MovieChat Forums > True Confessions (1981) Discussion > WHY did Tom try to destroy his brother?

WHY did Tom try to destroy his brother?

posted 15 years ago by mike-848
8 replies | jump to latest

There was obviously great jealousy since Des was always treated as the 'good' son but Tom really did have affection for Des. Yet in the confessional he tells Des that he doesn't care that Jack didn't commit the murder, he was going to implicate him and didn't care if Des went down to.

It doesn't make sense even more because when the press are hounding Des for more information about his connection to the dead girl when the story breaks, Tom seems flustered as to the fact that his brother's upward mobility in the Church was as good as done. What did Tom expect?

[–] DaVooz 15 years ago

Tom didn't try to destroy his brother Des. He choose conscious over false loyalty.

he tells Des that he doesn't care that Jack didn't commit the murder, he was going to implicate him and didn't care if Des went down too.

Tom was a little frustrated maybe of his mother favoring Des, but grew out of that I think. It didn't play a role in him deciding to mention he found out more (the location where that X-rated film was shot). Shouting at Des in the confessional scene is because he is emotional: he knows he will harm his brother (and it works because it is cinematographicly interesting - the contrast and conflict is emphatised). Thr truth hurts. And he loves his brother.

It doesn't make sense even more because when the press are hounding Des for more information about his connection to the dead girl when the story breaks, Tom seems flustered as to the fact that his brother's upward mobility in the Church was as good as done. What did Tom expect?

That's just organics and politics he had no longer control over (press). They both know they are on their own (and still loving each other). Tom didn't expect anything less then Des' downfall. That is why he was so concerned and emotional and stalling to break the implicating new details. Linking the murder to Rancho Rossa linking it to the church implicating Des the rising star.
It's out of his hands, Des cares for Tom, he's hurting.

[–] Badlands1 14 years ago

What was the position of a Bagman for Jack? was jack actually killing girls before, and tom covered for him, why did brenda go to jail, and how was it tom's fault?

What was the problem with the Rancho Rossa deal, more estate and construction is good, who cares if jack banged hookers, they did need bigger churches??

[–] DaVooz 14 years ago

It's been too long, I really need to see my one of three favorite movies ever again somewhere this weekend.

I think a bagman was a debtcollector for a corrupt businessman/criminal such as Jack. I don't know whether Jack let people pay for their "protection" (like Tom's partner in the police let the the chinese restaurant owner pay him), but Jack did bribe people to look the other way or to get things done. So he gave "donations" and bribed policemen. I think Jack Amsterdam gave money to Tom and he gave it to the corrupt policemen involved to keep quite and thus allowing prostitution or to speed up business decisions or get certain services favorable to him. Politics. Taking care of business. Money in the bag, man with that bag is the bagman is what I think.

Jack didn't kill girls ever. But Jack was dealing with and handling girls, he was a pimp starting out (before moving to construction and real estate), and prostitution was officially illegal. And Tom was working for Jack on the side. What and how exactly, I don't know.

I also don't know the details on Brenda's conviction (ruling to go to jail), but Jack and Tom framed Brenda and let her be responsible for all. I think she was jailed for prostitution or so (when some incident happened and thus it came out there was a whorehouse, and Brenda worked there), and Jack managed to stay off the radar, and so did Tom. So she was bitter, because Brenda at that time was working for Jack Amsterdam, but she got all the blame. Jack nor Tom, partners in crime, helped her, or bailed her out. So after jail she didn't go back to Jack but started pimping herself (she became a madam of a whorehouse), and she didn't contact Tom (her regular, and, as we learn, her friend: Tom's feelings for her were affectionate, Brenda was Tom's girl to Tom, whether he wanted to or not; Tom is the only one Brenda can think of to say goodbye to as she's leaving).

It became too obvious Jack's projects were corrupt, and that Jack's money ("donations") was dirty money. The Ranch Rossa building project was Jack's way to launder money, and to obtain a legal status, to get a "respected position". A known criminal and linked to a murder, a businessman accused of fraud, that Jack Amsterdam that is a partner to a huge Church project "banged hookers" - how would that not be a problem? In PR, politics and business, and for the people of that Church community?!

And also, Des just wanted him out. He got tired of the this-for-that with a crook. He was repulsed of Jack. And tired of dealing with power and corruption and his own ambition. Remember he had to fire his former mentor (and send him to the desert, where he would eventually end up). That was a turning point. Also Tom pushed him to do something. He had a conscience after all. Despite the "Church' need foor bigger Churches(?)".

with [cheese]

[–] Reds1981 15 years ago

You're over-complicating it with sibling rivalry.

It's was all because of Jack and how corrupt he was. 1st he sent Brenda to jail and kept Tom out of jail because Tom was Des's brother and his own 'bagman'.

Jack "passed around like a piece of Christmas Candy" a beautiful young woman who wound up brutally murdered.

Then Brenda kills herself and Tom's partner tells him the last call she made was to Jack, and what ever they talked about Jack directly or indirectly led to Brenda's suicide. Two dead women, and one corrupt man.

He goes to apologize to his brother before he 'takes Jack down' and warns him.

But Brenda is dead - it was Brenda's suicide after she talked to Jack that set Tom (Duvall) off the edge.

Were it not for Brenda, Tom would have never felt compelled to act, as he is in pain that he's discovered the murderer was also dead. No one to prosecute, but as he's pacing around the police station having just solved a murder he then learns of Brenda's suicide and he want's revenge for everything Jack did to Brenda, prison, suicide ...

Simple: it's all due to Brenda and what Jack had done to her over the years.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] pacinofan58 12 years ago

Tom didn't try to destroy his brother, he wanted to destroy Jack Amsterdam.... and Des was just the necessary collateral damage!
His motive wasn't jealousy towards his brother that made Tom do what he did, rather, it was simply a matter of Tom hating Amsterdam more than he cared about protecting his brother from the fallout of going after Amsterdam.

[–] mike-848 11 years ago

Hey thanks for all the comments everyone but, none of you have convinced me that Tom's actions made ANY sense for all the facts we know of the various relationships in this film.

Tom never hated Desmond enough to hurt him the way you would think it necessary to destroy Jack as well as his brother.

And I don't feel Tom did it for Brenda. I imagine it's something that can only be chalked up to human frailty. Tom tells Des 20 years later that it was all his fault and Des forgives him because it was Des who wanted out of the power trip position and just become a humble parish priest. Tom was his liberator.

What a great, great film.

[–] pacinofan58 11 years ago

He didn't hate his brother at all, he resented him for doing business with Amsterdam...... who Tom knew to be a phony crook who destroyed people's lives, and passed himself off as a religious family man. It's after Tom sees Brenda in the morgue and finds out that Amsterdam was the last one she talked to before she died, that he goes after Amsterdam with a vengeance!
He hates Amsterdam enough to try and pin the murder of the dismembered girl on him even though he knows that Amsterdam had nothing to do with it.
I'd say that pinning a murder on someone you know is innocent of the crime is a pretty good indicator that that person hated the other one enough to ruin him.
The apology to Des 20 years later is for causing Des to be that collateral damage in Tom's vendetta against Amsterdam.
Amsterdam got rich doing contracts for the church and Tom indeed hated him enough to bring his brother down too if that's what it took. The apology is a scene meant to show that despite his hard exterior, Tom did love his brother very much.