FANDOM


  • Disclaimer: This review contains spoilers for the movie.
    As with many of my friends, I was quite apprehensive about the Assassin’s Creed film, given that in the past, video game movies have always held the reputation of being some of the lowest quality works of cinema. After watching it, I have to admit that I was indeed very disappointed, though it was not as bad as it could have been and therefore decent for a video game movie. My disappointment stems from a variety of issues including poor script, bland or almost non-existent character development, poor presentation, pacing issues, but most relevant to this wiki: plot inconsistencies and contradictions with established lore.

    It is for this last failing in the movie that I think this thread I am making now is quite critical to our work. Now I think I should be clear that the majority of these contradictions can be resolved, but only through awkward or patchy explanations. Many of them fall short of being blatant, explicit contradictions but nevertheless are heavily suggestive of the presence of inconsistencies.

    Aside from this, I will also be using this post to double as a general movie review after my explanation of the contradictions because there are miscellaneous flaws that don’t exactly contradict the lore.

    One last time, the following contains major spoilers for the entire film!

    Discovery Contradictions

    A number of these inconsistencies stem from the fact Assassin’s Creed II: Discovery is also set in the Spanish Inquisition, so much that there are overlaps between Ezio Auditore and Aguilar de Nerha’s activities.

    I. Tomás de Torquemada is a Templar in the film; he is not in Discovery

    This is perhaps the most straightforward and blatant contradiction with established Assassin’s Creed lore.

    Tomás de Torquemada serves as the main antagonist of Assassin’s Creed II: Discovery. Throughout the game, the Inquisition is thought to have been part of the Templars, but each time Ezio assassinates an inquisitor, their last words heavily suggest otherwise. At the end, Ezio discovers that Torquemada is utterly ignorant of the fact that the Templars and Assassins still exist or of their war. The Grand Inquisitor believes that Rodrigo Borgia, who provided the names of the Assassins to be arrested by the Inquisition, is a true Catholic and that the “Assassins” are merely just atheistic heretics.

    In the film, after Torquemada acquires an Apple of Eden from Muhammad XII by ransoming the emir’s son, he holds up the Apple in triumph then makes some grand speech about Templar victory and domination, decisively revealing his allegiances. Even if we can try to explain that perhaps he just supports the Templars but wasn’t one himself at that point, in the game, he didn’t even know the Templars exist.

    Possible Solutions

    • He joined the Templars after his affairs with Ezio Auditore.
    This is the current explanation we have on his article, and it doesn’t work because Ezio’s direct confrontation with Torquemada occurs after Christopher Columbus sets sail on his first voyage. In the film, Aguilar’s confrontation with Torquemada when the latter retrieves the Apple of Eden occurs before Christopher Columbus sets sail.
    • Torquemada was deceiving Ezio, keeping his allegiance to the Templars secret.
    To be exact, Torquemada never explicitly said that he was not a Templar. Ezio concluded this based on his dialogue with Torquemada, who rejected Ezio’s assertion that Rodrigo was also an atheist. Ezio had been commanded by Raphael Sanchez to speak with Torquemada before killing him, to goad him into revealing his connections with the Templars. Because Ezio obviously had to word his exchange carefully, rather than outright say “ARE YOU A TEMPLAR BRO?”, he deduced Torquemada was not a Templar by interpreting his responses and fitting them in with the words of previous targets, who more explicitly denied any knowledge of Templars and Assassins, and not by having the question posed to them but by scoffing at Ezio’s notions they still exist. Ezio’s exact conversation with Torquemada can be found here.
    Therefore, we might suppose that Ezio’s conclusion was simply wrong: Torquemada was a Templar after all. However, this is still problematic because if Torquemada went through such efforts to hide his affiliation with the Templars from Ezio, why did he openly flaunt it to Aguilar’s group? His subordinates such as Gaspar Martínez and Pedro Ilorente seemed so sincere about their disbelief in the existence of Templars and Assassins, that they never felt peril at being confronted by Ezio. It’s possible that some inquisitors were not part of the Templar conspiracy, but Torquemada was. Even so, even though our conclusion that Torquemada isn’t a Templar comes from Ezio’s own deduction (which could be wrong), it seems quite certain that the game had meant to declare through all these hints that Ezio’s deduction is correct.

    II. Aguilar de Nerha gives Christopher Columbus an Apple of Eden

    First of all, why in the world would Aguilar give the Apple of Eden to Christopher Columbus?!?!

    Alas, in Discovery it is shown that the Assassins were probably not aware that Christopher is an imperialist at heart who would one day as Governor of the Indies would enslave the indigenous peoples and ruled them through brutality and violence. He is introduced as a friend of the Assassin Luis de Santángel, and I suppose neither he nor Ezio realized how Columbus is a cruel man, a bigot who would care nothing at all for the humanity or lives of the indigenous peoples he will later on encounter? Certainly in real-life, often friends who have known each other for even many years might not realize the deep-seated callousness and psychopathic tendencies that one amongst them may have if placed in a position of political power, especially if they never bothered to discuss ideology. We know from other sources that the Assassins did care greatly for the lives of indigenous peoples, and their support of Columbus was most likely a tragic mistake.

    However, even if they trusted Columbus before his journey, it does not make sense why they would trust him enough to give an Apple of Eden to him! He is a random man unaffiliated with the Assassins who has had a history of foolishly walking into Templar traps and being dismissive of Assassin warnings of danger.

    The Assassins went to great pains to ensure that these Pieces of Eden were locked away, secure, and not entrusted to any average person.

    Now, we might say that Aguilar perhaps did not have the common sense to understand how cautious he must be in choosing the man to pass the Apple to, but what made him think of Columbus?

    Did Aguilar have any connection to Columbus previously? If not, did he learn of Columbus’s friendship with the Assassins from Luis de Santángel and Ezio? If he did, then how could Luis and Ezio not have known that Aguilar had an Apple of Eden? If they did, then why would Ezio, who strove to protect the Apple of Eden from falling into the wrong hands, allow Aguilar to pass it over to a random man known for being dismissive of the Assassins?

    Possible Solutions

    • Aguilar de Nerha was friends/allies with Christopher Columbus through his own encounters and not through Luis de Santángel. He decided on his own volition (and poor judgment) to entrust the Apple of Eden to Columbus.
    • Ezio Auditore and Luis de Santángel agreed with Aguilar de Nerha’s decision to entrust the Apple of Eden to Christopher Columbus.
    Not likely for the reasons I have already stated above. Ezio strove to protect the Apple of Eden from falling into the wrong hands and was in a furious quest for the Apple of Eden Rodrigo Borgia held so that it would be safe. Even if he considered Columbus a friend, he wouldn’t have trusted such a task to Columbus, who is not an Assassin himself. Even if Ezio trusted Columbus’s sincerity for safeguarding it, his experiences with Columbus suggested a man who was foolhardy, prone to walking into Templar traps, and dismissive of Assassin advice and plans.
    Perhaps they thought the best location to hide this Apple was in the Americas, and through whatever analysis, thought it best for Columbus to be the one to transport it there. The plan backfired, Columbus turned out not to be the man to trust, and he would hoard it until his death, somehow hiding it in his own tomb.
    • Luis de Santángel agreed with Aguilar de Nerha to entrust the Apple of Eden with Christopher Columbus without happening to inform Ezio Auditore.

    III. Emir Muḥammad XII of Granada has an Apple of Eden just lying about in his palace, which Ezio Auditore, who was hunting for the Apple of Eden in Rodrigo Borgia’s possession, either did not know about or did not apparently care about.

    The Emir of Granada (referred to as King in Discovery & Sultan in the film), Muḥammad XII of Nasrid apparently had an Apple of Eden. It is reasonable to assume that Ezio Auditore, who was so keen on retrieving the Apple of Eden from Rodrigo Borgia’s grasp, viewing that as his main quest, would give much regards to the sudden news that the emir that he saved apparently had another Apple of Eden.

    In the game, it is shown that Ezio meets the emir quite last minute, rescuing his life in the midst of the final Battle of Granada, and thus had no prior connection to him. Thus, it is entirely possible that Ezio simply did not know that the emir had an Apple in his possession. However, the other Spanish Assassin, i.e. Aguilar’s group, did know about this, and one might think that Ezio’s group would’ve had some exchange in intel with them considering they were operating in the same area, in the same events?

    When Ezio rescues Muḥammad XII from the Templars, should the emir not have handed the Apple over to the Assassins before he was confronted by the Templars for it again later?

    Possible Solutions

    Much of the way we resolve this possible contradiction depends on the timing of the events between Ezio and Aguilar’s activities, and I now realize that this may in fact be easily resolvable. What made the inconsistency so stark to me at first was because when I first watched the scene, I was so certain that Muḥammad’s confrontation with Torquemada occurred after he had already capitulated to Spain, but this may not be the case.

    As of now, I would need to rewatch the film to know if Aguilar’s events occurred before the final Battle of Granada.

    Here we should analyze multiple scenarios:

    • The Templar’s capture of the son of Muḥammad XII and the ransom meeting occurs before the final Battle of Granada where Muḥammad XII surrenders. This means that Aguilar managed to recover the Apple of Eden, but Templar reinforcements arrived to take Muḥammad XII hostage once more while Aguilar escaped with the Apple. According to Discovery, the Templars were hoping to keep Muḥammad XII indefinitely detained in his palace to prevent him from surrender, ensuring that the Spanish crown exhausted their finances through a prolonged siege and preventing them from funding Columbus’s voyage. Ezio would go on to infiltrate Alhambra Palace, save Muḥammad XII, and convince him to capitulate in the midst of the last Battle of Granada. By then, Aguilar still had the Apple in his possession, and in the coming weeks, once Luis and Ezio had negotiated with Isabella to finally fund Columbus’s voyage, Aguilar would pass the Apple over to Columbus just as he departed.
    • The ransom meeting occurs during the final Battle of Granada, and Ezio arrives first. Muḥammad XII by this point was already kept hostage by the Templars, and it is suggested he had been for at least some weeks or months without the rest of his forces even knowing. Ezio infiltrates Alhambra just as the final Battle of Granada begins. He makes his way to the throne room where he rescues Muḥammad from the Templars After quickly convincing Muḥammad to abdicate, Ezio agrees to hurry to the city gates to open them and signal Granada’s surrender. For Ezio, it was paramount he achieved this as soon as possible so as to end the battle as quickly as he can and minimize deaths on either side. Because of the haste by which he met Muḥammad than left, it’s possible that Muḥammad did not have the chance to tell him about the Apple of Eden. It’s possible that Muḥammad also did not trust the Assassins and thought that the Templar threat had passed, hence he believed there was no reason to tell Ezio. Even more likely, he was aware that his son was in Templar hands at that point, and he thought he needed to keep the Apple to ransom his son back. More Templars, with Torquemada leading them, then arrive at the Palace just after Ezio left to secure the ransom. They would be attacked by Aguilar and Maria, the former who retrieves the Apple of Eden.
    • The ransom meeting occurs during the final Battle of Granada, and Aguilar arrives first. Muḥammad XII is held hostage, then Torquemada arrives for the ransom, to be attacked by Aguilar and Maria. After the fight, Aguilar escapes with the Apple of Eden, but the Templars retake Muḥammad hostage. Later that night, Ezio arrives and frees Muḥammad, who by then has already lost the Apple of Eden. Note that if both incidents did occur during the same battle, it is more likely that Aguilar arrived first because his scenes are depicted in daytime while Ezio does not enter Granada until it is night.
    • The ransom meeting occurs after the final Battle of Granada. Ezio infiltrates Alhambra Palace and rescues Muḥammad XII, who for the reasons I mentioned earlier, does not reveal the Apple of Eden in his possession to Ezio. These reasons include Ezio’s haste to go and deliver news of the city’s surrender, Muḥammad possibly thinking that the Templar threat had passed, and most likely, Muḥammad knowing his son was in Templar hands and that he needed the Apple to ransom him.
    This still proves problematic, however, as Ezio stayed in Granada to protect the people from Templar abuses in the immediate aftermath, and up until at least the abdication ceremony of Muḥammad. He would therefore still probably have been present when Templars went to ransom Muḥammad’s son for the Apple of Eden. It is highly unlikely that he would not have had news of that especially since he was actively in touch with both Isabella and Muḥammad and the capture of Muḥammad’s son would’ve been an important issue to discuss. He therefore should’ve known that an Apple of Eden was involved, and the mission would’ve been critical enough for him to participate in.

    As of now, we don’t know how to reconcile this overlap between Ezio and Aguilar’s participation in the final Battle of Granada unless any of you remember the exact timeline in the film. I’m sure once we read the novelization or rewatch the film, we would know if this contradiction still exists.

    Finally, I would like to add that if the Templars had Muḥammad XII hostage before the ransom meeting, I don’t understand why they couldn’t have merely seized the Apple of Eden themselves without having to capture his son. It did not appear that Muḥammad had really hidden the Apple of Eden, but then perhaps in the scene where we see him retrieve it, he had already taken it out of its hiding place in preparation for giving it to the Templars.

    I think that the last scenario is definitely the most problematic, and yet while watching the film I was fairly certain that the ransom scene occurs after the Spanish had taken Granada.

    IV. Muḥammad XII is left to the whims of the Templars after Ezio had saved him

    This is a very similar point to the one just above and resolution of this also depends on an accurate understanding of the timeline of events in the film.

    When I was watching the film, it was my assumption that the ransom meeting occurs after the surrender of Granada, meaning that Muḥammad XII had been saved from the Templars by Ezio only to immediately be held by their whims once more.

    As explained above, if this meeting does occur after Granada’s surrender, it would mean that Ezio, for whatever reason, did not assist Aguilar and his group in the rescue of his son, or in stopping the Templars from taking his Apple of Eden even though Ezio stayed in Granada for at least a couple of months to see through the abdication process.

    Possible Solutions

    • This is only a problem if the ransom meeting occurs after Ezio rescued him at the final Battle of Granada. Otherwise, if the meeting does occur before Ezio’s rescue, Ezio could not have intervened since he was still on the road to Granada from Zaragoza up until the night of the final battle.

    There is one last contradiction between Discovery and the film that I had thought of, but I believe I have since resolved it.

    V. Where was Ezio during Aguilar, Maria, and Benedicto’s execution?

    Ezio Auditore at this time was active in Spain specifically for the purpose of rescuing Spanish Assassins that had been captured by the inquisitors and sentenced to death. So where was he when Aguilar’s group were captured and sentenced to be burned at the stake?

    I believe I have since found the answer to this question, and so it is not an inconsistency. Ezio entered Spain through Aragon, first saving the Assassins of Barcelona than of Zaragoza. Aguilar and his company were based in Andalusia during this time, which is quite far. Although Ezio himself was traveling to Granada from Zaragoza, we know he did not actually reach Granada until its very last battle. It is highly likely that Aguilar and his group were merely captured and sentenced to execution before Ezio was in the area. Even if he was, he may not have received news of their plight.

    To be continued

    So apparently this analysis of inconsistencies between Assassin’s Creed II: Discovery and the film have already made for a far more extensive post than I had expected. However, I believe that being as comprehensive as possible is necessary here.

    I am not sure if there are any inconsistencies that I have neglected to address between those two works, but I am far from done.

    There are still other issues between the film and the general lore I have to call attention to which I shall address in Part 2 (and hopefully not a Part 3) of this review.

      Loading editor
    • The readability and organization of this did not come out as expected because for some reason the asterisks/bullet points are not working as they should, even when they come out fine in the preview.

        Loading editor
    • Excellent post, Sol. My copy of the movie novelization arrived this morning, so perhaps I can find something in there regarding the conquest of Granada and the whole sequence of events that happened during it.

        Loading editor
    • Brilliant Sol!. As for the meeting between Aguilar and Columbus, well Christopher made four trips to America (1492-93, 93-96, 98-1500 and 02), if I am not mistaken the last scene is not specified to be in 1492, with what the delivery of the apple might have been on another trip.

        Loading editor
    • Am I the only one who noticed that Callum didn't have any problems in using Aguilar's hidden blade when his ring finger should be cut for it to work? or maybe it was mentioned in the movie. the guys behind me was too noisy.

        Loading editor
    • Misphantom wrote:
      Am I the only one who noticed that Callum didn't have any problems in using Aguilar's hidden blade when his ring finger should be cut for it to work? or maybe it was mentioned in the movie. the guys behind me was too noisy.

      Hey Misphantom, long time no see!

      Perhaps the Hidden Blades used by the Spanish Assassins did not necessarily require the cutting of a finger to work, but the Brotherhood still upheld the practice for tradition? After all, Aguilar has two Hidden Blades, but only had the ring finger on his right hand severed.

        Loading editor
    • Crookandcharlatan wrote:
      Misphantom wrote:
      Am I the only one who noticed that Callum didn't have any problems in using Aguilar's hidden blade when his ring finger should be cut for it to work? or maybe it was mentioned in the movie. the guys behind me was too noisy.
      Hey Misphantom, long time no see!

      Perhaps the Hidden Blades used by the Spanish Assassins did not necessarily require the cutting of a finger to work, but the Brotherhood still upheld the practice for tradition? After all, Aguilar has two Hidden Blades, but only had the ring finger on his right hand severed.

      Heya Crook! School's been hectic these past months so I'm focusing on my studies. But yeah, maybe you're right. I'm still laughing about how all those Abstergo guards didn't have a single idea about shooting the rest of the Assassins. (I know I'm late for this movie. AC was just premiered this january because we had a film festival for the rest of december). Were guns prohibited in the lab? Because I vaguely remember some Abstergo guards shooting at my Desmond when I was playing ACIII.

        Loading editor
    • Misphantom wrote:
      Crookandcharlatan wrote:
      Misphantom wrote:
      Am I the only one who noticed that Callum didn't have any problems in using Aguilar's hidden blade when his ring finger should be cut for it to work? or maybe it was mentioned in the movie. the guys behind me was too noisy.
      Hey Misphantom, long time no see!

      Perhaps the Hidden Blades used by the Spanish Assassins did not necessarily require the cutting of a finger to work, but the Brotherhood still upheld the practice for tradition? After all, Aguilar has two Hidden Blades, but only had the ring finger on his right hand severed.

      Heya Crook! School's been hectic these past months so I'm focusing on my studies. But yeah, maybe you're right. I'm still laughing about how all those Abstergo guards didn't have a single idea about shooting the rest of the Assassins. (I know I'm late for this movie. AC was just premiered this january because we had a film festival for the rest of december). Were guns prohibited in the lab? Because I vaguely remember some Abstergo guards shooting at my Desmond when I was playing ACIII.

      Yeah, realism taking a backseat there; how else are the protagonists gonna show off their cool hand-to-hand combat skills? :p In AC3, there were guards with guns, but they were also very ineffective and weird, I think.

      And yeah, the movie seems to have come out quite delayed in some places. Weird :|

        Loading editor
    • Misphantom wrote:
      Heya Crook! School's been hectic these past months so I'm focusing on my studies. But yeah, maybe you're right. I'm still laughing about how all those Abstergo guards didn't have a single idea about shooting the rest of the Assassins. (I know I'm late for this movie. AC was just premiered this january because we had a film festival for the rest of december). Were guns prohibited in the lab? Because I vaguely remember some Abstergo guards shooting at my Desmond when I was playing ACIII.

      I pointed this out to my friends just after the movie, and they suggested that while Abstergo was stupid enough to leave random antique weapons lying around the facility for the Assassins to just pick up when they break out, they were smart enough not to carry around firearms because those firearms could easily be taken by the Assassins where they would be in far more lethal hands.

      In Assassin's Creed III there's only one guard who actually holds a pistol I think, and Desmond picks it up after killing him. You can then go on to snapshot everyone in the head with it, showing how deadly it is in the hands of an Assassin.

        Loading editor
    • Crookandcharlatan wrote:
      Misphantom wrote:
      Am I the only one who noticed that Callum didn't have any problems in using Aguilar's hidden blade when his ring finger should be cut for it to work? or maybe it was mentioned in the movie. the guys behind me was too noisy.
      Hey Misphantom, long time no see!

      Perhaps the Hidden Blades used by the Spanish Assassins did not necessarily require the cutting of a finger to work, but the Brotherhood still upheld the practice for tradition? After all, Aguilar has two Hidden Blades, but only had the ring finger on his right hand severed.

      For my part, Misphantom, I didn't even consider the fact that Callum might've needed to cut his ring finger for Aguilar's Hidden Blade to work. However, when I think back on it, I think I also was thinking that the ring finger severing was ceremonial and not a necessity, and the fact he didn't cut his other ring finger off was probably what gave it away.

      I don't know why, but the Spanish Assassins in the film seemed very backward. Their customs are more aligned with the Levantine Assassins before Altaïr's reforms.

        Loading editor
    • I've been meaning to write more on the other inconsistencies and problems of the film outside of its comparison with Assassin's Creed II: Discovery, but unfortunately, I'm not sure I have the time to get around to it :(, and by the time I do, I might have lost all interest. Currently, in terms of Assassin's Creed wiki work, there's still so much else to do.

        Loading editor
    • Sol Pacificus wrote:
      Currently, in terms of Assassin's Creed wiki work, there's still so much else to do.

      Don't I know it, pal. I appreciate all the work you've been doing though!

        Loading editor
    • Sol Pacificus wrote:
      I've been meaning to write more on the other inconsistencies and problems of the film outside of its comparison with Assassin's Creed II: Discovery, but unfortunately, I'm not sure I have the time to get around to it :(, and by the time I do, I might have lost all interest.

      Dude, you must continue. I like what you are doing here, it's a great contribution to the wiki. There's not part 1 without part 2 hahaha.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, thanks Sol. Maybe I can help fill out stuff after school ends which is 3 months away. But that would be mostly the comic stuff and the novelization stuff.

        Loading editor
    • Aww I don't know what else to say but that you guys are so nice ^_^

        Loading editor
    • given that there are some many inconsistencies when it comes to assassins creed: discovery I'm wondering if what ever fact checking the movie makers did only included the "main series" games but not the side games which is what discovery falls under(right?).

        Loading editor
    • Soul reaper magnum wrote: given that there are some many inconsistencies when it comes to assassins creed: discovery I'm wondering if what ever fact checking the movie makers did only included the "main series" games but not the side games which is what discovery falls under(right?).

      I think Ubisoft entirely forgot about Altaïr's Chronicles and Discovery. The games have long been removed from iTunes, and they're not even listed in the Assassin's Creed: Council website which has tags for all the other games even the spin-off ones. I won't say this immediately means they're non-canon though.

        Loading editor
    •  I think that the events of Discovery in Granada happens before those of the movie. The Templars forced the sultan to continue the war by kept him prisonner. Historically, the truce between Spain and Moors began in november 1491, when Ezio rescued Muhammad. What we see in the movie is the capitulation of the city in january 1492, the Templars used his son to retrieve the Apple.

       For Christopher Columbus, is already an ally of the Assassins, is not already an imperialist, he works for the crown of Spain as an explorer, Queen Isabella also changed of alligeance.

        For Torquemada links with the Templar, it's little confusing, maybe he knew the Templar Order and used them as they him for control. In the present McKey, precise Torquemada and the Templars.

        Loading editor
    • The Abstergo guys also act like there's only one Apple of Eden. They say Aguilar was the last person to have an Apple of Eden, when one of the biggest Abstergo members (Vidic) was asking for an Assassin to give him an Apple of Eden in 2012 in a large Abstergo Facility. I know that by saying that Aguilar was the last person to use it, they're probably talking about that specific Apple, but there are so much more Apples out there.

        Loading editor
    • Ezio returned to Florence in 1492, by the time Aguilar joined the Spanish brotherhood, that's why he never made a cameo in the movie, because he returned to Florence to deal with Rodrigo Borgia, who at that time became the most powerful man in Italy.

        Loading editor
    • 71.238.229.57 wrote: Ezio returned to Florence in 1492, by the time Aguilar joined the Spanish brotherhood, that's why he never made a cameo in the movie, because he returned to Florence to deal with Rodrigo Borgia, who at that time became the most powerful man in Italy.

      Not sure if you read the whole post. The events of the film coincide around the time of the fall of Granada. The film giving the year of 1492 is probably erroneous because the formal capitulation of Granada occurred on 1492, meaning Aguilar's story takes only the span of 2 days at most, hence why the novel has his events set earlier, in late 1491.

      Ezio returns to Italy very late in 1492.

      He stayed in Granada from the armistice all the way to Muḥammad XII's abdication ceremony (which is possibly the official capitulation of Granada on 1/2/1492), to guard both Muḥammad XII and Isabella from the Templars (who at this point threatened both their lives).

      After that, he stayed in Spain until after August 3, 1492, the date Columbus set sail from Palos. For the weeks after, he was defending Raphael Sanchez and Luis de Santangel from the Templars and Inquisitors. He doesn't return to Italy until very late in 1492.

        Loading editor
    • But Ezio returned in Italy after he was sure that Columbus could go on sea, so near August 1492. The confrontation in the movie took place in January 1492.

        Loading editor
    • I've finally seen the movie today. As Cal was being attached to the Animus for the second time, Sophia instructed one of the operators to set the memory for "the sixth". I interpreted this to mean January 6th, 1492. But I could be wrong.

        Loading editor
    • Here's how i would explain them:

      I.  Same, Ezio thought he wasn't a Templar. "You dare to lecture me? I am the hammer of heretics, the light of España, the honor of my order"  with "order" he most likely refers to the Church, but still it is open to interpretation. 

      II. Because he is secretly an ally, the Templars would think that the Assassins have the Apple, but it is easier to give it to someone else to hide it. And it always worked until the Animus was created.

      III. It is implied that the Assassins and the King are allies. It happened with the Egyptian Brotherhood as well. They gave a dynasty a Piece of Eden to help them overthrow a Templar goverment/dynasty. And why would Ezio take an Apple that is been guarded by an Assassin ally?

      What i want to know is what the hell happened to Apples #1, #3 and #5. They were supposed to in Templar hands the previous century.

        Loading editor
    • DipsonDP wrote:

      What i want to know is what the hell happened to Apples #1, #3 and #5. They were supposed to in Templar hands the previous century.

      Agreed.

        Loading editor
    • Master of the Night wrote:
      DipsonDP wrote:

      What i want to know is what the hell happened to Apples #1, #3 and #5. They were supposed to in Templar hands the previous century.

      Agreed.

      This was already discussed on another thread.

      When asked, Darby replied:

      "Ezio's apple was a red delicious. The others were a granny smith, a braeburn, a honey crisp, and a fuji, in that order."

      Although he was obviously joking, the implication seems to be that some Apples (like Ezio's and presumably Aguilar's) are more powerful than others. 

        Loading editor
    • Indeed, i created the thread :P 

      They need to state that somewhere in-media. Some Plot points depend on that "fact".

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.