Unnecessary completeness - Nueve reinas (2000) Discussion

[–] zefus666 18 years ago

The whole idea of Juan meeting all of those people at the end was to show how everyone was in on screwing Marcos over, since he was screwing everyone else over (ie: selling his grandparent's estate and screwing over his sister and brother). At the end of the movie, if you look closely when he enters the garage, you can see the bikers who "stole" the fake set of stamps, and everyone else in on screwing Marcos over are sitting at the poker table.

reply

[–] just4movies 18 years ago

i agree with you zefus666. but should the director explain the ending in such a fashion. the ending means a lot to a movie and i guess many would appreciate if the director makes his point indirectly and leaving the rest to the audience.
so when juan walks away at the end, and the director shows a triumphant laugh on his face that would have made the point indirectly and also to make the audience ponder over it.

atleast thats my point.

reply

[–] padzok 18 years ago

I agree a little bit.

In the scene where Valeria insists Marcos tells the truth to their brother, it's clear that Valeria and Juan are plotting together. It's reasonable to assume based on that scene alone that they have a pact that Valeria gets Marcos's confession, and Juan gets Marcos money. It follows that all the others are in on it too.

BUT check out some of the other threads. Even though you think the ending explains too much about what has just happened, you should not overlook that it does raise issues about what will happen in the future.

Juan gives Valeria the ring, and explains how it was his grandmother's etc etc. Does that show that he is now hooked on grifting, and will turn out just like Marcos? Or is the "story" true after all? We never see him given it by the woman in the flat, of course.

So the ending does leave some questions to ponder ...

reply

[–] just4movies 18 years ago

Good response Padzok. But I guess my point was a little different.
The question that you are pondering over is really not within the scope of the movie. These kind of futuristic questions could be asked for any movie then. Leave alone this one.
My point was this "good" movie could have been "better" if the ending was more incomplete. When we were watching the movie we were urged to ask within ourselves as to who is cheating whom. that question must not have been fully answered at the end - especially for such type of movies. Thats what makes great movies.

reply

[–] sergut-1 18 years ago

that question must not have been fully answered at the end (...) Thats what makes great movies.

Don't you think that's what makes movies as you like them? ;-)

The movie is great with either ending: big script, big director, great actors. Some people (like you) like open endings and other people like "complete" (as you say) movies, but that is a matter of taste, ins't it?

My two cents,

reply

[–] cccatalina 18 years ago

About the ring that belonged to his "grandmother"...

Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but after watching the movie several times I noticed that in the scene after Juan has been up to the old woman's apartment and taken the ring, Marcos is waiting across the street with his back to them. If you look carefully at the entrance of the building, you can see the old woman stroking Juan's face before he leaves and returns across the street to Marcos, who did not witness any of this. He then tells Marcos that the woman told him that he (Juan) reminded her of her grandson, or something to that effect. I always thought that this indicated the old woman WAS his grandmother, and either willingly or unwillingly participated in the events. Perhaps she was holding the ring for him to pick up, or maybe she was just a lonely old lady who thought Juan was really nice. Juan might have told her beforehand about what he was planning, or even just enough of the story so she would go along with the whole "Auntie" business on the intercom. I could be wrong, but it's just something I picked up on after several viewings.

reply

[–] Rugby5513 18 years ago

no no no. they needed that ending because people like all of you still don't get the movie. I think it was necessary. The movie is about the two guys being different. When Marcos asks his sister if she knows her bf, she says no, he is nice. Marcos also tells him how he is different. THe movie was about the one true con man getting his fair share. The old woman was not his grandmother. She was just one of marcos con. The purpose of the ring is to show that he had it all along and that he knew that he could win it back from Marcos because he was better and smarter than him. He never had to give it to Marcos in the first place, he didn't know about the ring. It was in one way an element to establish trust and for him to show marcos up. Him mentioning conning her made him feel bad was because he wasn't a con man and he did feel bad conning a nice old lady.

She is not in on the scam, a random apartment, and he rings several times until he finds an auntie? No way could Juan have had his grandmother set up in that situation, not knowing where he would be going and what Marcos might do.

If you guys liked this movie, I recommend "the following" by christopher nolan, he directed memento and batman begins. Both were great but both were some what predictable.

reply

[–] padzok 18 years ago

people like all of you still don't get the movie. ... The movie is about the two guys being different. When Marcos asks his sister if she knows her bf, she says no, he is nice. Marcos also tells him how he is different. THe movie was about the one true con man getting his fair share.

One interpretation is that Juan is a clever guy, who just did this one great con to help his girlfriend.

A second is that he - like Marcos - is addicted to conning people, and only helped the girlfriend so that he could part Marcos from his cash; he'll take it from the girl later.

A third is that he started off honest. But now he has had a taste of conning, he likes it ! He's started to spin lies to his girlfriend purely for the fun of it (fun for now, but he's on a slippery slope).

Rugby, if the only interpretation you can see is the first one, then try watching the movie again.

reply

[–] Rugby5513 18 years ago

I believe in that a peice of art has many interpretations and are all open to how one views it. However, I think it is clear that this was the director's intent on how he portrayed Juan, it shows how affectionate he is with his gf, etc. Yes you are free to interpret it any way you want, but the most logical and imo is the director's also.

reply

[–] CynthiaVS 18 years ago

You'll never know what the director intended, and I'm not only saying it because he passed away now, but because movies, like art, are different for each viewer. The fact that that's the most obvious and rational interpretation doesn't mean that it was necessarily the director's intention.

To me is just the story of a con man loosing in his own game, a dude that screws everyone getting screwed, like in Ocean's eleven, but in a very porteño way.
And yeah, Marcos is a son of a bitch, but like Marcos says... Juan looks like a nice man, that doesn't mean he is and even though it seems he is, we can never be sure, since a con man will always be a con man and after all, that's what he is.

~ Dream

reply

[–] Clancy13 17 years ago

For me, the whole idea behind the ending was just to screw with the audience's head. While at first, I was confused by it, after a while I realized that Juan was behind the thing from the beginning. Rather than Marcos taking advantage of Juan, it was the other way around. Though, when talking about the ring, etc....just because he told Marcos that he's not a "thief" doesn't mean he was telling the truth...just think about all of the other times he lied to him.

I think that I liked the ending. One of the best twists that I've ever seen.

reply

[–] cas357 17 years ago

Yes I agree with you! He had the ring all along and just told Marcos that the old lady gave it to him because he knew he could win it back (hence the elevator lady handing over the purse voluntarily.) And yes, the point was to show that they are two different people: one of them is a 100% HDP and the other one has a conscience.

reply

[–] CynthiaVS 18 years ago

not at all, that wasn't Juan's grandmother, remember Marcos rang many flats of many biuldings before landing with and old woman, this couldn't have been planned.
Juan may have use as an inspiration for his lie to his girlfriend over the origin of the ring what that old lady told her about him looking LIKE his grandson, but that's it

~ Dream

reply

[–] Aristides-2 17 years ago

I thought it was Marcos who chose which bell to ring. The coincidence of having the older woman being Juan's grandmother would be measured in the millions. However, Juan probably had the ring on him to begin with because he was setting up Marcos to see him as soft and sentimental. But there were so many story problems with this movie. One example is this: how could Juan have known that Marcos would be in the convenience store to begin with? Suppose the initial clerk didn't fall for Juan's scam. Or if a policeman happened to walk in. Or the store's manager was a cop working a second job? Juan gets busted and the last minute information about the bank failing the next day can't be used in the scam. Now, I don't react negatively when a film about con men is so well done that I'm fooled by it. But I don't like being "lied to", i.e., conned by the director. How and when? There was at least one scene and maybe more, where Juan and Valeria were by themselves with Marco not close enough to observe. Why wouldn't they smile at each other, or exchange questions about whether the scam was proceeding o.k., or anything else two lovers who were collaborators might speak about. Oh yes, another story problem. I'm certain that it was Marco who brought up Sandler's wife (the woman who had the "real" stamps.) How could the woman playing the con have been chosen in advance? Also, it was strongly suggested that Marco might be violent. Since he knew where Sandler's "wife" lived isn't it reasonable to assume he would have gone after his stolen $200,000?

reply

[–] Mat-37 17 years ago

" how could Juan have known that Marcos would be in the convenience store to begin with?"

He followed him. The movie begins with Juan smoking a cig outside of the store. Surely, he knew Marco was inside.

"Suppose the initial clerk didn't fall for Juan's scam."

You have a point here.

"Or the store's manager was a cop working a second job?"

Now you're going too far. Seriously, what are the odds of that?

"There was at least one scene and maybe more, where Juan and Valeria were by themselves with Marco not close enough to observe. Why wouldn't they smile at each other"

But they do. Watch it again!

"I'm certain that it was Marco who brought up Sandler's wife (the woman who had the "real" stamps.) How could the woman playing the con have been chosen in advance?"

Because Sandler was in on the con, as well as his wife.

"Also, it was strongly suggested that Marco might be violent."

Yes, but remember Sandler's wife lives with a young muscular guy who at one point threatens to hit Marco. He's much stronger than him.

"Since he knew where Sandler's "wife" lived isn't it reasonable to assume he would have gone after his stolen $200,000?"

Well the beauty of the con is that Marco doesn't realize he's been conned! As far as he knows, he's been conned by the Spanish dude, not by Sandler's wife.

- A point in every direction is the same as no point at all.

reply

[–] MocNeNu 17 years ago

To go back to the original point about the movie being too complete, I agree in a way that it would have been better to be slightly more enigmatic. However the improvement would have been very minor wheras the loss of appreciation by people who didn't get what was going on would be quite severe so I can understand why everything is revealed at the climax.

reply

[–] PsychoDingo 11 years ago

how could Juan have known that Marcos would be in the convenience store to begin with?

Juan could have followed Marcos to the store. dating his sister made him privy to Marcos' address, hangouts, etc.

Suppose the initial clerk didn't fall for Juan's scam.

then he wouldn't have needed to repeat the scam to get Marcos involved. remember, it was the failed attempt that resulted in Marcos' engagement with Juan's situation

Or if a policeman happened to walk in. Or the store's manager was a cop working a second job? Juan gets busted and the last minute information about the bank failing the next day can't be used in the scam.

all scams have risks

There was at least one scene and maybe more, where Juan and Valeria were by themselves with Marco not close enough to observe. Why wouldn't they smile at each other

they did

I'm certain that it was Marco who brought up Sandler's wife (the woman who had the "real" stamps.) How could the woman playing the con have been chosen in advance?

I'm certain it was Sandler's sister, and she was brought up by Sandler in the initial meeting in the locker room at the hotel

Since he knew where Sandler's "wife" lived isn't it reasonable to assume he would have gone after his stolen $200,000?

Marcos didn't know he had been swindled. as far as he knew, he was on the unfortunate side of a bank failure/closure. and if he did try to go steal the money back, the money wouldn't have been there, because Sandler's sister gave it to Juan, and it was distributed among the players

Who cares about stairs? The main thing is ice cream.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Yaali 18 years ago

I think the last 10 minutes definately need to be there for the audience to appreciate the movie. If it ends when Juan walks away from Marcos smiling, the audience can either assume that A) Juan is overly optimistic and stupid and no one gets the money, or that B) Juan ripped Marcos off.

If the audience accepts ending A, then it ends up pissed off at both main characters as well as dissapionted in the ending: Juan and Marcos went through all this and we watched an hour and a half of scamming all so that there would be no ending, no money, no winner. But anyone who buys that ending deserves to be dissapointed anyway.

If the audience accepts ending B, as is more likely, then it knows that Juan ripped off Marcos, but not how. The "how", after all, is the interesting part. It's the reason we sat through the movie. Where is that satisfaction in knowing that Marcos got beaten at his own game if we can't see the ingenuity behind it?

reply

[–] allstar_beyond 18 years ago

I agree with Yaali, without the ending we wouldn't know how much work went behind juan's entire circle of lies, and during which part of the story that he started conning Marcos. This completeness raises more question, the audience would try to think back to when each of the characters appeared in the story and how they played their part. The ending raises more questions than it answers, so if the ending was left out, we wouldn't able to appreciate the greatness of the whole story.

reply

[–] CynthiaVS 18 years ago

True.

The movie is about intelligence, is about being smart, the ending shows how all those loose characters come together giving sense to the entire game, making the con an intelligent con, otherwise it would have seemed like the movie just had way too many "coincidences" or "unusual yet helpful situations" that would have lowered the quality of the movie:
why did Juan looked that much at Marcos in the market (at the beginning)?, why did he waited for Marcos to look at the con he was playing on the cashier?
- the wife of the artist who draw the 9 queens liked Juan and gave the envelope to him.
-The thieves on the motorcycle throw the 9 queens to the river.
- the old lady at the Kavannah needs the money to support her taxiboy and accepts to sell the stamps
- the expert on stamps played along and say they were real before agreeing on getting a percentage of the con
- the bank got "emptied" so the check had no value
and many more...

Without the ending that shows what the 9 queens truly were and how each character fell into place the movie would have been pretty much a mediocre American movie, with the ending as it is, it is an excellent Argentinean film.

Plus you gotta love the Rita Pavone song, lol

~ Dream

reply

[–] CynthiaVS 18 years ago

I pretty much agree with you Yaali, The end as it is is perfect and much needed.

~ Dream

reply

[–] PiranianRose 18 years ago

just4movies, your proposed ending is interesting, and I would have preferred your version to the film's actual ending. However, my ideal ending would have had Marcos and Juan truly ripped off by the bank, their sweat and hard work all in vain. It would reinforce the notion that crooks like those 2 guys are nothing compared to the real crook that steal people's money big time -- the bank in this case. In my opinion, this would have been a powerful ending.

The ending as it stands right now is too convenient and contrived for my taste.

reply

[–] CynthiaVS 18 years ago

I disagree with your opinion of the ending, though I understand that for those who are not Argentinean or at least Latin might be hard to appreciate as intended, since the movie itself is very representative of the porteño culture and the Latin culture in general. I mean, for example, is not an everyday to see a bank being emptied like that in many countries, though for a long time it was an everyday thing in our "world". A clear example of this is the fact that Clooney bought the script and made his version of 9 queens (called "criminals") and it was not only very different but it also was a disaster, it made no sense such Argentinean situations in the United States.

Such ending, as I posted on previous replies, is perfect because it shows the complexity of the plan and its intelligence. Plus it kills the suspicion that too many things went well for Juan by chance.

~ Dream

reply

[–] joapet 18 years ago

i think that the bank shutting downwas a bit unneccesary. i thought that the guy who wanted the stamps would say that he'd given the cheque to the sister, and then he would leave. then, juan and that would go to the sister and ask for the cheque and she'd say that the guy was meant to give it to them. i think that would be more convincing.

reply

[–] padzok 18 years ago

i think that the bank shutting downwas a bit unneccesary. i thought that the guy who wanted the stamps would say that he'd given the cheque to the sister, and then he would leave. then, juan and that would go to the sister and ask for the cheque and she'd say that the guy was meant to give it to them. i think that would be more convincing.

But then he would have known he'd been conned.

Either purely for the sake of "art", or for practical reasons (ie to stop Marcos digging deeper into the story of the wealthy Spaniard), they wanted Marcos to think he'd been the victim of pure misfortune.

reply

[–] GeorgeFan 18 years ago

The Hollywood remake of this, 'Criminal', has a simply appalling ending. If you thought this movie gave away too much....!

reply

[–] CynthiaVS 18 years ago

Criminal was one of the worst movies I ever saw. Horrible casting and extremely bad adaptation

~ Dream

reply

[–] CynthiaVS 18 years ago

I feel the necessity to post my reply to PiranianRose again for you (joapet) to read:

I disagree with your opinion of the ending, though I understand that for those who are not Argentinean or at least Latin might be hard to appreciate as intended, since the movie itself is very representative of the porteño culture and the Latin culture in general. I mean, for example, is not an everyday to see a bank being emptied like that in many countries, though for a long time it was an everyday thing in our "world". A clear example of this is the fact that Clooney bought the script and made his version of 9 queens (called "criminals") and it was not only very different but it also was a disaster, it made no sense such Argentinean situations in the United States.

Such ending, as I posted on previous replies, is perfect because it shows the complexity of the plan and its intelligence. Plus it kills the suspicion that too many things went well for Juan by chance.

~ Dream

reply

[–] o_casta 18 years ago

but you were not the director.

estos gringos q vienen a criticar peliculas argentinas!!

reply

[–] veganbanana 18 years ago

about the bank shutting down, that is based on historical context and sets the film at a certain point in time. This film came out in 2000 when Argentina was dealing with major economic problems. In the 90's the argentinian governement pegged the value of the Peso to the US dollar in an attempt to bolster the economy, and they promoted neoliberal polices and accepted aid from the IMF. This lead to a huge public debt and dependence on foriegn businesses, who, as this massive public debt began to loom over their heads, started to question their investment in the Argentinian economy. What actually happened in real life was accurately predicted in Nueve Reinas. Essentially, in 2001 virtually all of the major foreign investors withdrew their investments from Argentinian banks and businesses and left the country, practically overnight. This lead to the closing of banks all over the country and an enormous economic crisis. One which many people, and apparantly Bielinsky, could see coming. This is driven home even further by the line that the banker tells Marcos (They're gone, all gone [or something to that effect]).

reply

[–] CaptainSnort 17 years ago

Yes, to me the comparison between the grifters and the Argentinian government and financiers was one of the big messages of the film. I assumed while watching that it was made following the economic crisis. If, as veganbanana says, it was made before then the film is remarkably prescient.

Aside from the collapse of the bank I think there is at least one other reference to political/financial corruption.

During the scene in the cafe where Marcus and Juan work the con with the torn banknote the pair have a conversation about how they got into grifting (which I describe from memory).

Juan says his father taught him the tricks of the trade as a game before advising him never to do it for a living. Juan then says: "What did you say when people asked you what you wanted to be when you when grew up? I used to say I wanted to be an accomplice. What else could I be with such a vocation?"

Marcus replies: "A [government]minister."

It would be interesting to hear what any Argentinian contributors might think of this point.

reply

[–] lnmoss 17 years ago

Okay, I haven't actually read the entire thread, but I just wanted to input something. We watched this movie in my Spanish class, and my entire class was blown away by the ending, closely followed by a forty-minute discussion of what exactly the ending meant. For those earlier in the thread who argued that the ending didn't leave enough contemplation to the audience, I disagree. We spent much discussion piecing together the story from what we had seen in that last ten minutes, so I would say that it was greatly needed in the movie.

reply

[–] boonjj 13 years ago

i just watched this film for the first time and thought the exact same thing

i suspected some way into the film "wait, what if juan is actually plotting against marcus? because we know his sister is pissed because he took a bunch of money from her...."

and by the time the fial was coming to an end i was thinking, "please, dont have some big secret reveal here"

well they did have a big reveal, and it felt like the director wanted the audience to go awww cool!!!!!! woow!!!! but it just fell totally flat. shouldve ended the movie a few scenes earlier, and subtely hinted that Juan had actually come out on top, rather than treating us like junkies in need of a fix of "cool"

way the ruin a very entertaining movie! luckily its only the very last scene, next time i watch it i think ill just switch it off 30 seconds early

reply

[–] IEatWords 12 years ago

The way the movie was designed, you could just feel that the ending was going to go down such a road. It felt a bit cheap that the entire con crew is all in the same spot, showing each and every one up to the girlfriend. I dont think it can be called "unnecassary" though because it was all intended from the start.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] PsychoDingo 11 years ago

the wrap-up makes the movie palatable for American audiences, which isn't a bad goal for a film. personally, I would have been cool with a more ambiguous ending, or the way it was. a "neatly wrapped" ending isn't necessarily a bad thing, not is it a requirement of a good film. either way is ok

Who cares about stairs? The main thing is ice cream.

reply