MovieChat Forums > Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998) Discussion > Great movie except for one really stupid...

Great movie except for one really stupid point

posted 8 years ago by movie_nazi
11 replies | jump to latest

Why is the hell would Eddie borrow money from Harry to see that bet? First of all, alarms bells should have been ringing that he was perhaps being cheated when the only guy in the room willing to let you borrow the money to go on was the guy you were betting against. But besides that, why in the fk would you wanna bet such a huge amount with such a weak hand? Seriously, not even the biggest donkey of a player would bet the farm on a horrible hand like that. Sh!t just didn't make sense. Would have been more believable if he had like a pair of Kings against Harry's Aces or some sh!t like that.

My Vote history: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur1914996/ratings

[–] Ace_Spade 8 years ago

I think it was just getting late, he'd probably had a shot of booze or two, he was feeling an immense amount of pressure, he panicked, and he agreed. Or, rather, he didn't disagree and just let it happen.

Eddie actually tries it once, he says he'd rather just see the cards, and then Harry says something like, "I don't care what you'd 'rather'..." and goes on to say he wants to keep going and basically all but forces Eddie.

I got the feeling Eddie's a small-timer playing out of his league. He felt threatened, maybe even like he had something to prove, and he made the bet. It was stupid, yeah, but I think he was just out of his element - used to the cards, intimidated by Harry.

[–] luckiest_strike 8 years ago

i am just rewatching it and it suddenly dawned on me that the whole plot could have been avoided if eddie had refused to go all in+loan on a bluff. i don't know anything about poker and i guess i always assumed he had no choice. harry makes it sound like it. but really he could have just said no, right?

i guess this makes eddie rather dumb and 90% responsible. i've always seen him as a victim here. kind of changes everything a bit.

i wonder if harry would have let eddie escape with anything at all. and if the ladie is apparently so strict with the rules why does she let it go down. what would have happened if eddie (like he should have) had caught on to what was happening and started getting careful and try to cash out asap. can you cash out in a game like that at any time?

so many questions lol

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mikeyg24 8 years ago

Yeah I think we're supposed to believe Harry bullied him into playing but it's still a stretch for me.

Hey! You're not old enough to drink! Now go and die for your country!!!

[–] Ace_Spade 7 years ago

I think it was because Eddie was in way over his head. He was at a table where he wasn't really supposed to be, out of his league in terms of social status in the gambling world. You know when you're in high school or something and you're finally allowed to hang out with the cool kids and they tell you to, whatever, huck a brick through a window or something? It's only later, when your parents are taking you to task for busting windows that you realise you were just swept along by being part of it all.

Eddie's acquiescence to Harry is due to Harry's willful bullying, the heat of the moment, the inexperience of Eddie, and a thousand other little factors. Eddie has six seconds to make a decision that he should have thought harder about. Too much pressure meant he caved.

[–] mikeyg24 7 years ago

Yeah I take your point. Pride comes before a fall and Eddies arrogance was well shown before the game, as was Harry's bullying. 'I never knew your father'...'Don't worry son! Carry on like that and you just might'.

We have to show the world that not all of us are like him: Henning von Tresckow.

[–] mikeyg24 8 years ago

but really he could have just said no, right?

Yes, in this case if Eddie can't continue they turn over their cards. However Eddie is obliged to honour his previous 100k bet, Harry is not. Incidentally it has nothing to do with the lady, Lending is actually permitted. In fact showing your cards to a player who's already folded in order to solicit a loan from them is usually acceptable.

Hey! You're not old enough to drink! Now go and die for your country!!!

[–] iron_bodyguard 8 years ago

teah that bothers me to especially after they said he was good at reading people, but if that didn't know happen it would be a short movie

[–] neverthereever 7 years ago

You missed a big part of that scene.

Eddie is supposed to be an expert in reading other players.

When Harry gets the signal that Edddie has a pair of sixes. He taps out his fingers on the table one two three followed by the thumb on his other hand. He has been feeding Eddie with a tell on his hand over the course of the game until he fakes a signal of a pair of threes when he actually has a pair of sevens.

That's how they "took him to the *beep* cleaners".

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

What ? Harry fools Eddie into thinking he has a tell that not only "tells" but taps out the exact hand in code?

seems unlikely

[–] daveyh (583) a year ago

sorry if I'm replying to an old imdb account here. Thought it was worth answering anyway.
My interpretation is that after Harry gets the signal that Ed only has a pair of sixes, you get an extreme shot of Harry's "reaction" to this - his pupils dilating, which Ed notices. Given that a significant enough amount of time has passed since each player looked at their own cards (including Harry), Ed see's this reaction as Harry thinking "i'm going to pull a major bluff, here goes nothin'", and his subsequent OTT bets further convince Ed of this.

Considering what a major part of the plot losing the card game is, though, it's not very well explained at all.

To answer the OP, Ed could have folded, but that would have meant losing all of his and his friends' money, as I think the 100k and then some was already on the table at this point. And if Ed was convinced by his usually accurate reading of reactions that Harry was bluffing, that would have been another reason to take the loan