Was Hickey a psychopath ??
or just suffering from the effects of the lead consumption ??
shareBoth, I think, he had endless stories about how he stabbed and killed many people.
share
MovieChat Forums > The Terror (2018) Discussion > Was Hickey a psychopath ??
Hickey was the name of someone he killed to board the Terror under a false identity. Who knows what his real name is? Fact is the man was a serial killer and an absolute psychopath. I liked the book ending better, where the Tuunbaq just leaves him to freeze to death because his soul is too evil for consumption.
sharethanks
shareEvil guys always stay the healthiest to the end, even tho consuming the same poisoned food everyone else did, EVEN after consuming Doctor's tainted meat designed to make him sick. That's some supernatural level of health :D
So, does this mean Tuunbaq died specifically from consuming evil souls more so than the lead filled bodies?
I kinda didn't like how they focused so much on him.
It started feeling like the movie Ravenous (1999) to me - "In a remote military outpost in the 19th Century, Captain John Boyd and his regiment embark on a rescue mission which takes a dark turn when they are ambushed by a sadistic cannibal."
No, he was not a psychopath. Also, he didn't get lead poisoned so much because early on he had noticed Dr. Harry Goodsir stopping "Lady Silence" to eat those tainted canned foods.
All his behaviors would make sense if we regard him as a spy who joined the expedition under a false identity. A trained spy with extraordinary insight, killing without blinking, manipulative skill, etc. That's why captain Crozier had a drink with him - a toast to the enemy, whoever they were that backed Mr. Hickey.
a spy for whom ???
shareI don't buy the spy theory at all. There is no indication whatsoever that Hickey worked for anyone but Hickey. He was just some psychopathic criminal who murdered a sailor (the real Hickey) and found sailing orders in his wallet and decided it would be a good idea to go on a voyage. Maybe he had some enemies or the law after him in England and he wanted to lay low for a while, thinking the voyage would be a nice way to do it free of charge. Crozier had a drink with Hickey for precisely the reason that was presented: They were both Irishmen and Crozier would drink for any excuse.
Why on earth would Hickey be a spy when there was absolutely NOTHING in the story to back that up other than your perceptions of his skills? You might as well say Satan sent Hickey from Hell to try to kill the Tuunbaq because he saw it as competition. If Hickey was a spy, this would definitely have been followed through in the story.
Hickey's simply a cunning, manipulative psychopath.
It seems to me that whenever there are some abnormal behaviour of the character unexplained in a movie/TVshow, the perceptions of most audiences always lean to the explanation of either "stupidity" or "psychopath". To me, there are plenty of indication of Mr. Hickey being a spy. Including Hickeys demonstrating his photographic memory to captain Crozier before they had the toast. What else do you need to be convinced? A flashback of other country's spy officer recruited him to gather information? The director of the show won't add that scene because a spy sabotaging the mission is not the main thread of the narrative.
However, the story writer does leave us a hint - the name "Hickey". Which associates with the spy "Thomas Hickey" who plotted against George Washington and was hanged for mutiny and sedition in 1776. And the story of his attempt to poison Washington was published in 1857 as a note in George Washington Parke Custis's memoirs. The name, the poison, the mutiny and sedition, the hanging and the spy - too many similar elements in these two stories.
Certainly,you can imagine Hickey to be a spy if you wish, but I have no doubt that the creators of the show and the author of the original novel had no such thing in mind when they created the character. Any character information that is not at least hinted at in the progress of a story has to remain strictly conjecture. And by hinted at, I mean a much stronger implication than merely sharing a name with an obscure historical person.
shareOK, I assume you found some stronger implication of your "Hickey is simply a psychopath" theory. How about you tell me which was his "psychopathic criminal action", so that I could explain why that was his well calculated move as a spy. Maybe then you will change your mind?
shareOK. How about this: Hickey pooped in Franklin's bed and wiped himself with the late Captain's white gloves during his funeral. How was that a well calculated spy move? Never saw that tactic on Mission Impossible or The Bourne Identity.
At no time did Hickey do anything that was remotely connected to spying on the international level you imply. No note taking, no stealing documents, nothing that would indicate he was working for a rival power. The only eavesdropping and information gathering he did was related to getting information about the food and plans for the evacuation march, both of which related to his personal situation. Hickey was totally self-motivated. Anyway, what would a spy be looking for on that voyage, anyway? What would France or Russia or some other power need a spy on the Franklin expedition for?
BTW, as far as the name Hickey, there was a real man named Hickey on the voyage. There is no evidence to show the real Hickey was anything but a law-abiding helpful member of the crew. Dan Simmons just used him as a villain. The show-runners added the scene where we find out our Hickey stole the real Hickey's identity to spare the feelings of any living Hickey descendants that may be around today.
There would be no point whatsoever for the writers to make some elaborate secret backstory that Hickey is a spy if that narrative thread was not developed in any way. It would be pointless. Hickey is simply a career criminal who is very crafty and who manipulates, lies, steals and kills to survive. Classic psychopathic behavior. He was on board because he got lucky when he killed a random sailor and obtained a convenient way to get out of England and away from pursuit by the law or enemies. He probably planned to start a new life by jumping ship the first time they made port in a populated area.
LOL, I was expecting some killing like crazy or eating like savage scene. And there it is, you chose Hickey's pooping in bed scene. Seriously, that's your "stronger implication" to convice us that Hickey was a psychopath? Bad choice, man, bad choice!
Anyways, cut to the chase, Either you have a poor memory or you are a bit lack of honesty (the truth, the whole truth, remember?). Otherwise, you won't leave out the following scene where Hinkey was reading Franklin's letter and learned some serious shit (we know that from his expression). So yes, that is his calculated move to go to Franklin's cabin to collect information at that moment while others were participating Franklin's funeral. And pooping in bed show the audience how much confidence he had about not getting caught.
I'm sure that if I had mentioned a killing or the like, you would have said "Oh, that man was a target Hickey had been assigned to assassinate."
I think you just really, really like the Hickey character and you don't want him to just be some stock issue psychopath.
Whatever I say to you, you will remain convinced that Hickey is some sort of 1840s James Bond in a hidden spy mission that is withheld from the viewers and totally irrelevant to the plot of the TV show. I don't think continuing this conversation is going to be worthwhile for either one of us.
In fact, I hate the Hickey (spy) character very much. Which is actually my compliment to the actor and the author, because it won't be a good show if there is no such a hateful villain.
The Northwest passage has never really become available for big ship to voyage, so we never know how it could change the world history. Should a hidden spy be irrelevent in this 1845s fiction story? Let's leave this question like that for others.
So his actions of getting all of them killed wo getting back info to his supposed superiors and his pooping abilities are all signs of him being a spy? There was no indication of this so it's amazing that you came up with it.
shareI explained to whynotwriteme that it shows how bold and calculated Hickey was, but should you focus on his pooping ability or on him reading the letter - gathering information? Other signs of him being a spy include his sharp observation ability, killing skill and how he sabotages the mission by channeling and creating the conflict between the crew and the locals.
shareBecause those scenes blatantly depict how unlikely a spy he would be.
shareIn real life, not every spy is like in 007 or "mission impossible" movies.
shareI thought it was clear from the last episode, that Hickey made a confession explaining he was just trying to escape England, thus being no spy
shareThe tricks that "Hickey" pulled in his "confession" is to tell some truth that Captain Crozier might already have figured out --- Real Hickey was just a regular sailor and "Hickey" is definitely more capable than that. And given how ruthless "Hickey" is, it takes no genius to guess what happened to real Hickey; And of course, after what "Hickey" did, he is not going back to London, nor he would let crew members make their way back home and report him to the authority. The part about a criminal wants to flee to the other side of the world and start a new life, is just a ready-made cliche to hide his true identity, a spy, and his true intention, to sabotage the mission.
share