But James Franco's brother said it was fake? I didn't get this part. Was the boy who lived lying?
sharePart of the problem is probably that you confuse actual people and their brothers with characters they played.
shareI didn't know that Harry had any siblings.
shareHe was being facetious..
sharethat is not part of the probem he was describing.
also he does not have the "confuse actual people" prblem .
why the hell am i typing this ?
I watched the movie twice and didn't understand that part either.
Came on this board to open a topic about it, and your post was on top.
I think they were pretending when they act surprised by the chip being real cause that whole airplane was bugged by them. Even the champagne was pee.
shareOkay, but the question is, why did Daniel Radcliffe's character say it was real? When prior to that it was obviously fake, with some sticker coming off it?
I mean, it appeared as though they never actually had the real card.
They rigged the plane, and probably also the machine that was to verify the chip, so that it would show the fake as being real.
shareAh, that makes sense, thanks.
But then who really had the "real" card all along?
shareThere was no real chip. The entire Macau arc was orchestrated by Thaddeus and the Eye
Everyone else were pawns playing their little game.
It was a team building excercise and initiation into the Eye
I know this is old but there is one issue. If the chip doesn't exist and was just a lie to get potters character then what about the fact he claims to have invented it. Was that just a pointless lie?
shareThis movie and the one before it never should’ve been made. They’re both such vapid utter garbage.
shareThey rigged the plane, and probably also the machine that was to verify the chip, so that it would show the fake as being real.
It kind of bugged me that Arthur and Potter couldn't tell that they were in a fake of *their own private plane*, (I was gonna list a couple of reasons but there are millions), but to have the chip reader exactly as it is in the other plane is ridiculous. Whatever, I guess.
shareLol the way you wrote that post cracked me up
shareAs it is setup in the first movie, they are aspiring to become members of the Eye. And this movie (or a lot of it) is actually about how the Eye is testing their ability to act as one united group under harsh circumstances. Freeman's introductional speech is about this very setup. This is the essence of what unfolds in this story.
In other words, the chip and all that is nothing but a red herring controlled by the Eye. Also evident when we later meet that tech administrator from the chip lab at the Eye headquarters.
In other other words, the chip was never real. The plane in the end and the equipment was rigged and so showed Harry Potter what ever was necessary for the plot to work.
___________
** I am normally not a praying man, but if you are up there, please save me Superman **
there is no chip. whole thing was made up by the eye, to get the attention of Harry Potter.
sharebut Harry potter said he invented it didnt he?
Harry Potter only called it his “vision,” which is tech-bro speak for, “I lack the skills to invent it but I have the foresight to see how neat it would be if I COULD invent it”
Like Steve Jobs and virtually all of Apple’s greatest hits. He envisioned each product and orchestrated its development, but he didn’t “invent” any of them (nor would he claim he had).
A dangerous tightrope between envisioning new cutting edge gizmos that you realise should be possible given the current tech , or even the current speed/size improvement rates ....
... and just asking the engineers to invent pie in the sky sci fi shit that aint do able.
(like beancounters and their bullshit illogical metholodies - "you cut costs 10% last year , therefore you can cut 15% this year ")
Steve Jobs seemed to have got that mix exactly right.
Yerp, and Elizabeth Holmes got that mix exactly wrong