Picking Nits
Crime logic, communication and the afterlife rules are challenged.
In the discussion (6)
Approx. transcript time · 01:05:35Read transcript
- Carl’s street robbery for passwords and conspicuous office fraud are mocked; drug use is an inference explicitly never shown. The mob lawyer’s openness and Sam’s obliviousness compound the implausibility.
- Willie returning to Molly’s apartment after she saw the killing seems reckless; $80,000 is considered a poor share for the crimes.
- Molly should ask many questions about death, exclusivity and moving on; her lack of curiosity is challenged and partly defended as shock.
- Sam can shove Willie and move objects but cannot touch Molly; an anger-based training explanation is accepted.
- Carl’s hell sentence is questioned because he ordered a robbery rather than a killing; an objection points to greed rather than any benevolent motive. The debate asks about the risk of hell for Sam if he pushes Willie to his death, versus possible immunity while in purgatory, without resolving the rules.
- Heaven Can Wait is praised, with James Mason and Buck Henry recalled as authority figures; Defending Your Life supplies a legal-system comparison. Demotion is questioned, and purgatory in New York is contrasted with fewer opportunities for wrongdoing in the woods. The medium’s message that others are waiting is taken to mean his time is limited and a higher authority decides.