MovieChat Forums > Disclosure (1994) Discussion > Ok I am really confused RE: Garvin

Ok I am really confused RE: Garvin

posted 8 years ago by Wardman3
20 replies | jump to latest

So Garvin is in on the whole deceitfulness from the beginning.. He is involved in a ploy to get ride of Sanders. Correct? So why does this seemingly get swept under the carpet at the end. It makes it seem like he bears zero responsibility. He appoints Stephanie and all is well in Digicom land... So why didnt Sanders call him out on this? Why would he continue to want to work under his authority? The ending seems out of place completely. Everyone is happy with the outcome

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] DeviousPheonix 8 years ago

All multi-million companies get rid of staff. It didn't matter at all if Sanders was doing a great job. It's all about profit, down-sizing and getting caught in the middle.

It really didn't matter that they wanted Sanders gone, it was about how they were going to achieve it.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Wardman3 8 years ago

You and I are on the same page, Trespalmas... It just didnt make any sense to me. The whole Garvin involvement seemingly got swept right under the rug..If we were to imagine a continuation of life at Digicom after the party ended, why would Sanders want to stay knowing all this... What would make him want to put his faith and trust into Garvin?

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Okeelani 8 years ago

Why would he want to remain working for Garvin?
Simple, what choice does he have? Garvin is the boss. He may be a jerk....but he is still the boss, and if Tom wants to work at DigiCom, he's stuck working for a jerk. Happens all the time. The end.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Goose Boy 8 years ago

I always thought they wanted to get rid of Sanders to cover for Meredith's mistakes. She made those changes to their line that saved money, and impressed some people leading to her big rise, but ended up being more costly in the long run. When those costs started to become known they had to cover the rising star before the merger and since that was technically Sanders responsibility they wanted to put it on him (after he was gone and couldn't defend himself). That was the impression I got.

As for Garvin's involvement, I think he wanted Sanders gone to protect Meridith but wasn't in on the whole scheme that Phil and Meredith were working. Also, I think in the book Meredith presented herself a little bit like Garvin's dead daughter, so he may have had some blinders on concerning her until everything came out at the end.

It's been a while since I saw the movie, and even longer since I read the book so my memory of it may be fuzzy.

[–] Kittymari (5) 6 years ago

Oh he was in on it because the end scene in the conference, when tom started answering Meredith's questions strongly instead of saying he doesn't know, Garvin looks at Phil annoyed. He knew exactly what was going on & even says to Phil at one point 'I want him gone before the merger goes through'

[–] Patman111196 (1219) 6 years ago

When exactly did he say that line? Also I believe he looked annoyed when his plan to fire him failed when Tom exposed Meredith. He was Meredith's strongest supporter so he would certainly be pissed.

[–] mmitsos-1 8 years ago

Don't bother wracking your brain over this worthless piece of pulp film fiction CRAP. I usually like Barry Levinson, but this is one of the most ridiculous, over-the-top portrayals of Corporate America, including the whole sendup of the fictitious company "Digicom", and ball-breaking femme fatale Meredith (Demi Moore).

[–] al666940-3 7 years ago

"So Garvin is in on the whole deceitfulness from the beginning"

WRONG. He was not in on it. The book clearly spell out that he told her to close the deal any way she had too, and then she got the idea of:
- sleeping with the Connely & White main negotiator (not in the movie)
- cutting corners (to cut costs) and blaming them later on Tom after the merger.

Garvin was simply pushing hr to get it done, but she didn't fill him in on those details, only Blackburn. Which is why he also gets sacked in the book.

If he were in on it, why would he demand Meredith to tell him EXACTLY what happened? Even tossing aside her answer "Already told that to Phil (the lawyer)" with "You're not talking to Phil, we believe there's a recording".

And once she's forced to come clean, THEN he picks up Sanders to dive him to the hearing so that both can have their private chat.

I mean, he clearly found out about the sexual harassment charge being bogus then and there.

That's why Sanders can still afford to stay there.

[–] Kittymari (5) 6 years ago

Also he offers to drive Sanders because he has toms phone records & knows Tom can prove it. That's why he tells tom to drop the case because Meredith will lose. He doesn't care about sanders, he wants him to drop the case so she's fine & then he will get rid of tom.

[–] Patman111196 (1219) 6 years ago

That's what I always wondered. Did he know that Meredith was to blame for the changes from the beginning? I thought Meredith was trying to set up Tom behind his Garvin's back.

[–] Kellymariekitty (158) 5 years ago

Exactly and if I were sanders I would seriously put in a huge complaint to HR for discrimination, not to mention his boss must have broken a dozen laws and ethics for setting up an employee to be blamed for something he didn’t do, allowing him to take the blame when it had nothing to do with him. Surely this Mustbe waaaaaayaganst the law

[–] Patman111196 (1219) 5 years ago

I assume this a new account from your name. Was Garvin always planning to get rid of him from the beginning? I think he knew about the changes from the beginning, but in the Tuesday morning meeting, his reaction seems like he want Sanders to demonstrate competence and make the Conley-White people confident about the merger. I don't think he was planning on getting rid of him until Sanders rejected his proposition and proved Meredith's lies. I think he would have given Sanders his job back if he let Meredith stay.

[–] Kellymariekitty (158) 5 years ago

No he’s would have got rid of him. There’s a conversation between garvin and Phil about sanders where he says he doesn’t want him quitting before Thursday. He wanted him gone so once the errors of Meredith cane to light, they could blametom because he’s not there any more.

[–] Patman111196 (1219) 5 years ago

Very hard to buy that he was planning on getting rid on Tom before he announced Meredith as VP. If that's the case, Meredith and Phil would have told him about the sexual harassment plot, which he clearly had no idea about. I guess I must be looking at the plot from a different prespective.

[–] Kellymariekitty (158) 5 years ago

He new about her mistakes but not the sexual harassment bit. In the book, it’s kind of obvious he wanted to, gone so she could take over. She was the face of the merger, not Tom. I don’t think he knew she would have tried to sexually harass him but not sure. But his boss definately knew Meredith was behind the mistakes, and he was totally all for getting rid of Tom.

[–] Kellymariekitty (158) 5 years ago

He new about her mistakes but not the sexual harassment bit. In the book, it’s kind of obvious he wanted Tom gone so she could take over. She was the face of the merger, not Tom. I don’t think he knew she would have tried to sexually harass him but not sure. But his boss definately knew Meredith was behind the mistakes, and he was totally all for getting rid of Tom.