willis Cole died in the past he'll reappear in the future when the scientists and agents travel back? This has been confusing me, any explanations?

[–] mcp-69798 9 years ago

No, Cole doesn't "reappear" in the future. Old Cole and kid Cole are exactly the same person, just at different stages of his life, not different versions with different experiences. Keep in mind that the past is never changed, there has "always" been a 1996 with Cole interfering from the future.

Kid Cole survives the virus outbreak and lives in a post-apocalyptic world until he is sent back in time around the year 2030, as we see at the start of the movie. Then at the end, he dies at the airport in 1996.

[–] pferreira86 9 years ago

I realise that but if the female scientists and the agents like Jose travelled back after getting a pure sample from Peters would grown up Cole be back in the future when they got back?

[–] mcp-69798 9 years ago

No... why do you think he could be back? He dies at the airport.

[–] pferreira86 9 years ago

No, actually you're right. I got confused. I was mistaken into thinking he'd have to exist in the future when they got back but that would still be their future so he wouldn't be there. There's only one of him and he died out of his time. Technically Cole disappeared in 2035. So am I right in thinking young Cole seen at the end grows up to be Bruce Willis and the events of the movie still unfold as they do with him dying in the end?

[–] mcp-69798 9 years ago

Yes, that's right ;)

[–] pferreira86 9 years ago

Apologies, I understood the whole film but something so obvious confused me. Ok thanks again.

[–] mcp-69798 9 years ago

You're welcome, and no need to apologize! It's always good to talk about this great movie :)

[–] the_notorious_bid 9 years ago

Actually, it's "the Cole (grandfather) paradox."

How can Cole try to stop a plague AFTER 1996 when the plague was (maybe) thwarted AFTER he died and before Cole grew up (and therefore never happened... And therefore, he never grows up in a post-apocalyptic plague-plagued world... And therefore, he doesn't die in the airport in 1996)? It can't happen under a linear, single universe, theory.

I think THIS is what you were asking, initially.

My answer is the Deja Vu answer. There is a branching universe theory. Once you change something significantly, you change everything!

If you find a cure and you can go back to the past (as many times as you care to do), why not cure it in the past? The weird thing is once you figure out who is involved and who is not, you can go back in the past as many times as it takes. There are, apparently, no limits to their time travel. So, if you got it wrong in 1990 and you know the exact day in 1996, and now you know the exact people, why can't you just go back to the day before and kill one person (if necessary)? Such an individual has to die! I'd take no chances that this individual might wind up in a sanitarium and someday get out.

I know killing seems extreme but would you kill Hitler, before he rose to power in 1933, if you had the chance?

Would you warn everyone of 9/11 before it happened? If you knew where these people were, would you disclose the information which you know would probably lead to their deaths?

If Dr. Peters was killed in 1990, does the plague ever happen? Or does somebody worse (perhaps a collaborator) cause the plague to occur sooner? Or in even worse form? These are questions which we must ask.

Paradox: Send Jose back to kill Dr. Peters the day before Cole dies and Cole doesn't die in The Airport On The Edge Of Forever (Star Trek reference). Young Cole never grows up in a plague-plagued society! History is changed!

[–] pferreira86 9 years ago

Actually, it's "the Cole (grandfather) paradox."

How can Cole try to stop a plague AFTER 1996 when the plague was (maybe) thwarted AFTER he died and before Cole grew up (and therefore never happened... And therefore, he never grows up in a post-apocalyptic plague-plagued world... And therefore, he doesn't die in the airport in 1996)? It can't happen under a linear, single universe, theory.

I think THIS is what you were asking, initially.

I think that's about right. The female scientist with an example of the pure virus will travel back to the correct timeline after Cole went on his mission and they will then find the cure. I got confused that when they all went back afterwards that it would be before Cole went on his final mission so he should exist when they got back. It never occurred to me until I re-watched the film before that a lot of the future agents like Jose, the female scientist, the future prison warden etc could have been from different points of the future. They may have failed a number of times until the scientist said pretty much if you want something done right do it yourself.

I do agree that they could have saved themselves a lot of trouble if they'd bend the rules and stopped Peters in the past instead of 'observing' the world going down the drain like that. They knew about Kathryn's answer message even if they misinterpreted it.

As flawed as it may seem the film Millennium deals with a lot of stuff you're talking about. If you liked this movie you could give that movie a try:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097883/?ref_=nv_sr_3

[–] BigRich 8 years ago

My answer is the Deja Vu answer. There is a branching universe theory. Once you change something significantly, you change everything!

Exactly. I firmly believe if "time travel" is possible, you can't change anything in your past, but you can change events in a parallel universe's past. As soon as you "time travel" you have effectively entered, or created, the alternate/parallel universe. However, I will also add, no matter where you go, that timeline is now your timeline, and as already stated, you can't change your timeline's past.

Similar to the movie The Langoliers (1995), when they entered the time rip, they brought they're own "time" with them via the airplane into the past. However, in this case, it was not a parallel/alternate universe. Hella cheesy movie, but I love the story how it explains why you can't go back into your own past because it no longer exists (and was eaten up by the Langoliers).

_
Every person that served can be called a veteran, but not every veteran can be called a Marine.

[–] debiler 8 years ago

Keep in mind that the last couple of answers, although completely viable in a theoretical discussion about time-travel concepts, all don't apply to this movie.

In Twelve Monkeys, there are no alternate universes, there are no paradoxes. There is one big chunk of everything that happens, all at once. It's just a matter of your own (i.e. Cole's) perception that defines past, present and future. Everything you apparently "decide" to do "at the moment" could have never played out differently, everything is fixed. Therefore, time-travel in this theoretical construct doesn't provoke any paradoxes. Which is both awesome and frightening at the same time.

___________________________________
I didn't like the Godfather, so what?

[–] eyeandeye-1 8 years ago

I agree with this, there can’t be any coincidences as everything that occurs is interdependent on everything else i.e. anything that happens only does so because everything else did. It’s like an exact intricate sequence as a 'password' to unlock a particular version of 'reality'.

I think the points made below were inferred in the scene in the cinema where Vertigo was showing and Cole said "the movie never changes but every time you see it, it seems different because you're different". Referring to perspective, which is born from the illusion of separation (hence the Vertigo scene using a tree’s timeline and the character referring to reincarnation).

It's just a matter of your own (i.e. Cole's) perception that defines past, present and future

the energy is just shifted to a new vessel. I think the movie makes it clear that life goes on and on and on.

[–] ARNKxx 9 years ago

It depends on if you believe the soul carries on when you die, or if it's just nothingness. In my opinion, he dies on Earth, the body, the energy is just shifted to a new vessel. I think the movie makes it clear that life goes on and on and on.

[–] ARNKxx 9 years ago

For some that is.