A more reasonable explanation for the arsonist: oneself

Yvonne 2022-01-15 08:01:54

The film is also very good, and the low score is probably affected by the second bad film. The ending is what the protagonist thinks of the real world. The movie has always been after the protagonist saved his sister. The key is how did the fire happen?
There are two kinds of discussion, natural fire or man-
made
fire : 1. The man-made fire should not be set by the daughter. If it is a fire, it will not happen. Then it is normal that no one is dead, and the daughter will be born.
After reading the film reviews, I felt that the father was the one who set the fire, that is, the daughter fell in love with the son (various,,,,) in normal time and space, and then the father went through the fire and intended to burn the daughter to death. In the movie to solve the space, the son intends to save his sister. The film mainly tells the plot --- the younger sister becomes a serial killer.
As for why the daughter set the doll on fire, it is basically certain that she has the ability to travel through. But there is no way to travel to the time and space before birth. As for the daughter's reincarnation, let's wash and sleep. This is a suspicious point, and it feels contrary to the film's main purpose of not changing, which is the best.
2.
Of course there is nothing to say, but Sam traveled back and saw that the arson device was not working and couldn't explain it? Broken, it doesn’t conform to the movie’s conventional logic


.


(The fire was set by the protagonist himself, and he wanted to commit suicide. Why did the protagonist’s daughter burn the doll, because the protagonist’s daughter was coming back to kill her mother. The protagonist’s daughter "Electra killing his mother" when he grows up. According to Ability is a constant formula, energy will not disappear for no reason, incest and serial murder will occur in the life of the male protagonist. The fire cannot be sam’s daughter killing her aunt to guarantee her existence, because she can’t go back that far, the fire is not JENNA as proof Sam loved him because there was a fire that caused her to fall in love with Sam. After falling in love with Sam, she went back to see who set the fire. From the dialogue, it can be inferred that the fire was bothering JENNA. She must have gone back to see it, and she found that the fire was set. It was Sam. She was puzzled why she saved her after setting the fire. And why Sam didn’t know, because it wasn’t the sam who went back to set the fire before 2009, but the future he went back to set the fire! So Sam answered that JENNA didn’t know. The future He was unaware after setting off the fire. When he came back before the age of 20, he could only use a ladder to save his sister. So he concluded that sam found his daughter very scary when she grew up (the hero’s daughter burned a doll when she was a child, it’s weird) Smiled. She came back to kill, and she was so calm, it was really terrifying.) Decided to go back in time, light the fire, let her parents and sister escape, and commit suicide by herself. According to: Why didn’t sam stop the fire and let the whole family do it? It’s okay. But he looked for a ladder to save his sister, because he found the fire soon after he went, and couldn’t get back sooner. Because the 40-50-year-old came back to set the fire, the 20-year-old could only save people when he returned. (20 When he is 10 years old, he can’t use his consciousness when he sets fire, and he will travel with his own time later!) And the next time sam comes back, he wants to die in the sea of ​​fire. It can be calculated from the 1st and 2nd that every time they come back, they will only be in the future. It will get worse and worse, and there is only one way, and that is to choose suicide. That would be the best for everyone around him. And when sam is dead, his daughter must not exist, which is why JENNA comes back to stop his father. Reason) The

above is analyzed by experts. Very powerful, no flaws can be found. The future little jenna kills people like hell, and then her father regrets it, and then tells the little jenna, I will die with you. Then the little jenna refused, anyway, she killed her easily. Fortunately, when she was 5 years old, she had been born at that time, and there was no worries about her. If she decisively kills her dad, no one will threaten her life.

In fact, I only have one question that is perplexed. After Nima wears it back, aren't there two deities in a period of time? Please note that in the third part, the wear-back is not attached to the past body, but a new one appears. There is a time, a place, and the character who wears-back is directly generated there. You wear it back, come in accordance with the regulations, and do not affect the past, then you can go back to the present. However, even if you affect the past even a little bit, you stay in the past, and history will continue from the point you changed. The problem comes, you stayed, and there are two you. Isn’t this chaos? , Life can still follow normal? Suddenly there are more people who are exactly the same as you, and they wear them like this again and again. The number of people should add up, so that scientists won't come to arrest you for research? How can life continue to develop normally...

View more about The Butterfly Effect 3: Revelations reviews

Extended Reading

The Butterfly Effect 3: Revelations quotes

  • Harry Goldburg: That right there - that's Burundanga. It's the Devil's Breath.

    Sam Reide: And you grow this because...

    Harry Goldburg: It's fucking Detroit, man. Put a few of those under my window. Cheaper than buying a burglar alarm.

  • Detective Dan Glenn: [to Sam] Now I'm going to tell you how it's going to happen. You're going to confess. You're going to plead insanity. I'm goin go testify myself to what a crazy motherfucker you are. Because if you keep giving me this tired-ass song and dance about trying to stop the Pontiac Killer, I'll make sure you're locked up in county with them big old boys. Now don't it just make your asshole pucker?