- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Question, re: overanalysis of the ending of Man on Fire
Posted on 2/23/12 at 5:25 pm
Posted on 2/23/12 at 5:25 pm
I was watching Man on Fire yesterday for maybe the fifth time and the ending finally got me to thinking. As you recall, Denzel is negotiating with "the Voice" via telephone while holding his brother and severely pregnant wife hostage. Denzel wants to swap the Voice's family for the Voice's life.
Upon learning that his family is being held hostage by Denzel, the Voice offers an exchange of Dakota Fanning (who we/Denzel believed was dead) for his brother and the life of Denzel - a "life for a life" because the Voice's nephew was killed in the botched exchange earlier in the movie. (Please note there is no mention of his 8-months pregnant wife in the exchange
but I digress). Denzel, wanting the return of la nina (Fanning) at any cost, quickly agrees to the swap.
My question becomes, didn't Denzel ultimately possess the greater negotiating position in this situation? I mean he's holding the Voice's brother, preggers wife, and multiple dirty mexican children hostage while the Voice only has Fanning, who is worthless to him without anyone to pay a ransom. So the question becomes, why doesn't Denzel just tell him to frick off and give him Fanning in exchange for the Voice's entire dirty family in which he held hostage? Surely the Voice would've agreed to such given his untenable bargaining position and the precarious situation his immediate family was in.
Ultimately, I believe Denzel agrees to the deal without further negotiation for two reasons:
(1) Given his numerous injuries, he knew he was close to death. Thus, agreeing to the deal without further negotiation made the most sense to ensure the safe return of Fanning.
(2) The movie has a much less greater impact if Creasy lives past the exchange and settles down with some Mexican wife and shits out 3-4 kids.
Thoughts? Did anyone else wonder why Denzel was so quick to agree to the proposed "swap" - i.e., Denzel's life + the Voice's brother for Fanning?
Upon learning that his family is being held hostage by Denzel, the Voice offers an exchange of Dakota Fanning (who we/Denzel believed was dead) for his brother and the life of Denzel - a "life for a life" because the Voice's nephew was killed in the botched exchange earlier in the movie. (Please note there is no mention of his 8-months pregnant wife in the exchange
but I digress). Denzel, wanting the return of la nina (Fanning) at any cost, quickly agrees to the swap. My question becomes, didn't Denzel ultimately possess the greater negotiating position in this situation? I mean he's holding the Voice's brother, preggers wife, and multiple dirty mexican children hostage while the Voice only has Fanning, who is worthless to him without anyone to pay a ransom. So the question becomes, why doesn't Denzel just tell him to frick off and give him Fanning in exchange for the Voice's entire dirty family in which he held hostage? Surely the Voice would've agreed to such given his untenable bargaining position and the precarious situation his immediate family was in.
Ultimately, I believe Denzel agrees to the deal without further negotiation for two reasons:
(1) Given his numerous injuries, he knew he was close to death. Thus, agreeing to the deal without further negotiation made the most sense to ensure the safe return of Fanning.
(2) The movie has a much less greater impact if Creasy lives past the exchange and settles down with some Mexican wife and shits out 3-4 kids.
Thoughts? Did anyone else wonder why Denzel was so quick to agree to the proposed "swap" - i.e., Denzel's life + the Voice's brother for Fanning?
4
Posted on 2/23/12 at 5:34 pm to Jwodie
I also thought it was a lopsided swap, but justified it by your (1), and the fact that Pita meant so much to him. She changed his life, and made him actually care about something/someone. All he cares about is her safety. He's not concerned with his own life which also goes back to (1).
Posted on 2/23/12 at 6:02 pm to Jwodie
Denzel is in an immediate position of power, but how does he strong arm an exchange? How does he protect everyone after an exchange is made?
Any tough play on his part probably just gets people killed at the exchange or later.
He was on a mission of vengence. That would be easier to negotiate himself into a suicidal end, where all the bad guys die.
But when the girl is discovered to be alive, now he can't just play for the kill.
The voice made him an offer he could accept. Accepting it without condition gives the girl the best chance. He knew he was going to die when he started his quest.
Any tough play on his part probably just gets people killed at the exchange or later.
He was on a mission of vengence. That would be easier to negotiate himself into a suicidal end, where all the bad guys die.
But when the girl is discovered to be alive, now he can't just play for the kill.
The voice made him an offer he could accept. Accepting it without condition gives the girl the best chance. He knew he was going to die when he started his quest.
Posted on 2/23/12 at 6:52 pm to coloradoBengal
I have always questioned this. Why go with them? They were most definitely going to torture him. Made no sense for him to be a part of the deal.
Eta: Maybe they just wanted to show that there definitely would not be a "Man on Fire 2".
Eta: Maybe they just wanted to show that there definitely would not be a "Man on Fire 2".
This post was edited on 2/23/12 at 6:54 pm
Posted on 2/23/12 at 7:30 pm to LaBornNRaised
quote:
(1) Given his numerous injuries, he knew he was close to death. Thus, agreeing to the deal without further negotiation made the most sense to ensure the safe return of Fanning.
I always just pretty much accepted this. Also Dakota Fanning became his everything, so he actually didn't have as many bargaining chips as you would think, because if he lost her, he lost everything. His life mission was to save her, the very minute he realized she was still alive. I only questioned why he didn't take a grenade with him and just take them all out while he was in the car.
quote:
I have always questioned this. Why go with them? They were most definitely going to torture him. Made no sense for him to be a part of the deal.
I don't think he was gonna make it past the car ride anyway. But if he did, it's just them showing that this merciless killer still had this kindness in him and was willing to sacrifice everything for what he loved. Even if it meant him being tortured to death. It's the Romance of him giving everything for her life.
Posted on 2/23/12 at 7:55 pm to Jwodie
Have kids...then you'll get a better understanding. He was essentially her father. Most fathers would make that exchange as well.
Posted on 2/23/12 at 7:58 pm to Jwodie
The original ending had Denzel meet with the "voice" and is talking with him. His watch beeps. Go to credits.
Figure out the rest.
Much better ending in my mind, but it all worked out.
Figure out the rest.
Much better ending in my mind, but it all worked out.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News