24: Season 2 - Hour 9 - 01/07/03 - It's back! (1 Viewer)

[Jason Quillen]

If anyone else taped it, watch the area with Nina in it when they come back from the last commercial break, it shows an operative placing his weapon on the ground,

Thats what I thought at first too, but since I watched it again, I think its the phone he's putting there...
JQ

 

[Jeff Kohn]

I dunno, it seemed to me like the show is loosing plausibility.
- When was the last time you heard of an airplane crash-landing hard enough to break up the fuselage with debris strewn over a significant area, and there were several survivors?
- Wouldn't Jack have counted the number of clips before handing them to Nina? I mean he's not a stupid guy. If you've got a limited amount of ammo you're going to try to use it effectively and keep track of how much you have, not just spray bullets willy-nilly without worrying about it.
- Does a single soldier really carry that much extra ammo? (I don't know, just asking)
Nina's new bargain seems kinda stupid to me. It's not at all suspenseful because we know Jack is going to get out of this situation in the next hour or two. I mean, even if you want to argue that he could possibly die before everything is said and done, I seriously doubt he's going to spend the rest of the season sitting in a field with his hands over his head, so he's bound to get out of this situation. Also, if we're supposed to believe they would just stand by and watch her shoot Jack, come on. She'd be dead as soon as they knew they had everything they need from her, pardons and promises be damned. My prediction is that their "out" is going to be the fact that she killed the guy on the plane, I don't think she asked for a pardon explicitly for that.
And if this does turn out to be a plot by the CIA or some pentagon guys, that will be lame, lame, lame. Been there, done that. Hollywood with all their biases may love to portray the military as evil, but the notion that anybody in the US govt would even consider nuking a major U.S. city is just retarded.
I'm all for trying to keep things exciting, but it seems to me that the required suspension of disbelief is getting to be a bit much. The thing I liked about season 1 is that it had a more realistic edge to it compared to something like Alias (which isn't remotely realistic, but who cares because it's a fun show with a hot chick).

 

[Patrick Sun]

Nina can't shoot Jack yet because her info hasn't been verified to be "good", so she hasn't gotten the "get out of jail" card...yet based on the deal the president struck with her (it was conditional on the info leading them to the bomb), so if she killed Jack and her info was bad, then she'd get more time in the chair. Jack is still considered a hostage of hers as well.

 

[LennyP]

Hollywood with all their biases may love to portray the military as evil, but the notion that anybody in the US govt would even consider nuking a major U.S. city is just retarded.

No it's not, it's the best current theory that I hope turns out to be true. There is always a crazed extremist with his own agenda, not the whole government or the whole military. It would also be nice since even a "typical arab terrorist" feels compassion like that driver did, but someone like Bob Warner, if he turns out to be someone more involved, doesn't even blink an eye.

 

[MickeS]

Exactly. She should shoot Jack, tell them she knows where the bomb is and demand that they let her go after verification. Otherwise, they'll kill her right after they verified the location of the bomb, in order to protect jack.

The story they chose is really dumb, IMO.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I think Nina would have been shot by the CTU agents if she killed Jack right then and there, plus Jack is the one with the access to the president at that crucial time. Nina still needed Jack at the time, and Nina doesn't get her "guarenteed" immunity if she offs Jack and then tries to bargain her way into it later.

 

[MickeS]

The only card she could play was that she knew where the bomb was. Whether she offed Jack or not, that's why they didn't kill her at that point.

The "deal" they have now, means nothing:
Since she didn't kill Jack and told them where the bomb is, she's toast.
If she would have killed Jack and told them where the bomb is, she'd have been toast.

At least by killing Jack BEFORE she told them where the bomb is, she would have gotten the satisfaction of seeing him die.

 

[Craig P]

Remember, they agreed not to try Nina for killing Jack. They didn't agree to let her kill him. If they feel she's about to pull the trigger, IMO they could shoot her dead and not be reneging on the agreement.

I agree, though, that Nina should have shot Jack first and demanded immunity afterwards. I'm not sure if the writers thought through a reason that she wouldn't have done so.

 

[Ken Chan]

I'm not sure if the writers thought through a reason that she wouldn't have done so.

I'm not sure Nina would have thought through the entire scenario either. You were just in a plane crash and now you're running for your life, hoping not to get shot. We're doing a lot of arm-chair quarterbacking here.

However, if she had shot Jack first, there was a good chance the agents would have shot her immediately before she could open her mouth. After all, it would seem like she's trying to escape, and the agents' lives were also in danger. If she's playing the odds to stay alive, what she did is safer in the short term, although killing Jack at the first opportunity would be safer in the long term.

//Ken

 

[Patrick Sun]

Again, you guys are discounting the power of keeping Jack hostage in Nina's POV. If you're Nina, you have to string it out until a real opening for an escape materializes. She was still not in "friendly" territory and was outmanned and outgunned. Using Jack as a shield works for her at that instant in time, moreso than killing him after extracting the immunity and then having to deal with trying to kill the CTU agents as well.

 

[OliverT]

However, if she had shot Jack first, there was a good chance the agents would have shot her immediately before she could open her mouth. After all, it would seem like she's trying to escape, and the agents' lives were also in danger.

Nah...she could easily have just shot him and threw down the gun. Don't forget she squeezed a bunch of rounds to show Jack she was armed and the CTU troops were in no position to return fire.

I totally agree with MickeS. By far her best play for survival and freedom would have been to kill Jack first and bargain later. She is pretty much in a no-win situation at this point. Why should she think that the prez would honor a promise he gave at the point of a nuclear bomb?

OT

 

[Elliott Willschick]

I just hope that there is no back-up on the way for the soldiers sent to kill the survivors. That would probably give Jack a chance to get out of the way.

 

[Mark Kalzer]

We tend to be analyzing this whole sequence very intensely...but I think we're forgetting about the whole time aspect. We have a whole week to analyze and second guess everyone's decisions between hours of the show...but the characters do not have that luxury. They do not have the time to think everything through that we, the viewers have. I don't find it implausible for Jack to forget how many clips of ammo he's carrying...considering his plane just crashed, military grunts are shooting at him...and that he's been forced to rescue his mortal enemy Nina Myers. That, plus the fact there's a nuclear bomb threat tends to make people make more than a few mistakes! Everyone's stretched very thin now...and like Jack said..."This isn't over yet."

 

[OliverT]

I agree with ya. I'm just discussing what Nina's 'best play' would have been. I'm not saying the plot is bogus because she didn't act that way. There might be more going on here than we realize...

OT

 

[LennyP]

Again, you guys are discounting the power of keeping Jack hostage in Nina's POV. If you're Nina, you have to string it out until a real opening for an escape materializes. She was still not in "friendly" territory and was outmanned and outgunned. Using Jack as a shield works for her at that instant in time, moreso than killing him after extracting the immunity and then having to deal with trying to kill the CTU agents as well.

Exactly, they're all tense, jumped off a helicopter, just shot a bunch of unknown soldiers, and if Nina were to shoot one of their own, at least one of the CTU Search & Rescue guys would think she'll fire upon them too, or whatever, and take her out, that's why she didn't shoot Jack right away, plus he helps her with the bargain, telling those soldiers to put down their weapons as they don't listen to her much. It's always better to have a live hostage than a dead one. Everyone thinking otherwise is wrong, end of story. :b

 

[OliverT]

It's always better to have a live hostage than a dead one.

The only 'hostage' that matters in this case is the information she has on the bomb. She shoots Jack to start with and the president has to agree to give her a pardon and doesn't come off feeling manipulated into having to choose life or death for a friend of his. I'd say her survival chances are far better if the president is less pissed off hehe.
Jack is irrelevant. Her info is all important. She has more leverage if he was killed quickly and she wouldn't be tied down. They could take her to a place where she could receive a fax with the president's signature and a place where she could refax that to the press. Jack is dead and her freedom is assured. Now she has to deal with a tense standoff and isn't mobile. Bad move. Human. But bad move. Guess she isn't as smart as I thought she was .
OT

 

[Keith Mickunas]

Why are so many of you hung up on the idea that the president has to or should keep his word to Nina? Is it so bad to not honor your word to a terrorist/traitor who would bargain with the lives of what could potentially be millions of innocent people? Once again I have to ask, does anybody really think the president or anybody else involved would actually get in trouble if it was found out that she was promised immunity for her crimes and was lied to so that the necessary information to stop a nuclear bomb could be obtained?

If she's not willing to abide by the law why should anyone else when dealing with her? I'm not suggesting that all criminals should lose all their rights, but some like Nina don't deserve any.

She's got to be thinking the same thing, which makes me wonder if she's got more going on behind the scenes than we realize. Heck, she could secretly be working with the people trying to undermine the president. Her life isn't worth squat once the bomb is found and she knows it. She needs an escape plan that doesn't involve people friendly to CTU or the president.

 

[Qui-Gon John]

Based on Jack's statement and expression in "this isn't over yet" lead me to another possibility, that both the soldiers on the ground and the CTU people are all a setup, by Jack and CTU to make Nina think she's in control of the situation. Maybe the guns have blanks. I don't know, if Nina shot blanks into the dirt like that, would it still kick up some dust like we saw.

I read the TV Guide article and did not get that Sutherland did not want to do another season. Either it's not in their or I didn't read that part right.

 

[Paul McElligott]

I read the TV Guide article and did not get that Sutherland did not want to do another season. Either it's not in their or I didn't read that part right.

I think Sutherland said something about not wanting to more than three seasons. IIRC

 

[Bill Catherall]

There are other ways to get information from Nina besides bargaining. They didn't want her to do anything irrational, like kill Jack anyway, so they bargained. Without Jack, the information can be extracted by other means, and Nina knows that. She can't just kill Jack and hold the information hostage.