why did the two police officers give him a gun? - Red Riding: The Year of Our Lord 1974 (2009) Discussion

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] prmlscrm81 12 years ago

Yeah after I posted the question I saw that explanation on other posts
I've yet to see the other two but I hope they offer me more explanations

thanks

reply

[–] Itadakiman 12 years ago

They gave it to him as a souvenir, to remind him of the horrors that he's been through in the North and hoping that he will do something stupid that will eventually result in his death. (Instead of just killing him, which in light of the sequels would have been just passable as well)

reply

[–] timlin-4 12 years ago

omg, it must be Tony Grisoni himself, only his mind could come up with such BS

reply

[–] victoria-ruscica 11 years ago

I think they knew exactly what they were doing when they gave it to him.
After he's told that he'll be blamed for Paula's murder he says "but I didn't do it, I loved her."
"We'll of course you didn't do it, but we know who did, don't we?"
He's beaten past the point of breaking and told that the woman he loved will never get justice for her daughter or herself, on top of his best friends life.
Then they hand him a gun and leave him to his own devices.
Be it because John had pissed them off (he said earlier he often passes on information about corruption in the government) or simply because he was a sick bastard.
And with no way to actually prove anything he knows or clear his name for Paula's murder, he dies.
That was my take anyway

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] daddie0 11 years ago

My "hunch" was that it was the murder weapon used in killing Paula (Mrs. Kemper?), but it was obviously never clarified. It did make a nice "retribution" scene though...that he does something none of them would have ever expected...and turns the tables on his oppressors. Great film!

reply

[–] Furious_Fenner 11 years ago

They wanted him to kill John Dawson. Initially, it looked like Molloy and his men intended to frame Eddie for the crime until Jobson told him about all the evidence Barry Gannon had accumulated. They realised at that point that they were on the verge of being exposed, and decided they needed to get rid of someone. The sequels reinforce the point that the West Yorkshire Police were working with Dawson almost under duress, so this represented the point where they decided to give him up.

So, give Eddie motivation to kill Dawson, give him a gun, and drop him off in the middle of nowhere. They even tell him they want a favour. By this point, Eddie is so traumatised and heartbroken that he cares more about getting revenge for Paula than anything else. So he goes after Dawson. The only thing they didn't expect was Eddie bursting into the Karachi Club and talking with Dawson first, or that he would leave Marjorie alive. Hence what happens in the sequel. However, his suicidal charge at the end definitely suited them, since it meant that two liabilities were snuffed out in the same night without any suggestion of foul play by anyone other than the individuals themselves.

They needed Dawson and Eddie dead. Giving him the gun achieved both. That's why.

If those were my last words, I can do better.

reply

[–] e-kjerte 10 years ago

Spoiler, don't read if you haven't watch the sequels.

As seems clear from the sequels, I would definitely agree with the argument that Molley wants Eddie to kill Dawson. However, I have to say I'm still puzzled. Firstly, why would Eddie want to kill Marjorie? and, secondly, why would Eddie's bursting into the Karachi Club come as such a surprise?

What has baffled me the most, is why Craven and Douglas are present at the Karachi Club at all? This is such a serious miscalculation that it seems almost too conspicuous. I was thinking that one answer to this riddle, could be that Craven and Douglas were not aware that Eddie was targeting Dawson. They had simply been instructed to give him the gun, while the broader scheme was calculated by master-minds like Molley and Angus. Apparently, these regarded the wounding (and what could easily have been the death)of Craven and Douglas as acceptable. While it is speculative, this might also explain why Craven seems so infuriated at the Hospital, when we see flash-backs from Hunter's investigation into the Karachi incident in the sequel (1980); a feeling of betrayal is indicated, I would say.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] typo_3000 10 years ago

The wanted him to kill Dawson. Molloy says to Dunford "No you didn't kill her, but we know who did."

reply