Petty nitpick about the ending (spoilers)

Ruined Angel

Sidekick
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
2,078
Reaction score
0
Points
31
For someone who got brutally stabbed in two different places in his chest and fell a couple of stories, Harry took a long time to die.

And although it was a beautifully written and acted scene, don't you think that Harry was able to talk far too much and too clearly for someone with his type on injuries? There was also a real lack of blood...though that's understandable; the makers of SM3 would have had to tame that stuff down for the child audience. Still, it was jarring.

I know deaths in most movies/tv/etc have never really been realistic but it doesn't make it any less distracting.
 
Spec, if his lungs had been punctured, blood would be flowing into his lungs constantly and he would find it painful and hard to breathe and eventualy die.
 
He did die I just made point to why it took him a while to die. The no blood thing I can't explain.
 
Are you guys serious? You know, in the movies, sometimes logic takes a backseat so that a good (exciting, beautiful, tragic, etc.) scene can happen. Crazy but that's how it works. If you're not down with that, maybe you should watch any more movies.
 
Are you guys serious? You know, in the movies, sometimes logic takes a backseat so that a good (exciting, beautiful, tragic, etc.) scene can happen. Crazy but that's how it works. If you're not down with that, maybe you should watch any more movies.

I did warn that it was a petty nitpick. ;)

But I feel the questions are legit enough. I'm not saying that logic should never take a backseat (I think I stated in the original post that I get that this sort of thing happens in movies all the time) but I thought it could be interesting to see what other people thought of the issue. Wasn't meant to cause any bad feelings. *shrugs*
 
He heals rapidly though, as evidenced by his scar being non-existent. That's probably why it took him awhile to die.
 
For someone who got brutally stabbed in two different places in his chest and fell a couple of stories, Harry took a long time to die.

And although it was a beautifully written and acted scene, don't you think that Harry was able to talk far too much and too clearly for someone with his type on injuries? There was also a real lack of blood...though that's understandable; the makers of SM3 would have had to tame that stuff down for the child audience. Still, it was jarring.

I know deaths in most movies/tv/etc have never really been realistic but it doesn't make it any less distracting.

yes, it was long, it wasnt realastic, but it was touching and sad as well. :csad:i love u harry!! :heart:
 
Are you a doctor? Have you seen someone stabbed in the chest? I'm not, but for all we know, it could very well take a few minutes for someone stabbed in the chest to die. (I would agree that there should be more blood in the scene, though.)

In my CPR class several years ago, we learned about the Heimlich maneuver and how not to do it. If done wrong, you could break the person's ribs and cause internal bleeding. Death could happen in 30 minutes.
 
Well obviously as the movie's PG-13 (and designed to get kids in those seats) they weren't going to have a fountain of blood pouring out of his mouth.
 
Unless the stab was directly to Harry's heart, which it didn't appear to be, it would naturally take longer for Harry to die, as in such a case, his death would be from internal bleeding, which could takes hours.

As for Norman, he took a harder hit to the groin area. And honestly, we still don't know that he died instantly. He could've just passed out from the pain and died shortly thereafter.
 
I did warn that it was a petty nitpick. ;)

But I feel the questions are legit enough. I'm not saying that logic should never take a backseat (I think I stated in the original post that I get that this sort of thing happens in movies all the time) but I thought it could be interesting to see what other people thought of the issue. Wasn't meant to cause any bad feelings. *shrugs*

Well if you admit that it's a petty nitpick and there is no answer, what do you expect to hear?
 
But enhanced life?

Norman took the same formula and look how far he lasted.

yeah, but he had nothing important to say during his death excpet "dont tell Harry". Harry needed to talk to MJ and Peter.:woot:
 
Yes it looked weird, especially the long downward spiral fall needn't to be there. But the ending was rushed anyway, like Harry was completely scarred just about 1 day after Peter nuked the crap out of him. So it may could've been the Goblin stuff that healed him very fast and extended his life in the last minutes?

I guess this all plays the ol' game of "supension of disbelieve"!?
 
yep I suspendend all belief when Peter nuked a cap on Harry...
besides always thought the Spidey saga was supposed to play like a
greek tragedy anyway
 
Well if you admit that it's a petty nitpick and there is no answer, what do you expect to hear?

Well I really liked Mara Jane's answer, which taught me something I didn't think of. So the thread has done some good.
 
Yes, but did Harry have an allergic reaction like Norman?
You've said this before and it didnt make sense and now it still dont make sense. Norman did not have an allergic reaction to anything the test on norman just went wrong where as it seemed to work perfectly on harry.
 
I'm surprised we didn't see a final scene with Bernard entering the secret goblin lair and picking up one of the green cylinders...maybe he will don the paintball mask on SM4 :woot:
 
The final scene started off good, then it turned into an afterschool special. "I need some help over here Harry." "Duh, I'm a little busy Pete."
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"