Where is the nail scene in Taken?
Robert Nicholson
character takes too nails and rams them thru a mans legs but nowhere
in the movie is this scene actually shown. Anybody know why?
moviePig
wrote:
> So the preview clearly shows a scene where it looks like Neeson's
> character takes too nails and rams them thru a mans legs but nowhere
> in the movie is this scene actually shown. Anybody know why?
Sounds like an outTAKEN ...probably for the 'PG-13', and soon to
appear in an Unrated DVD near you. Fwiw, though, this movie didn't
need to further emphasize its point that Liam Neeson's a pragmatic
guy.
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
Bill Anderson
It was in the version of the movie I saw. Neeson tied the guy to a
chair, jabbed big nails into his legs, connected electric wires to the
nails, and then flipped the light switch a few times to torture the guy.
He even made a comment about how much easier it is to torture in Paris
than in third-world countries because you don't have to worry about the
power grid going down.
How did you miss this?
--
Bill Anderson
I am the Mighty Favog
moviePig
Fwiw, I remember the scene (of course)... but somehow missed the
jabbing...
nick
international cut?
Richard Evans
I must have missed it too. I saw the electrocution scene, but the
cables were attached to the chair arms with alligator clips. I didn't
see any nails.
Robert Nicholson
I didn't miss most of that just that in the version I saw there was no
nails.
Robert Nicholson
Correct in the US version you don't see any nails. You see the
aligator clips attached
to the chair and then it goes into his bit about the power grid etc.
Robert Nicholson
Whilst we're at it how is it he has a IV bag with him with syringes
and stuff? The car chase scene is about as unbelievable as the opening
scene to Quantum Solace to think that he wouldn't be shot with all
those bullets.
I think it's a bit far fetched to believe that that stuff just comes
out of nowhere.
Richard Evans
>
>Whilst we're at it how is it he has a IV bag with him with syringes
>and stuff? The car chase scene is about as unbelievable as the opening
>scene to Quantum Solace to think that he wouldn't be shot with all
>those bullets.
>
>I think it's a bit far fetched to believe that that stuff just comes
>out of nowhere.
That was my main complaint about the whole movie. I know he has mad
skills and a network of old contacts, but for a guy in a foreign
country dealing with mulitple languages he doesn't speak, everything
fell into place too easily. Add to that the car chases, explosions,
and mounting body count that never seemed to come back on him and I
had to suspend a lot of disbelief.
Rich
news:lvjco49bvtgmbb348...@4ax.com:
There was no nails scene in the Canadian showing. Just the
electricution.
Thumper
It wasn't in the version I saw. The electric wires were looked like
they were hooked to the chair.
Thumper
Thumper
Oh, there were a lot of weak points but it was still enjoyable. One
of the main problems I have always had with this type of movie is the
amount of public violence that takes place and it seems to go
unnoticed by the police or even the general public.
I am also disappointed that we always have to sit through a couple of
idiotic car chases.
Thumper
trotsky
They looked more like knitting needles in the commercial, anyway. Did
he poke anybody with soft cushions?
trotsky
> On Feb 1, 7:34 pm, Robert Nicholson <robert.nichol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> So the preview clearly shows a scene where it looks like Neeson's
>> character takes too nails and rams them thru a mans legs but nowhere
>> in the movie is this scene actually shown. Anybody know why?
>
> Sounds like an outTAKEN ...probably for the 'PG-13', and soon to
> appear in an Unrated DVD near you. Fwiw, though, this movie didn't
> need to further emphasize its point that Liam Neeson's a pragmatic
> guy.
Doesn't sound like too many complaints about the subject matter vis a
vis the PG-13 rating.
trotsky
No such word. Did you go to high school?
moviePig
If you mean complaints from me about the 'PG-13' harming the movie via
sanitization.... no, my comment was actually how silly that rating
was, given the movie's subject matter. No F-bomb, no problem...
If, otoh, you mean we should've expected complaints from various self-
appointed Guardians that this movie got a 'PG'-pass, then I'll go
further and suspect that Liam Neeson's righteous presence might've
helped to grease people's thresholds. E.g., try putting Vinnie Jones
in exactly the same script...
Thumper
<pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>On Feb 2, 8:24 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>> moviePig wrote:
>> > On Feb 1, 7:34 pm, Robert Nicholson <robert.nichol...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> So the preview clearly shows a scene where it looks like Neeson's
>> >> character takes too nails and rams them thru a mans legs but nowhere
>> >> in the movie is this scene actually shown. Anybody know why?
>>
>> > Sounds like an outTAKEN ...probably for the 'PG-13', and soon to
>> > appear in an Unrated DVD near you. Fwiw, though, this movie didn't
>> > need to further emphasize its point that Liam Neeson's a pragmatic
>> > guy.
>>
>> Doesn't sound like too many complaints about the subject matter vis a
>> vis the PG-13 rating.
>
>If you mean complaints from me about the 'PG-13' harming the movie via
>sanitization.... no, my comment was actually how silly that rating
>was, given the movie's subject matter. No F-bomb, no problem...
>
That reminds me of Marlon Brando in Apocalypse Now, which I watched
again yesterday on tv. He was writing to his superiors bemoaning the
fact that the USA spent all this time teaching young men to drop
bombs, and kill people but go nuts over them writing "fuck" on their
helmets.
Thumper
nick
Peckinpah to complain about the early scene in Pat Garrett and Billy
the Kid where you see chickens getting their heads blown off in target
practice. To film the scene, the chickens had little rockets attached
to their necks. When the person complained to Peckinpah about
cruelty to animals, Peckinpah said he didn't want to hear about
chickens while America was off committing war crimes and atrocities in
Viet Nam.
trotsky
> On Feb 2, 8:24 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>> moviePig wrote:
>>> On Feb 1, 7:34 pm, Robert Nicholson <robert.nichol...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> So the preview clearly shows a scene where it looks like Neeson's
>>>> character takes too nails and rams them thru a mans legs but nowhere
>>>> in the movie is this scene actually shown. Anybody know why?
>>> Sounds like an outTAKEN ...probably for the 'PG-13', and soon to
>>> appear in an Unrated DVD near you. Fwiw, though, this movie didn't
>>> need to further emphasize its point that Liam Neeson's a pragmatic
>>> guy.
>> Doesn't sound like too many complaints about the subject matter vis a
>> vis the PG-13 rating.
>
> If you mean complaints from me about the 'PG-13' harming the movie via
> sanitization.... no, my comment was actually how silly that rating
> was, given the movie's subject matter. No F-bomb, no problem...
No, I meant by the movie going public at large. I'm sure Rich will be
bothered by the fact that their are no eyeballs plucked out with
cocktail forks, but I've seen plenty of stuff like that in Italian
movies which he's too stupid to see anyway. But the general consensus
seems to be "plenty of action," so my point was it seems like the rating
didn't hamper the entertainment value. Hopefully I'll get a chance to
see it next weekend and determine for myself.
nick
>
> - Show quoted text -
The entertainment value comes from three things: Taken's brief
running time--there's no excess at all; truth in advertising--it's 90
minutes of kicking ass and killing, you get what you pay for; and
thirdly, it's Liam Neeson doing the kicking ass and killing. If it
was anyone else--anyone else at all--it wouldn't be half as much fun
but to use the dated lingo of the fanboy generation--Liam Neeson rules
in Taken.
trotsky
"I'm not as shitty as they are" is never a good argument.
moviePig
The only thriller better than a 90-minute one is an 80-minute one.
Meanwhile, I've reflected on TAKEN's violence-level, which I at first
thought was a little over the top. Since then, though, I've decided
they successfully navigated a quite narrow corridor... between Grand
Guignol and sappy/crappy pulling of "low" punches. I've seen much
bigger efforts do it much worse...
Thumper
They carefully crafted the bad guys so as to have absolutely no
sympathy. What could be worse than abducting and selling underage
girls into slavery except perhaps to make them pre-pubescent?
As a grand finale they trotted out Muslims to be the ultimate swine.
Thumper
trotsky
How much does this movie have in common with Polanski's "Frantic"?
TBerk
wrote:
> So the preview clearly shows a scene where it looks like Neeson's
> character takes too nails and rams them thru a mans legs but nowhere
> in the movie is this scene actually shown. Anybody know why?
... takes TWO nails ...
... and rams them THROUGH ...
<ahem>
TBerk
Red Cloud
wrote:
> So the preview clearly shows a scene where it looks like Neeson's
> character takes too nails and rams them thru a mans legs but nowhere
> in the movie is this scene actually shown. Anybody know why?
No beating nor tortured by nail. Neeson fighting in Paris for his
daughter
reminds me the last movie he did the same reason except the time was
18th century Paris. The movie is called Jean Valjean.