Law Abiding Citizen (2009)

Harold Chavez44 said:I suppose I don't know which version of the movie you watched, but he definitely used a spork—that plastic hybrid thing—which the warden handed him when he asked for utensils.

He used a bone. A literal steak bone. Not some flimsy plastic spork. It’s quite obvious. He was holding the wider end of the bone, and it pierced his throat.

I'll grab a screenshot, maybe then this ridiculous debate about how someone could be killed by plastic will finally end.

Case closed.

edit: This is a mess; I didn't capture it at the exact right moment. I mean, I see the image on my PC, but I really don't feel like messing around with a proper screenshot. I have no idea why this even uploaded, but he's holding a bone in his left hand and dropping his arm below the table while the fork stays in the plate. You'll just have to take my word for it, I guess.

Sandra Patel23 said:Hold on—just because they sped up the final act and it didn't suit your tastes doesn't mean the movie is a failure. Besides, I wasn't commenting on the ending itself, since that isn't exactly what I was watching.
Furthermore, the killing of Clyde was the only way out—unfortunate, but necessary.

It's not that it's a bad movie, but that ending definitely tanked the score.
And there was absolutely more than one way to handle Clyde's death.
The movie was well-made, and it would've been a hundred times better if Nick had died instead, or if Clay realized the bomb was set for him and just took them both out at once.

I'm getting tired of these endings where the good guys win. It’s predictable. You know who survives by the first twenty minutes.

Chloe Palmer2 said:

Case closed.

edit: This is a mess; I didn't capture it at the exact right moment. I mean, I see the image on my PC, but I really don't feel like messing around with a proper screenshot. I have no idea why this even uploaded, but he's holding a bone in his left hand and dropping his arm below the table while the fork stays in the plate. You'll just have to take my word for it, I guess.

Yeah, I agree. Though, frankly, what he actually used isn't even the main point.
He could have killed him with his bare hands by snapping his neck or something similar (he was likely prepared for that kind of thing anyway). That would still achieve one of his goals: getting sent to solitary confinement without technically committing a murder with an object provided by the prosecutor or the warden. Of course, it still counts as a murder committed while he was supposed to be under strict supervision—though why he wasn't is anyone's guess.

What I find absolutely mind-blowing, though, is how he—the most dangerous criminal in the entire prison—didn't have a camera inside or even around his cell. For heaven's sake, we have more surveillance in local police station holding cells during a 48-hour detainment than they had in a high-security facility.

Harold Chavez44 said:Well, obviously; I'm honestly not sure how much sense it makes to demand total realism from cinema in the first place. 🤣

Sure, there ought to be some semblance of a connection to reality, but let’s not go overboard, shall we? Once those theater doors swing shut, the lights dim, and the feature begins, isn't it best to simply drift away from this somewhat predictable world and escape into a new one where the rules aren't quite so rigidly enforced?

It is an established fact that such chemical compounds truly exist. 🙂

Zachary Turner6 said:Yeah, I agree. Though, frankly, what he actually used isn't even the main point.
He could have killed him with his bare hands by snapping his neck or something similar (he was likely prepared for that kind of thing anyway). That would still achieve one of his goals: getting sent to solitary confinement without technically committing a murder with an object provided by the prosecutor or the warden. Of course, it still counts as a murder committed while he was supposed to be under strict supervision—though why he wasn't is anyone's guess.

What I find absolutely mind-blowing, though, is how he—the most dangerous criminal in the entire prison—didn't have a camera inside or even around his cell. For heaven's sake, we have more surveillance in local police station holding cells during a 48-hour detainment than they had in a high-security facility.

At that stage, he wasn't the most dangerous man alive yet; he hadn't started his killing spree on the outside. It was only after they botched that meal, and while they were busy trying to save that lawyer, that he killed the guy. That's why they moved him to the SHU, and those units are supposed to be 100% secure. The fact that he pulled this off is frankly ridiculous.

Harold Chavez44 said:I’m not sure which cut of the movie you watched, but he absolutely used a spork—you know, those plastic utensils.

No. It was a cost issue.

hiddenhound3 said:Now, hold on just a moment; I recall seeing a movie where even chemical canisters explode, so why shouldn't a smartphone be subject to the same risks? 🤷

A pen that snaps has a casing. This didn't specify.

And that lethal cellphone actually functioned as a phone.

Noah Moore55 said:It's not that it's a bad movie, but that ending definitely tanked the score.
And there was absolutely more than one way to handle Clyde's death.
The movie was well-made, and it would've been a hundred times better if Nick had died instead, or if Clay realized the bomb was set for him and just took them both out at once.

I'm getting tired of these endings where the good guys win. It’s predictable. You know who survives by the first twenty minutes.

Then maybe stop watching modern Hollywood movies.

And it wasn't a dungeon; it was solitary confinement.

The ending is completely pointless. Throughout the entire movie, Nick adheres to a strict code—respecting legal protocols (even if we overlook that break-in at the FedEx warehouse)—only to execute him so coldly? What is the point of that? Does it suggest that nobody has any faith left in the American justice system?

Furthermore, someone as brilliant as Clyde—could he really not deduce that they might have defused the bomb once he saw Nick in solitary confinement and realized everything had fallen apart?

Additionally, if national security was truly at stake, Nick could have simply shot or wounded him to prevent the detonation. 🙂

Ultimately, evil came out on top—driven by a greed for greater success and that cold-blooded murder without any right to a trial. 🙂

I caught this a few days ago, and honestly, it was a decent enough watch. I don't have any major complaints per se, though I did find myself wishing for a few more genuine surprises or narrative twists; instead, it felt like just another entry in that long line of standard action-thrillers we see all the time—pretty much what you'd expect. While I noticed a lot of people on the forums were pretty let down by how things wrapped up, I actually found the ending to be the highlight of the whole experience, which probably says a lot about how much I enjoyed the rest of it.

bluebison8 said:At that stage, he wasn't the most dangerous man alive yet; he hadn't started his killing spree on the outside. It was only after they botched that meal, and while they were busy trying to save that lawyer, that he killed the guy. That's why they moved him to the SHU, and those units are supposed to be 100% secure. The fact that he pulled this off is frankly ridiculous.

isn't it? You're forgetting about that old attorney he buried. Right after that, there was that conversation where he explains just how incredibly capable Clyde actually is.

If I were in charge, he would have been under 24-hour surveillance immediately—both digital and physical (because let’s be real, bypassing a camera isn't even that difficult these days).

Zachary Turner6 said:isn't it? You're forgetting about that old attorney he buried. Right after that, there was that conversation where he explains just how incredibly capable Clyde actually is.

If I were in charge, he would have been under 24-hour surveillance immediately—both digital and physical (because let’s be real, bypassing a camera isn't even that difficult these days).

The timeline seems to be bothering you.😬

Clyde didn't kill the guy in prison until after the lawyer incident. Actually, they didn't even suspect he'd kill the attorney; they probably thought he'd just be found dead naturally. He used the lawyer situation as an excuse to get moved to solitary confinement (he wasn't planning to kill him then; if he had, he would have set the clock much earlier than 3 PM). There was no reason for him to be in isolation before that.😉

Chloe Palmer2 said:The timeline seems to be bothering you.😬

Clyde didn't kill the guy in prison until after the lawyer incident. Actually, they didn't even suspect he'd kill the attorney; they probably thought he'd just be found dead naturally. He used the lawyer situation as an excuse to get moved to solitary confinement (he wasn't planning to kill him then; if he had, he would have set the clock much earlier than 3 PM). There was no reason for him to be in isolation before that.😉

Look, I’ve always maintained that he needed to disable the guards and the cameras *after* the conversation with that individual (which, yes, happened afterward). Wouldn't you have done the exact same thing if you were in his shoes?🙂

Some bot wandering through a graveyard? 😕Just sounds like

goldenhound32 said:No. It was a cost issue.

A pen that snaps has a casing. This didn't specify.

And that lethal cellphone actually functioned as a phone.

Then maybe stop watching modern Hollywood movies.

And it wasn't a dungeon; it was solitary confinement.

It wasn't the phone doing the shooting. The phone contained a tiny explosive charge specifically designed to detonate when a certain number called it.

Chloe Palmer2 said:The timeline seems to be bothering you.😬

Clyde didn't kill the guy in prison until after the lawyer incident. Actually, they didn't even suspect he'd kill the attorney; they probably thought he'd just be found dead naturally. He used the lawyer situation as an excuse to get moved to solitary confinement (he wasn't planning to kill him then; if he had, he would have set the clock much earlier than 3 PM). There was no reason for him to be in isolation before that.😉

Look, they were late with his meal, and he was busy making sure the lawyer ended up buried. In the meantime, he was eating and sharing food with his cellmate.
While they were busy hunting down the lawyer, he took the guy out with a bone.

Honestly, I thought the movie was great.. 🙂

Gerard Butler 🙂🙂

bluebison8 said:Look, they were late with his meal, and he was busy making sure the lawyer ended up buried. In the meantime, he was eating and sharing food with his cellmate.
While they were busy hunting down the lawyer, he took the guy out with a bone.

I suppose there isn't much of an issue here. 😕 I am merely suggesting that at that point, he hadn't actually killed anyone in prison yet, nor had they realized he was, shall we say, a sick fuck 😬 so, perhaps, there wasn't any immediate need to throw him in solitary 😉

Charles Hall7 said:Some bot wandering through a graveyard? 😕Just sounds like

Look, hiding a robot in some trench isn't actually the hard part—you just dig it up and remote control it from a distance when the time comes. The real logistical headache is how he knew they’d pass through that exact spot😁 because you’d have to plant that specific robot in that specific cemetery; otherwise, someone would definitely notice a heavily armed robot cruising around town, which would probably raise at least a tiny bit of suspicion🙂

I still maintain the point I made to a friend during a similar debate over drinks: one guided rocket, a small explosive charge (just enough to wreck a single car), plus a guidance gadget tucked under one very specific vehicle (since he's an electronic genius, making it bypass a standard inspection wouldn't be much of a challenge) = a much more efficient, safer, and convincing assassination for anyone watching😁

Chloe Palmer2 said:I suppose there isn't much of an issue here. 😕 I am merely suggesting that at that point, he hadn't actually killed anyone in prison yet, nor had they realized he was, shall we say, a sick fuck 😬 so, perhaps, there wasn't any immediate need to throw him in solitary 😉

Oh, sure. But let's think about the timing here—AFTER they’ve already figured out exactly who he is and just how much leverage he actually holds? It makes zero sense to suddenly stick him in a cell with a camera pointed at him and a guard breathing down his neck, especially given everything we discussed earlier.

Zachary Turner6 said:Oh, sure. But let's think about the timing here—AFTER they’ve already figured out exactly who he is and just how much leverage he actually holds? It makes zero sense to suddenly stick him in a cell with a camera pointed at him and a guard breathing down his neck, especially given everything we discussed earlier.

Gle, in the real world, there is zero chance someone just digs a tunnel from a prison cell. If you even suggested that to anyone, they’d look at you like you’ve lost your mind. In 999,999 out of 1,000,000 cases, that’s going to be an accomplice on the outside.