MovieChat Forums > Reasonable Doubt (2014) Discussion > SPOILERS...Plot Holes....SPOILERS

SPOILERS...Plot Holes....SPOILERS


1.If all of Davis' victims had their parolee cards taken why no connection by police.
2.How could Brockden just walk out of police station after assaulting interrogation room officer.
3.When Davis tortured Jimmy and Brockden was accused wouldn't he have trace evidence on him (blood, tissue, hair....)
4.When Davis called 911 and pretended to be a torture victim he dropped the phone outside well clear of the building. How would the victim have made the call from outside when he was bound to a chair inside.
5.Davis killed because of some vigilante justice theme. Why would he make victims out of Brockden's family.
6.How did the detective who said to send a sector car to Brockden's house get there first.
7.When Brockden left evidence in the printer in the detective's office looking for evidence of Davis' other victims why wasn't it mentioned when he was arrested. I know the detective suspected him of something.
8.Jimmy at first refuses to help his step-brother to avoid going back to prison, yet he perjures himself in open court and agrees to help a break-in at Davis' house therefore being part of a criminal conspiracy
9.Even with a guard booth it was very easy for Brockden to leave the station parking lot in a stolen car.
10Why did Brockden give up the gun instead of fighting for the lives of his family.

reply

Who is Braxton?

reply

You should Google the definition of plot hole and learn what it means because you clearly have no idea.

1) Because people lose all sort of things, cards included all of the time. When I was in the military I saw guys lose their military ID, you really think its improbable that people would lose their parole cards? Not to mention that that doesn't really link anything together. So every murder of a parolee in the country where their card can't be found now becomes part of this investigation? lol!

2) I doubt every single person in the police station knew he was under arrest. He was a prosecutor that spent a lot of time at the police station and probably knew many of the people that worked there. Why would they question him walking around? Granted, the guard shouldn't have let him out without checking his badge, which I'm sure they would have confiscated from him, but that's still not a plot hole.

3) The trace evidence on Davis doesn't matter because the police did not go and check him. There was no evidence he was involved and the prosecutor was the main suspect and in custody.

4) He called using Jimmy's phone, that's why he left it at the scene. Had Jimmy really ran outside and made the phone call, the killer could have still come out and grabbed him and chained him to the chair before the cops got there. Not sure why this is even questioned.

5) Did you have the end of the movie on mute? He wanted him to feel the same torment and loss that he felt when he watched his family die. It was also a way to prove that Brockden wasn't the serial killer and innocent since the killer just went to his house and killed his family. It was the third option, the one that got Brockden out of jail and Davis left alone to continue his work. Poor judgment was used clearly as he had to know that Brockden would likely seek revenge but not a plot hole.

6) Continuity error. Not a plot hole. Stupid, yes. But not a plot hole.

7) There was no need to mention it because she probably didn't have proof that it was him that used the computer. And if she did, there is no reason to lay all of her cards on the table. Interrogation is a process, you don't walk in giving away all of the evidence you have collected.

8) Jimmy likely cared for his brother and felt bad about almost ruining his life while on drugs. So he decided to help. Plus, when he found out a serial killer broke into his brothers home with his wife and baby I'm sure it gave him more of a desire to help his brother out.

9) Agreed, but not a plot hole.

10) Because he was scared and might not have ever held a gun in his life. It's not as easy as many internet dwellers think to shoot a gun accurately let alone even know if its ready to be fired. That is why using guns requires training. He handed over the gun hoping to diffuse the situation and possibly save his wife. If he tried to shoot, the gun might have not even fired if he didn't know to turn the safety off or load the chamber. He would have then pissed off the killer who would then kill his wife immediately. If the gun had fired, he might have hit his wife and killed her himself.

He just broke out of jail. The cops know where he lives and know where he's going. Any idiot could figure out that your best option in that situation is to stall the maniac long enough for the professionals to arrive. It's not like they are going to wait until the morning to go looking for him. I would have shot the guy but I've been trained and am pretty accurate, but it is just as believable that for many the best option would be to do whatever the maniac tells you to do and wait for the police.

Nothing you mentioned was a plot hole. Not even close. I don't know why I typed so much to defend a movie that wasn't even that good but here it is.

reply

good points.

"laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone." - Dae-su Oh

reply

Blind woman who practically identified Brockden in court earlier could easily indentify that Jimmy did not make the help me call from the factory and that it was a black male and case against Brockden could be dismissed.


Sorry Brother.

reply