Is that what they were getting at? Tony's a natural born assassin with an absent father, and it's just the sort of twist scriptwriters love. They seemed to be hinting at it but confirmation never came.
Was it meant to be a red herring, was it meant to be left open, was it narrative clumsiness, or did I just read too much into it?
Fiona
i think the whole point of it was just to show that in the future tony was gonna be the heir to his family as he himself hadnt had a kid, but then in the end they did anyways so it didnt matter too much. and also if tony is then the assassin, his kid could live a life as whatever he wanted as his legacy would remain in tony.
but still it was definitely not really implied they were father and son in the first place lol, just to set up the heir thing
Yes, I'm prettty convinced that they are faher and son, everything leads to that conclusion!
share