The Ending *SPOILERS*
-
jolex_the_light — 17 years ago(August 09, 2008 03:09 AM)
it's clearly stated eventually that the cd case is someone else's, and that none of the protagonists did it but "the guy downstairs". That part is not ambiguous or anything, it can't be more clear.
The more intriguing part is that hackman probably says that he did it maybe thinking that he's protecting his wife. and that's a part of the awkward stares at the end, everybody gets that part, along with the one that they have forced it on him, but that's a minor one, he deserved it because of being such a prick during the interogation.
-
Guamley — 17 years ago(January 16, 2009 01:57 PM)
Reading some of the posts here, i'm amazed some of you can actually muster the brain power needed just to move your fingers across your computer keys.
He thought his wife did it so he confessed to protect her???
How on earth did you come up with that?
There was nothing ambigious about who the murderer was.
Its spelled out pretty clearly near the ending when the police woman tells the Captain they had him downstairs and he was caught in the act killing a third girl.
We don't actually meet the guy, but its pretty clear that niether Hackman nor his wife did it.
Hackman only admitted it at the end because he felt betrayed, first by Freeman, a supposed friend, and then by his wife.
He just didn't give a beep anymore. -
mdelvecchio — 14 years ago(August 06, 2011 10:59 PM)
I find it amusing that while you're criticizing the intellect of others, you fail to realize that Henry's character is completely unawares that the killer had been caught. he knows nothing as he's been in the room, being interrogated. dur.
-
gloves21 — 17 years ago(January 18, 2009 06:33 AM)
I just saw the film for the first time. As far as I could tell, first let me dispel the notion that Hackman (Henry) or Belleuci (Chantel) are the killer. The killer is an anonymous character. He is mentioned briefly and it clearly is stated he was caught in the act, but they were too late to save the third victim.
The truth of Henry's character is ambiguous at best. The negative characteristics of Henry are mostly stated by Chantel.
It appears that Chantel suspected Henry was guilty. Mostly due to her interpretation of the innocent event with her niece Camille. Sticking with the theme and the title of the movie, she suspected him and that was all.
She knew the pictures were there and, she only reluctantly, after much convincing, allowed the police to search their home. It might be easy for one to assume she set him up. But I think the tears and her reaction at the end, when she finds out he is not the killer, she attempts to hug him show this not to the case. Henry is convinced she did set him up. Which is why he admits to the crime. He is heartbroken. Notice he did not give one detail about the crime that Freeman (Victor) did not bring out during the interrogation.
She suspected him of the murder and he suspected she set him up. The title and the theme rings true in a way which goes far beyond just the guilt or innocence of Henry of the murders.
The part of the story I have the most trouble with is it seems very convenient he happened to have known and taken pictures of the victims. Now we know he hung around the area both victims were found in. And he may have gotten to know them but I still have trouble with it.
If anyone has a better explanation for the pictures rather than happenstance and beyond the incorrect conclusion is wife set him up, let me know. It may just be literary license in order to tell the story, but it seems a bit thin if you ask me. Maybe there is something I am missing.
SJK -
lil_Nicky-94 — 16 years ago(November 09, 2009 07:55 PM)
And, as girls want powerful and economically secure men, men want young and fertile girls. Thats normal.
thaaank you.
Wanting older women is a fetish.
THAAANK you! yo, i laughed when i read this tho.
(_o)/
WHY EVEREH BODAY SO CRAZEH?! -
IEatWords — 15 years ago(July 18, 2010 04:04 PM)
Wowpeople are so dumb. What happened, and the reason why he made a false confession was obvious.
How many times did he repeat the 60 ft hallway line?
The dude obviously felt betrayed by his wife, who couldn't get over some BS in the past and she carried it onward as so did he. He felt punished by her and unloved so he went to prostitutes to get satisfied but of course didn't want to tell his wife that because of the repercussions, because he still wanted her.
I think at the end he felt like she was still punishing him about Camille in that she was still "proving a point" and he just got sick of it all and confessed to piss her off and make her disgusted about her life of knowing him. Basically to just upset her and ruin her life as much as possible because of the misery she had caused him.
Nothing really difficult about it too many damn conspiracy theorist around here, or just brain dead folks or actually a bit of both.
RetardoArona-gone but not forgotten. Nvr4get. Send me your thoughts on this unjust tragedy. -
crc-4 — 14 years ago(September 24, 2011 02:03 AM)
Are we watching differen't versions of the film? In my version lady says they found this in his car and that they were too late (A third child was killed, and the picture is shown) and that they caught him in the act. IE the real killer was aprehended.
-
goldenskies — 14 years ago(January 15, 2012 12:45 AM)
I just watched this movie and saw this discussion. Since I have the movie right here and can back it up, I thought I would settle a point that seems to have some disagreement.
BIG SPOILERS:
Morgan Freeman does say, after showing photos of the two girls to Gene Hackman "Chantal was nice enough to bring these out of your darkroom." The music goes up and Hackman's face tightens as he registers that Chantal is the one that implicated him by giving them the photographs.
Hackman does not know that the detective went into the darkroom proactively and truthfully, Freeman may not know that either. What Freeman says and what Hackman hears is that Chantal was "nice enough to bring them out of his darkroom".
Freeman continues to put down more photographs and says "You make lovely photographs Henry."
Hackman then says "I can't believe that she would go to these lengths to make this kind of point. It's almost farcical."
Freemen then says "You killed Sue Ellen Huddy." And Hackman says "Yes."
So in my mind, the catalyst to Hackman's confession is the wife's betrayal. He may be disgusted with the whole thing and may have given up on life but the chain of events starts with the Freeman saying the wife gave them the photos.
The truth is, there was nothing to implicate him in those photos. Put in the context of all the photos he had taken of all the people on the island, young and old, families and individuals, to pull these out and give them meaning would be a leap at best. Did all the hundreds of others he had photographed also get murdered? No. He took hundreds of photos. A lawyer could have defended those photos easily by showing a jury all the photos he had taken over the years.
The movie was excellent but what left me unsatisfied was Freeman not acknowledging in some way what he had put Hackman through. -
CmdrCody — 14 years ago(January 15, 2012 07:57 AM)
goldenskies:Good comments.
The police captain's (Freeman) acknowledgment of his deeds in the movie is with his facial expression of sorrow from the balcony of his office as he gazes upon the couple in the square. Subtlebut it's there.
CmdrCody