Question
At the end of the movie, what significance is the old man that is in hadcuffs that Joe Magtenga sees?
sharehe is the one who is arrested for killing the old lady.
"I really do have love to give. I just dont know where to put it."
MovieChat Forums > Homicide (1991) Discussion > Question
[deleted]
I think that was a conspiracy. the guys who confront Gold (maybe the Mossad agents) were looking for the list of army dealers, that is the point?!
shareI thought (perhaps mistakenly) that the handcuffed prisoner at the end is the same guy who grabbed Joe's gun earlier, and promised to "Show him the nature of evil"
shareI am a great fan of Mamet's work but "Homicide" was something like a toothache - you want to ignore it but cannot. I agree with Beady-El that the man at the end of the movie was the prisoner who shot his family. I have the tape and have watched it a number of times.
But the more I watch it, the more puzzled I get. Was the whole thing just an elaborate setup? From the maid hanging the picture crookedly so the photograph fell out of the back, to the "GROSFUZ" note on the roof. . .and if "GROSFUZ" was only the name of a pigeon food, then a lot of folks had to be in on the deception: the elderly store owner where Gold takes his holster, the librarian, etc., etc.
And why the big deal about getting the original list of names? And was that group really Zionists or were they neo-Nazis disguised as Zionists?
If anybody can share their thoughts on these questions, I would be most appreciative.
Yeah; the implication seemed to be that GROFASZ was a hoax, and that a remarkable number of people had consipred to make Bobby Gold believe it was a Hitler reference.
They apparently wanted appeal to his Jewish heritage to compel him hand over that original list of names. But indeed, why??
I can't figure it out. Because
(A) Under what circumstances would the original list be so crucial if copies exist?
(B) Why did they wait until Bobby Gold had found the list and logged it as evidence? As I recall, several key characters had full access to the building where the woman was killed both before her murder and then after her death but before the police came. They had ample time to recover the original list WITHOUT the police being involved. WTF??
I am of the opinion that several vital pieces are missing from this puzzle; perhaps intentionally.
That's fine, though if even Mamet does not know what the missing pieces look like, it seems like a bit of a cheat.
If you apply my reasoning to your questions, then they make sense (sort of). And my reasoning is that the "Zionists" were really neo-Nazis who used the list as a pretext to get Gold enmeshed so they would have an insider in the police. Of course, that does not explain how the murdered woman's family was involved because they really were Jewish. Yet the first clue (the photo that fell out of the picture) came from their home. On the other hand, maybe it was only the maid who was part of the neo-Nazis.
and on and on and on. . .
I wonder if anyone ever asked Mamet these questions.
The Zionists were really Zionists and not Neo-Nazis in disguise. And no, there wasn't a worldwide conspiracy against Inspector Gold !!!
As for GROFAZ, I think it's really an acronym ("The Greatest Field General of All Times" in german) for Hitler as explained by the librarian... But the piece of paper found by Gold was not complete; one letter was missing at the end of the word GROFAZ... the letter T... This paper was a wrong clue that leads Gold to believe in a Neo-Nazi conspiracy... But at the end of the movie, Gold discovers he has been misguided and that the word on the paper was really GROFAZT which is pigeon food!
And about the list of names, the cops were the first on the spot after the old lady is killed, and the store was guarded day and night by a cop, so no, the Zionists didn't have the occasion to retrieve the list after the old lady's death! So the Zionists had to set up a trap for Gold (the bombing of the Neo-Nazis hideout) to blackamil him into giving them the original list.
Hello -
your answer makes a lot of sense but there are still some puzzles. For example, it is true that the Zionists did not have opportunity to get into the store. But why such a big deal about getting the original list when there was already a copy?
And the business with the maid hanging the picture crookedly, which started Gold on his quest. That had to be deliberate. And the "gunshot" the family heard - who would have shot? I note that in another Mamet film (The Winslow Boy), the maid plays a small but pivotal role.
On top of Mamet, I read Cormac McCarthy, so a part of my brain has become habituated to complexity.
Thanks for your response. It certainly did shed a new light on this interesting film.
I admit I'm a bit perplex about the importance of the original list. It's just a list of names without any other inscription on it, and as such I doubt it could be used as an evidence at all. Nothing proves the list is linked to the weapons order form, even if there is a strong presumption!
You're right about the maid hanging the picture crookedly on purpose... It is to get Gold involved with the list of names problem, but why not tell him directly ?
And for the "gunshot" the family heard, I'm not sure it was a gunshot at all... To me, it sounded more like a window or a windowed door closing, maybe by "the guy on the roof" who went there to feed the pigeons.
Assuming that the maid hung the picture awry on purpose, then that meant the family was involved in some way. As you may recall, the woman who "tricks" Gold into detonating the bomb was at the family's apartment, as were the members of the Zionist group.
This is one of those "problems" that makes one go round and round. Any solution seems to lead to another question.
Last week, I watched the "Spanish Prisoner" for the umpeenth time. And that is a whole 'nother set of speculation.
Thank you for your responses. I love movies and puzzles so Mamet always fits the bill.
Of course, the maid hung the picture awry at the request of the zionist family she works for.
This family and their friends are the people whose names are on the list. That is why they want the list so badly, so their names don't get associated with weapons trafficking. (I don't know to what extent it is permitted to possess weapons - or deal in weapons - in the US, but in my country, only hunters with a due licence can have a hunting gun, and of course assault riffles and other weapons are prohibited).
And again, the bombing was just a trap to blackmail Gold and convince him to get the list for them.
The guy at the end is the same as in the beginning that killed his family but what did the bird feed fax have to do with anything?
Don't wander into abandoned churches for Czakyr will grab you from underneath the watery grave.
C'mon guys. It wasnt that confusing was it?
The guy in handcuffs was the one who'd murdered his wife & kids
The old woman's murderers were those 2 kids. Remember the first time they speak in the movie, Gold turns to the Rookie and says to take everyone's name because th killer might be there? He was right.
They killed her for what they thought was cash in the basement. But all she actually had was memories of her old guerilla/gunrunning days.
People assumed she'd been murdered by anti-semites; and what's more, they assumed the reason was that the anti-semites wanted to get hold of the list to do mischief with it.
Therefore "212" wanted the original list so they could put it in a safe place. They had no use for copies of the names from it, since they already knew the names. [I doubt the list would really have had any propaganda value - but that aint the point. The Zionists assumed the Nazis wanted it - so it was imperative to keep it from them just in case.]
The library was not a set up. It was just a coincidence that "Grofaz" was a word which tied into the anti-semitic theory.
Even the bombing was not really a set up. They had the place under surveillance anyway - and just grasped the opportunity to blackmail him.
But then it all turned out to be exactly what he had thought it was at first. It was just a robbery.
padzok, clear summery thanks ;-) intriguing film, thought it basically became clear in the end.......Except for the significance of the slow shot - at the end - of the guy who shot his family & broke the fastener on Golds holster.
Any Ideas/Interpretations/Theories Anyone?
Because Gold is paranoiacly thinking that everything he has just gone through could be the gift from this man...or that maybe that he really has been cummin' w/ the customers.
shareAnd because, like the man, Gold had killed his family-his partner. Remember how earlier he said that he was his family?
shareI suppose "the list" is in the tradition of something Mamet really likes, the hitchckonian Mc. Guffin (we know it is a list, but we really don´t know what it means): is some item just used to make the story go round. Mamet used a Mc Guffin in the "Spanish Prisoner", "Ronin" & "Spartan".
Otherwise, Gold find the list (and this is first introduced in the movie) just AFTERWARDS the maid involves Gold in the con ¿?.
She didn't hang it badly on purpose. Gold just distracted her.
I really gotta find better ways to waste time.
perhaps the man who killed his family DID show him the nature of evil
or at least Gold understands the nature of evil better at the end of the film
due to the whole story that has unfolded since then....
....and remember the the whole scene at the end where Gold talks to Randolph only happens DIRECTLY because of the man who killed his family (when he tried to take Gold's gun he broke his holster leading to Gold dropping his gun leading to him being shot by Randalph and having the talk with him where they both realize they've been betrayed by people the thought they could trust)
[deleted]
The neo nazi place might have been fake but I agree with everything else.
Somebody here has been drinking and I'm sad to say it ain't me - Allan Francis Doyleshare
I think this is because they are the two faces of the same coin, in a way. And they are at the same point.
As explained early in the film, the old man (Colin Stinson) killed is entire family for "protecting them from harm", as he is probably delusional. Joe Mantegna's character does, in a way, the same. He blamed himself for the death of his partner (his only family, as he says in the movie) by protecting people from a harm that even didn't existed. Eager to find a place where he belongs, a family, he msisinterpreted clues and saw danger where there was none. By doing so, he let his true family (his partner) down for a family who betrayed him (the jewish group) by blackmailed him.
So, both men betrayed their duties -as family man or cop - for dangers who where never there, killed their families (at least, Mantegna thinks so about William Macy) for a false dream of the right thing to do. And now, at the end of the movie, they are both destroyed: Colin Stinson goes to prison and Mantegna is off his job, witch is his entire life.
So, maybe this is the true nature of evil: evil disguised as virtue (hell is full of good meanings)
I also thought that this film was confusing, after having watched it for the first and only time. Rhaquette's last post makes sense though. I think the idea is that evil and violence are oftentimes meaningless (the dead jewish woman, the man killing his family), and that any attempt to add meaning to these acts will ultimately fail.
I still have some questions though:
Why does Joe Mantegna's character feel like he let down his partner? Didn't he attempt to get off the jewish woman's case and back on the case with his partner? But his superior officer didn't let him; so it doesn't seem like his fault to me. Why feel guilty?
And how, when Joe Mantegna goes to the address on the back of the photo given to him by the zionists, is this the exact location of some other police case (his original one)? The zionists knew where that suspect (Ving Rhames) was hiding, and were acting like Mantegna had to show up there to give them the original list, but actually it was just to give him Rhames' location? I'm confused....
You really are confused, Wil R Davis. Sorry, but here's the problem: the cases were unrelated.
The film (with all it's confusing bits) is at the core about this duality that Gold is struggling with. To become a cop, he kind of had to turn his back on his Judaism. Now that he sees that there is some higher purpose to the Judaism, he wants to be more involved...and to do so, he turns his back on his career and his only friend, his partner Sully (Wm. H. Macy).
While Gold did try to get off the old woman's murder case and originally was prevented by his lieutenant, ultimately he was able to sweet talk Ving Rhames' mother into a "sting" to bring Ving in peacefully. That was Gold's specialty on the force, mentioned several times by his colleagues. Gold feels guilty because when he was needed (at 5am to facilitate the sting), he was caught up with his new Zionist pals (who really weren't interested in him beyond what he could do for them). Because he forgot all about his part in Operation Ving Rhames, he showed up late, stuff had already started to go down, and people were getting shot because a less-talented negotiator had to step up.
Gold only realized he was late for the Ving Rhames case because he fished the photos from the Zionists out of his pocket to look at them again; and out with them came the fake passport that he (or Ving's mother?) was supposed to pass off to Ving (to gain his trust?). The address and time: 3rd and Racine at 5am, are on the back of the passport jacket, not the photos, and his partner Sully is the one who wrote it there to remind Gold of the scheduled operation.
It's actually a very clever screenplay, Mamet knows a lot about the Jewish mindset. There's mysticism and ambiguity, no resolution to the conflict that will go on forever.
my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings
I'm still not sure about the significance of the man who killed his whole family, and attacked Gold trying to get his gun. And this was the OP's question.
Anyone??
Schrodinger's cat walks into a bar and doesn't.
Evil is random and indiscriminate.
my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings