Talk:Boiling Point (2021 film)

The white powder snorted in the penultimate scene

Some say it is cocaine. Some say it is heroin (which is available as a white powder). Some say he thinks it's cocaine, but it's actually heroin.

There have been a series of edits going one way or the other.

Should the article just say "a white powdered drug", or something like that.

I don't think it's clear from the film that it's not what he expects it to be, nor what it's supposed to be. It could well be precisely what he ordered, be that heroin or cocaine. So I will change it to a "white powder", until someone can provide more concrete evidence of what it actually is, and what Andy expects it to be. Jakeqz (talk) 02:55, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Agree, let's keep it as neutral as possible. Ultimately, while I like the idea he did a Mia Wallace, it's WP:OR to say he thought it was coke but was actually heroin. — Czello 10:12, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

The ending is deeper than it seems by casual viewing

Boiling Point doesn't explain anything and much is left to interpretation of the numerous but subtle clues. I believe it is pretty well established that in the final scene Andy snorts heroin thinking it was cocaine. As per the movie's overall theme, a series of miscommunications leads to this, in particular that between Holly (the drug dealer) and Jake. How exactly that happens is dubious but Holly appears to ask if it was heroin that Jake wanted, while Jake hears "henry", that is slang for 1/8 oz, a typical (large) amount of any drug. Thus, he most likely thinks he is buying coke, while the dealer thinks he said yes to wanting heroin. Jake and one or two other staff members appear to get heavily wasted, likely due to the same mistake that ultimately kills Andy, with heroin-like effects. Another case of miscommunication occur in that Jake never warns Andy of having delivered heroin instead of cocaine to his office. The powder also doesn't seem exactly white but of a slightly darker tint, as street heroin would often be (while cocaine is always plain white) - but given the lighting in that room it is hard to tell.

Why Andy gets cardiac arrest while the other guys survive? The hints get even more subtle, but it does appear that Andy had also been using cocaine earlier in the evening, and the combination of those two drugs is known to be dangerous. Of course that could be attributed simply to him also being drunk, older or more stressed, or taking a larger line than the others did, but given the attention to detail in this film, and very clear hints that he indeed gets into a cocaine-like euphoria before Jake buys the heroin, make me believe in this interpretation.

Another very relevant detail is that the nut allergy was not simply a side story, but that it ties to the main plotline and Andy's death. Had the woman not gotten that walnut oil (as a result of Andy's and Camille's mistakes), and since she arrived quite late, she would still be sitting at table 13, near where Andy collapses. And her EpiPen would have saved Andy (because, why else make a big fuzz about the EpiPens). And to throw off the inattentive viewer, she did get shot with the paramedic's EpiPen on screen, an event one might more easily recall than the brief dialogue mentioning that she'd already used one some five minutes before the ambulance arrived.

It is a very complex thriller but almost no-one seems to understand even the ending, let alone all the substories, simply taking it as a kitchen drama with a nasty and stupid ending. This movie is just too brilliant for Modern Audiences. 93.108.178.201 (talk) 05:27, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

A black waitress is treated with hostility by an aggressive guest (in contrast to her white colleague)

Referring to this change with commit title "(→‎Plot: WP:OR that isn't even mentioned in the film)".

Not sure what you mean by "not mentioned in the film". It's quite clear this is a subplot if you actually watch the film. Not all plot elements come from dialogue, but the line "Do they not teach you people how to serve wine?" is clearly meant to be a racist slur. I would vote to revert this change. I don't think there's any WP:OR in including it, and suitable references can be included if you insist: "an irate, racist patriarch performatively throwing his weight around on table seven"; and/or "Andrea is berated by a boorish and racist customer". Jakeqz (talk) 04:47, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Without sources it's the definition of WP:OR. But thank you for finding sources for this claim. — Czello 09:02, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Would you be happy for me to restore the previous text (as per the title of this 'Talk' section) if those sources (which might also be used in the 'Critical Response' section) were cited? Jakeqz (talk) 01:06, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Yep, go ahead. — Czello 08:13, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

OK, thanks, have done. As I indicated, I think the racist undertones are quite clear and intentional; however, it's good to have some references to back that up. Jakeqz (talk) 00:48, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

References

Versions

I watched a short a few days ago, on terrestrial TV (possibly Film 4). I'm now watching a 90-minute movie, which appears to be the subject of this present article; also on Film 4. The plot outlined in the article seems to besimilar to the plot of the short; at least, the scene with the powder is present.

Tonight the series is airing, on BBC1.

I can't find online references to the short; my STB says it's 20 minutes long, and was made in 2019. Does mention of this short belong here? MrDemeanour (talk) 14:22, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, the feature film was based on the previous short - so yes, it definitely warrants a mention if you can find a reliable source! OGBC1992 (talk) 14:14, 4 October 2023 (UTC)