Who Were the 3 Bounty Hunters/Hitmen?
I got the impression that they were hired guns by someone that Bob and Ruth ripped off during their crime spree.
True? Or was it something else?
From what I could glean, you seem to be correct in your estimation! I can't say I'm 100% though. There was the odd time I must confess when I wondered whether Skerritt hadn't tipped someone off (this person who hired these bounty hunters) in the first place that Bob was in the vicinity… with the notion that perhaps whoever mystery man-who-wants-Bob-dead is might indeed achieve this and thus Ruth and Sylvie'd be safe again. But maybe Skerritt forgot Ruth played her part in all they did too…?
Anyway, I don't say Skerritt is involved. He likely isn't. But I just say I wondered whether he could be. For example he tells Ruth that he could sort all this out if she wanted him to… What does he mean by that… He tells Bob there are going to be people who want him dead. Is that because there are a lot of people who would want Bob dead or is it because Skerritt has reminded folks who might have a bone to pick with him that he's around? And so on….
Ohhh, I didn't consider Skerrit hired them. It does make sense though when Bob asks Skinny Pete why they're after him and his reply is "You and the girl, everything you did." Skerrit obviously was upset about Freddy being killed, so this could have been his revenge. Was Freddy his son or something?
"Soylent white is semeeeeen!"
Freddy was Skerritt's son, yes. I'm sure Skerritt didn't want general revenge on Bob & Ruth both - he definitely wanted to protect Ruth, but I couldn't fully understand how he appeared to have no empathy towards Bob. Seems like when they were kids he was a Father figure to both Bob and Ruth, not just Ruth. Did he blame Bob for what happened to Freddy? Bob and Freddy started out as kids getting into some form of petty crimes (or not petty?!) through Skerritt from what he says at the end of the film.. Bob has a big suitcase full of money… Could some of that be stuff he's siphoned off from money he got for Skerritt? Maybe Bob has done more to specifically make it such that Skerritt has something against him. Bob likely wouldn't consider doing something like this that bad… after all Skerritt would surely have been the one who got him into doing such things…. We don't know any of this. Just things I wondered.
It's certain Skerritt didn't hire the bounty hunters directly since when they find out from Skerritt where Bob is they mention their employer who seems to be someone Skerritt knows. But I just did wonder, given other things Skerritt does and says whether he might not have tipped off this guy about Bob with the notion that this'd get Bob out of the way and make Ruth and Sylvie safe… not taking into consideration that Ruth was involved in the crimes she and Bob committed too so this guy has as much against her as Bob…
I don't know who hired who though to be honest. DVD/Blu Ray's out in the US isn't it now? Maybe there's something else on there?? Skerritt is certainly in my view the most mysterious character in the film in terms of his motivations.
The bounty hunter tells Skerritt that their employer's name is "Hartigan." It appears that Skerritt didn't hire the bounty hunters, since he warns them to stay away from Ruth and her daughter and is ultimately killed protecting Ruth from one of the bounty hunters.
In the scene where Bob confronts the dying bounty hunter; Bob asks "what's this about money?" and the bounty hunter replies "It's about you. You and the girl. Everything you tried to do."
I'm not sure how much we are supposed to read into that dialogue. But I took it to mean that the bounty hunters are coming after Ruth, too. Bob says earlier in the film that he used to be the devil. And Ruth was his accomplice. So we can infer that they made some enemies.
True, but also, the bounty hunter tells Skerritt that Hartigan said to tell him something. As I said above, I didn't take it for a definite implication, but afterwards, given that Skerritt also told/reminded Bob there'd be people who'd want him dead, whether Skerritt might not have tipped off this Hartigan that Bob was back in town, not thinking that Hartigan would want revenge on Ruth just as much.
I'm definitely not saying that this is the case, but it did cross my mind. Also Skerritt told Ruth that he could sort the situation easily. She said she could sort it herself by telling the truth... but of course that'd be the last thing Skerritt would want (not that Ruth was going to do that anyway, given Sylvie.)
Do you think it's 100% that this isn't the case?
Also, is it chance or not that the first place the bounty hunters go on arriving in town is Skerritt's? (I know it's a film of course too!! haha!)
[deleted]
Well, much of it is open to interpretation, so your guess is as good as mine, LOL. But I'll address some of your questions as best I can.
It's possible that Skerritt tipped off Hartigan, but I don't think so. Skerritt was known to be Bob's adoptive father/caretaker, and he was established in the community and easy to find. Hartigan knew who Skerritt was, so it is not surprising that the bounty hunters would visit Skerritt first. Also, we don't know for certain that Skerritt's shop was the first place they visited. If you recall, during the first scene at Joe's bar; Joe tells Bob "I got a call asking about you." "I told them I hand't seen you. Which I hadn't." At the time I assumed it was probably police, but we really don't know who it was.
Regarding Skerritt's intentions toward Bob, if you recall, when Skerritt first sees Bob, he greets him with a hug (even though Bob hesitates). He promises not to harm Bob if only Bob will stay away from Ruth. It doesn't appear Skerritt has any enmity toward Bob. He later surrenders Bob's location to the bounty hunters but his intention is shielding Ruth from the vendetta (as has been his priority from the beginning). Skerritt made poor decisions rearing his children, but he appears to be honest and ethical at this point in his life. I didn't see anything in the film to imply otherwise.
Regarding Skerritt telling Ruth he could sort the situation out easily; I interpreted that as Skerritt trying to shield Ruth from her culpability in Bob's crimes--just as Bob shielded Ruth from culpability at the beginning of the film. Ruth was Bob's accomplice but she is treated as a victim by the leading men in the film: Skerritt, Pat, and Bob. Skerritt is stubborn and proud and believes he controls circumstances that he really can not. For example, he warns Bob to stay away from Ruth, but Bob pursues his plan to run away with Ruth anyway. Similarly, he warns the bounty hunters to stay away from Ruth, but the surviving bounty hunter comes after her anyway. Ruth knows she is as guilty as Bob and it is tearing her apart. She never pays for her crimes as Bob did, but Skerritt ultimately pays the price for her. He had to account for his crimes as well.
Hee, I guess we could go at this all day. I think I've probably wondered so much about this aspect of the film because I find Skerritt the most mysterious character. I don't fully understand his motivations for everything he does from the film. Bob and Ruth seem to be like children to him and yet to protect Ruth and Sylvie, Skerritt would go so far as to kill Bob! I can't quite get my head around that. I get that he'd do anything to protect Ruth and Sylvie, but I don't understand why he wouldn't want to protect Bob at least somewhat too? Doesn't he want happiness for them? I know I sensed that though, yes, a bleak on-the-run life it may be, I didn't feel there was absolutely no possibility Bob, Ruth and Sylvie couldn't have gotten away somewhere, with new identities, started anew. I mean, I wanted it for them. But Skerritt doesn't entertain the idea.
You mention that Bob hesitates before hugging Skerritt and I think perhaps that in the back of my mind I read some article some time soon after seeing he film with David Lowery in which he mentioned a scene that he'd cut which I think showed more of Skerritt's (criminal type) business and I don't know whether it was in the scene or whether it was just mentioned but David Lowery (if I recall correctly) said something along the lines that Bob had stolen money from Skerritt (it was I think more like taken more of a proportion than he should have from some job... and I don't know whether it was Bob and Ruth or just Bob.. I guess maybe it was some job he was doing for Skerritt and maybe there was more money in it than anticipated so Bob took extra and Skerritt found out or something like that... some sort of thing anyway that Skerritt had against Bob, whether Bob knew Skerritt knew or not.) I think Lowerey felt so much didn't need to be spelled out (I forget why or if he said why it was cut.) And so I guess I have in my mind somehow that when Skerritt says to Bob that there'll be people who want to get back at him... in a way... it's Skerritt: he wants to get back at him. Does Skerritt also blame Bob at all for his son's death? If he doesn't blame him, at least he's likely thought "Why Freddie, not Bob?" ??? Skerritt has gotten himself out of the business now and Ruth is out of it, Sylvie has never been near it and he is not going to let Bob, who Skerritt himself taught from a child for this to be his life draw anyone back there.
It struck me in the scene of Bob and Skerritt in Skerritt's shop and Bob talking of that horse and cowboy. Coupled with what Skerritt saying at the end about Bob and Freddie going off on their first job, thinking themselves hardened criminals when they were just little boys... I imagined Bob and Freddie playing cowboys and indians and living round Skerritt's business and make believe turning into committing real crimes for Skerritt and becoming a part of who they were.
Other things...
Also, we don't know for certain that Skerritt's shop was the first place they visited. If you recall, during the first scene at Joe's bar; Joe tells Bob "I got a call asking about you." "I told them I hand't seen you. Which I hadn't." At the time I assumed it was probably police, but we really don't know who it was.
I guess! I'd always assumed it was police too and I'd assumed it was a call round by actual people rather than a phone call, but I suppose we don't know!
Regarding the men treating Ruth as the victim, I think part of why you still feel there is something there in Ruth and Bob as a partnership is that he does understand the side of her that's no victim, but an equal partner in crime. We see it when she shoots that gun and Bob knows it. He knows the all of her. Ruth at one point, when Patrick says he only sees good in her says "Maybe I'm just fooling you all." Certainly it's Bob in this story who has the Romantic notion of his own self and his life with Ruth and Sylvie. It's Bob who is the dreamer amongst those who can actually achieve. Yet, in another sense, I don't think Patrick sees Ruth for who she actually is, whereas even if Bob doesn't understand how Ruth has grown and changed, he does understand her.
I find Ruth so interesting as from necessity she has to close parts of herself off. I've seen some people call her cold, but I think everyone has to close some of themselves off at some times in life. She has to do it for her daughter. She has to close of aspects of her personality and of her feelings (I feel at least). But though Bob protects Ruth, he doesn't treat her as a victim, and I am less sure about Skerritt... I mean about why he would do this. I think it's more for Sylvie, but I will say that Skerritt possibly treats Ruth a little this way too.
I should have written this when I had more time, but oh well, for what it is here it is!! share
Erm...
I thought it was pretty clear they were hired by Ben Foster's character, Wheeler.
Out of love or jealousy or whatever.
That's why he's so quick at killing the last henchman.
That's why he's so slow at pursuing any leads. (The attick in the old farm, the hideaway above the bar).
That's why he takes the kid away in the end: he's moving on in.
Just like the killer says at gunpoint:
"You. It's about you.
You and the girl.
Everything you tried to do."
I thought it was pretty clear they were hired by Ben Foster's character, Wheeler.
Out of love or jealousy or whatever.
I'd never even remotely considered that! Evidently I am far too trusting of gentle-seeming men.
I mean, it did cross my mind whether Patrick really felt as strongly as he seemed to towards Ruth... or whether he wanted to spend so much time with her now especially in the hopes of Bob turning up and him capturing him... But that thought of mine is quite the opposite to your suggestion!
Beyond that I don't agree with you that Patrick hired the bounty hunters: mainly 'cause he's portrayed as a law abiding citizen (well, as the law in fact), as a forgiving, kind and gentle man and I don't see him as being so cruel as to hire men to kill Bob... although I can't say you have no reasoning, as your logic, though I can counter at least the first one, does make sense.
That's why he's so quick at killing the last henchman. - He's a trained police officer so I think it makes sense he'd easily shoot accurately and quickly here. Admittedly, I guess he didn't have to kill the guy, yet he did...
That's why he's so slow at pursuing any leads. (The attick in the old farm, the hideaway above the bar). I mean he is a pretty pants officer, it's certainly true. So you think had he found Bob he'd have had to send him back to jail so he'd much rather someone else find him and shoot him as that would be the only way Ruth would truly move on and be free for Patrick? Oooh, it all seems for too devious for that lonely, gentle guy with the guitar. haha. I can't say it's definitely not the case though.
That's why he takes the kid away in the end: he's moving on in.
I wonder whether anyone else thought the same as you!!?! I can 100% say nothing like this ever occurred to me! So if it is supposed to be implied, I am evidently very slow indeed!!
Just like the killer says at gunpoint:
"You. It's about you.
You and the girl.
Everything you tried to do."
But no, surely that's referring to the robbing and that that Bob and Ruth tied to do. I do see though how you could take it in the way you have too! How amusing - there's a lesson in the vastly different interpretations people can have when a film doesn't explicitly say a thing!!
I don't know, I can't help but find the notion of Patrick being that covetous of Ruth slightly funny..?! And also rather at odds with what the story was telling in general terms. share
I think Skerritt understood that the bounty hunters knew the Bonnie and Clyde connection between Ruth and Bob, though not established in the narrative, it's somewhat implied that Skerritt was warning the hitmen to lay off of "those girls" as if he knew they'd get something out of them in finding out more about Bob and his relationship with Ruth as partners in crime and what they'd done to turn these hit men on them.
share