Not necessarily, no. And your vindictiveness doesn't lend any substance to what you say. All "the way the movie is cut together" - by which I presume you mean the montage of Kujan reading notice board, Kint walking out of the station, the zoom-in on the name Kobayashi on the base of the coffee-cup, Kobayashi picking Verbal up - clearly shows is that a) Verbal isn't a cripple, b) he took names off the notice board, c) he's in cahoots with the guy (whom he called Kobayashi) who made the proposition to the gang on Soze's behalf. In other words, he's not who he says he is. Not that he necessarily IS Keyser Soze - or even that there's necessarily any such person. The sketch is the most compelling piece of evidence but even then it's can't seriously be considered conclusive beyond any reasonable doubt. The Hungarian was delirious, and it's not made manifestly clear that Soze's real identity was made known to him. He saw Verbal "in the harbour, killing many men" - that's only evidence that he was the gunman, not that his real identity is Keyser Soze. I mean the writer has said that Verbal=Soze isn't the only reasonable interpretation for gods' sake! So your nastiness is plain out of order.

Your points are weak as hell and not even worthy of consideration. And yes, the way the movie is cut together, it is clearly telling you, the audience, that you're supposed to think Verbal is Soze. Anyone with common sense should be able to "get" that and come away from the film thinking that without having subtitles slapped on the screen telling you. It's all right there, even right down to a man who knows what Soze looks like describing a sketch that looks exactly like Kent.

Now, now, little child. No need for the abusiveness. And, no, the "visuals and editing" don't explicitly confirm any such thing, as I said. If you think it does it's you, not I, who lacks logic. I won't go over the points I previously made, because you probably didn't even read them in the first place. But they still stand and you failed to dispute any of them.

The movie is clearly communicating to you with editing and visuals that Verbal is Soze. If you lack the most basic insight to get that, that's your issue. You're just arguing for the sake of arguing at this point.

None of that stuff actually positively ID's him as Soze, though.
Keaton calling him Soze in the opening scene
Keaton doesn't have any ID for Soze though. He's just assuming that the guy who tricked him all along about being a hapless petty conman and cripple must be the guy pulling the strings.
and the fact that Soze in that scene has all the items that Verbal asks for at the end - gold watch, gold lighter, cigarettes, etc.
Just means he was the guy who shot Keaton, not that his real identity is Keyser Soze.
the way the movie is edited at the end with cuts between Kujan talking about Soze and revealing to us that Verbal isn't quite the crippled weakling we've been lead to believe is obviously the film telling you that Verbal is Soze.
All that logically implies is that Verbal is lying about being a cripple. There's no unavoidable logical pathway from lying about being a cripple, and lying about being a stupid petty crook, to being Person X. All it implies in-and-of-itself is he's misrepresenting himself.
So the interpretation that Verbal is a hitman and spy in Soze's employ remains equally plausible.

No piece of evidence except Keaton calling him Soze in the opening scene, and the fact that Soze in that scene has all the items that Verbal asks for at the end - gold watch, gold lighter, cigarettes, etc. Plus, the way the movie is edited at the end with cuts between Kujan talking about Soze and revealing to us that Verbal isn't quite the crippled weakling we've been lead to believe is obviously the film telling you that Verbal is Soze.

Likewise!;)

Yeah, I am definitely not convinced that part actually happened, but if anything in the movie was depicted accurately, up to that point was probably it. We're pretty much arguing nothing now, haha. Good chatting with you!

Like you said yourself, "If we're to allow that the post-lineup scene in the holding cell actually happened". Why should we? There's no reason to believe it really happened. Since it was all a set-up, MacManus probably never brought up the heist job either, it was most likely Verbal who did.
But as I said, if he did spend time in jail, he did it to establish a connection to Keaton.

This message has been deleted.

(whom we would have to accept he planned for),
No, we don't have to accept that. I don't think he expected Kujan at all. He just wanted to tell the story of a dope deal gone wrong. It was Kujan's interference that forced him to change his story, taking inspiration from the bulletin board.

It seems pretty incredible that a plan that elaborate actually worked perfectly. I say perfectly even though he ended up in a room with Kuja (whom we would have to accept he planned for), because he knew he could talk his way to freedom.

As I've said several times, Verbal tells them in the cell that he did time in county with Keaton, who hears him and doesn't dispute it.

Well he didn't change any records, he definitely was jailed with the guy.
Uhm, how do you know this? There has to be a file on Verbal Kint, this supposed arrest could very much be included.
I don't find it believable that he even planned that.
Why not? He clearly planned the line-up, why not his stint in jail? I think it's plausible, although falsifying police records would be easier.

Well he didn't change any records, he definitely was jailed with the guy. And that was my point: I don't find it believable that he even planned that.

Don't you just find it a bit odd that someone like Kint could pull this whole thing off, but not be able to talk his way out of a brief stint in the county jail for misdemeanor fraud?
No, because if he did spend time in jail (instead of just changing the police records, which he easily could've done and which I think is more likely), then he did so because he wanted to establish a connection to Keaton.
Or are you saying that the cops should find it odd? In that case it's still no, because a mysterious third party was involved in the boat heist.

Well, depending on what he told the DA, it doesn't seem to have been a lie. If we're to allow that the post-lineup scene in the holding cell actually happened, verbal tells McManus how he met Keaton and Keaton doesn't deny it. Don't you just find it a bit odd that someone like Kint could pull this whole thing off, but not be able to talk his way out of a brief stint in the county jail for misdemeanor fraud?

So, are we supposed to believe Verbal ended up in jail (not prison) for some misdemeanor, where he happens to meet and befriend the man who is going to take the fall/credit for the whole operation because the agent who shows up has a history with Keaton and also gets Verbal in an office with him for a few hours?
When Verbal planned this, he never intended to put the blame on Keaton or expected Kujan to drop by. It was just supposed to be a story about a dope deal gone wrong. It seems he already mentioned having met Keaton before in his statement to the DA. The reason for this is that it makes it more believably that Verbal got involved in the heist, as Keaton apparently trusted him. It could be he lied about a previous encounter with Keaton thinking they wouldn't bother checking it, but it's also possible he arranged for the police records to be changed, just like he arranged the line-up.
Kujan did show up on his own accord, but it's not something Verbal counted on.

You just brought something to my attention that makes the whole thing possibly even more far-fetched: Kujan's tunnel vision on Keaton and the fact that Verbal and Keaton were friends. They met in county where Verbal was doing time for fraud, he says.
So, are we supposed to believe Verbal ended up in jail (not prison) for some misdemeanor, where he happens to meet and befriend the man who is going to take the fall/credit for the whole operation because the agent who shows up has a history with Keaton and also gets Verbal in an office with him for a few hours?
Or are we supposed to believe that the whole thing was intricately planned and went off virtually without a hitch? That seems equally unlikely. Unless I missed something and Kujan only showed up because he requested to be sent over a personal vendetta, which Verbal had counted on.. That makes it a little more reasonable, I suppose, but only a little.

Why do we see it up close, rather than simply from where Verbal is watching?
Because eventually it's clear that that scene isn't really taken from Verbal's testimony, but instead shows what really happened. But as the director has pointed out, he filmed the scene in such a way, focussing on the ropes, to give the impression that Verbal was secretly watching them.
Yeah, so you're still saying that because Kujan hypothesises that Keaton would want to kill someone who informed on him personally, then it follows that Keyser Soze would also?
No, I'm saying that it's logical to think that if Keaton is the mastermind behind the operation and staged his death, that he's also the gunman on the boat. But I'm also saying that it's logical that Soze is the gunman because three different characters believe he is. And Kujan's theory on how Keaton pulled everything off, would also apply to Verbal if he's the gunman. Meaning he's also the mastermind and thus Soze.
But it could also make sense that, as a crime kingpin, Soze would ultimately rather entrust the job to a henchman rather than put his own life at risk on the boat. I know the script doesn't introduce the concept of a hitman working for Soze, but it's an equally plausible scenario the way I see
As I've said multiple times, go ahead if you want to believe that. This all began when you asked me who I thought Verbal really was and if Soze would shoot Marquez himself. I simply gave you a logical explanation based on what the movie implies.

It could've been staged like Kujan suggests.
I consider that unlikely. The scene between Keaton and the cloaked man staged for Verbal? Why do we see it up close, rather than simply from where Verbal is watching? Why hear them talking in voices barely raised above whispers, that Verbal couldn't have heard?
IF Keaton was truly the Soze, it would also be perfectly reasonable for us to believe he was the gunman on the boat, as we saw Keaton on the boat and up till the revelation have no reason to doubt what we're seeing. If he's on the boat, ofcourse he's going to kill Marquez himself. Three different characters suggest it's Soze and the reasoning for doing it himself makes complete sense.
Yeah, so you're still saying that because Kujan hypothesises that Keaton would want to kill someone who informed on him personally, then it follows that Keyser Soze would also? It doesn't necessarily follow. It makes sense, stands to reason. But it could also make sense that, as a crime kingpin, Soze would ultimately rather entrust the job to a henchman rather than put his own life at risk on the boat. I know the script doesn't introduce the concept of a hitman working for Soze, but it's an equally plausible scenario the way I see it.

Really? I thought it was made manifestly clear he wasn't in the very opening scene
No, we don't know what that scene means until the revelation. It could've been staged like Kujan suggests. Only looking back at it aftwerwards is it clear that Keaton is truly killed in that scene.
it's a perfectly reasonable theory for Kujan to have drawn
IF Keaton was truly the Soze, it would also be perfectly reasonable for us to believe he was the gunman on the boat, as we saw Keaton on the boat and up till the revelation have no reason to doubt what we're seeing. If he's on the boat, ofcourse he's going to kill Marquez himself. Three different characters suggest it's Soze and the reasoning for doing it himself makes complete sense.

We only really know he wasn't the gunman after the revelation, though.
Really? I thought it was made manifestly clear he wasn't in the very opening scene (which only a while ago we both agreed shows us what really happened on the boat, ie that Keaton is dead beyond doubt, and that his killer was most probably "Verbal Kint"). In the rest of what you say, aren't you basically arguing that it was reasonable for Kujan to entertain that theory (though not to assume it's necessarily correct, as he does)? That he believes Keaton was the gunman shouldn't lead us to the inevitable conclusion that Soze was the gunman.
No, I'm saying that to Kujan, Verbal had no reason to lie about Keaton being on the boat and seeing him die. But even without tunnel vision, there wouldn't be a clear motive for him lying. So if Keaton was the mastermind behind the whole heist and staged his death on the boat, then he was also the gunman who shot Marquez.
Quite. It's just that, forgive me, I don't really see the logical path from that theory to Soze being the gunman. I mean, it's a perfectly reasonable theory for Kujan to have drawn; given what he knows about Keaton's criminal past, it's reasonable for him to pick holes in Verbal's account to test his certainty over whether he saw Keaton get shot or not. It just seems to me a moot point, eventually, since we know from scene one that Keaton was killed by a man he recognizes, whom he identifies as "Keyser" in the line "I can't feel my legs, Keyser" - which to me suggests very strongly that Verbal was the assassin. Though there's a degree of ambiguity over whether that alone makes it safe to draw the certain conclusion that he's actually Keyser Soze.

IF he was Keaton, yes. Obviously with IF being the operative word there. But that's just what Kujan assumes, based on the lies in Verbal's testimony, and partly fuelled by his overwhelming predisposition to believe the worst of Keaton. WE know Keaton wasn't the gunman, don't we?
We only really know he wasn't the gunman after the revelation, though. Again, Kujan having tunnel vision is the whole point of the movie. It's the reason he believes Keaton faked his death once again. And yes, that's why he chooses to believe that Keaton was the gunman Verbal mentioned who shot everybody and got away. But even after Soze's name popped up, Keaton could've been a mere henchman just like you think Verbal was just a henchman. But Kujan thinks he's the man behind Soze because he believes that the man Marquez had betrayed would come onto the boat himself to kill him. Just like Keaton and the Hungarian believed the gunman would be Soze himself. The idea of the gunman being a henchman of Soze is never introduced.
Verbal is lying though. Did I miss something you said? Are you submitting a possibility that Keaton was the gunman?
No, I'm saying that to Kujan, Verbal had no reason to lie about Keaton being on the boat and seeing him die. But even without tunnel vision, there wouldn't be a clear motive for him lying. So if Keaton was the mastermind behind the whole heist and staged his death on the boat, then he was also the gunman who shot Marquez.