Of course, this movie is just a circular logic of a timeline, which is relatively simple to understand compared to the logic of a parallel world. The ending of the story could have been a good ending, but I don't know why it was arranged this way. Maybe it was just to impress the audience, maybe the screenwriter didn't think that it could be arranged like this, maybe to take care of the title. In any case, this kind of timeline, it should be said that because it is a circular timeline, there is a way to solve the problem.
Next is my idea of a good ending: the key to the plot is that there is also a No. 3, and No. 2 returns to the point where No. 1 made a time jump in order to save the innocent woman's death, but no matter how hard he tried, instead The more and more chaotic, so simply let the woman be "unintentionally" killed by No. 2, so that you can continue to make No. 2 time jump, so as to proceed to the next cycle. In fact, this is the breakthrough point. In order for the cycle to continue forever without disruption, No. 2 must "hope" to go back to the past to become No. 3, and let No. 2 have the motivation to go back, only when he thinks the woman is dead. . So in fact, No. 3 (that is, No. 2 before jumping back to No. 1) as long as the woman fakes her death, because No. 2 (bandaged man) is already very nervous and has not confirmed whether the woman is really dead, he will mistake it for It is true, so jump back to the past again, here only No. 3 who has returned to the past will know the truth of the matter, and the matter can be concluded successfully. As for the details of how No. 2 thought the woman was dead, there is a lot of room for imagination.
View more about Timecrimes reviews
