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

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.

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.

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.

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?!

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

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.

This message has been deleted.

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.

There's no chance than in a filme Mr. Gene Hackman be a rapper, so the end is int he begining.

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.

I just finished this film and went to the computer as soon as the credits ran to see any discussion on ending.
All along, I felt that he's most probably covering up something for the wife. At times, I thought that the young cop might have been the rapist (and perhaps was even seeing the wife on the side). What get's confusing is that at one point Hackman said that it is "farsicle (sp?) how far she has taken this." He loves his wife so he gave in and confessed so she wouldn't get in trouble, despite knowing that she is the one setting him up. Then he would go to prison and she stays rich and can do whatever she wants.
But where I thought this movie REALLY fell apart is at the CD case. They make it fairly clear that it is Hackman's, but then a picture is found of a recent murder. They say they have the murderer downstairs, Freeman looks at Hackman's wife like she's been caught and his wife seems to agree with her eyes, then hangs her head in shame. All along, Hackman continues to confess and now I'm waiting to get some really cool answers.
Instead, the next seen shows her looking like she's going to commit suicide, but the very first question for me is why was she is set free. And then Hackman is set free into the crowd and yet he has lied throughout the whole movie and has pictures of each victim in his house. You'd think cops would detain him to make sure this guy downstairs is not his partner. So I'm getting a little more frustrated at the writing.
Then you see her and she didn't kill herself. Why are they both free? At that moment, the only good part for me was then he shunned her when she went in for a hug & kiss. That would have really pissed me off.
So now the credits roll and I feel very ripped off. I rewind to see the CD case part again. They don't say a name so I say to myself, maybe it it's the guys downstairs and not Hackmans. But I'm still feeling like both Hackman & his wife are guilty somehow. I get mad that this movie left me hanging so bad.
I'm an experienced movie watcher. At first I thought it was terrible writing and then thought about it and justified a few things in my head. And then I started thinking that this ending had a whole lot more genious then I gave it credit for. I had to really think it through because the ending changed everything. But, I've made my peace with it and do appreciate the writing now. But I still feel they should have clarified who's CD case that was. I can't help but think of poor people like my mom who watched this for the stars and were very disappointed with the end and never did really figure it out. I'm all for thought provoking movies, but they could have helped out the watchers just a little more on this one. I think they pushed the envelope to far and got too cute for they're own good.

I think some of you are missing the point when Henry says "I cant believe she would go to these lenghts". My intial response was that she was setting him up, but the murders are not what Henry is talking about. He is talking about Camille. Chantell has destroyed their marriage because she believed that Henry's relationship with Camille was inappropriate and she was jealous. She needs to have that jealously and suspicion justified, otherwise she is the one at fault for ruining the marriage. Thats the whole point. He is under suspicion by both his wife and his good friend for being nothing more than a man who is not getting any and loves children. The movie is about destroying a man through suspicion. It is also done visually as he enters the police station in a full tuxedo. Then the coat is ripped, he losses his hair, and eventually (as he confesses) he removes the tux. The major point is that Henry was already guilty before he stepped foot in the police station because they thought he was guilty. Victor thought he was guilty because he envyed Henry and wanted to destroy him. Chantell thought he was guilty because she was jealous of his relationship with Camille. And Opey thought he was guilty probably because he thinks everyone is guilty, lol. A very respected, upstanding, loving, gentleman had his life destroyed by suspicion from people with shakey motives. That's the message I got from the film, and Hackman even says that in the film very early when he's talking about why his neighbors would lie. It's laid out very carefully you just have to dig for it. Excellent movie, excellent performances, excellent message.
Thank you!!! This is the exact message I got from the film. Although I had to watch it about 4 timesLOL. After reading through the threads on this board, many people are getting things wrong. Many need to go back and watch the film a few more times. Thanks again!

This message has been deleted.

This is what i came away believing from the filmthat chantal hired someone to carry out the murders, hence her looking so pertrified when the female police officer said theyd caught the guy in the act, she was afraid so she thought about topping herself, but was too vain..thought she could go back to her husband, and at the very end where they are sat on the benches and henry and Victor look at each other, Henry realises this and so does Victor.
all very presumptious i know, but that was my honest feeling straight after watching it for the first time, have since thought differently after watching it a few times although have seen things too also confirm it. the films what you want it to be eh?

I think some of you are missing the point when Henry says "I cant believe she would go to these lenghts". My intial response was that she was setting him up, but the murders are not what Henry is talking about. He is talking about Camille. Chantell has destroyed their marriage because she believed that Henry's relationship with Camille was inappropriate and she was jealous. She needs to have that jealously and suspicion justified, otherwise she is the one at fault for ruining the marriage. Thats the whole point. He is under suspicion by both his wife and his good friend for being nothing more than a man who is not getting any and loves children. The movie is about destroying a man through suspicion. It is also done visually as he enters the police station in a full tuxedo. Then the coat is ripped, he losses his hair, and eventually (as he confesses) he removes the tux. The major point is that Henry was already guilty before he stepped foot in the police station because they thought he was guilty. Victor thought he was guilty because he envyed Henry and wanted to destroy him. Chantell thought he was guilty because she was jealous of his relationship with Camille. And Opey thought he was guilty probably because he thinks everyone is guilty, lol. A very respected, upstanding, loving, gentleman had his life destroyed by suspicion from people with shakey motives. That's the message I got from the film, and Hackman even says that in the film very early when he's talking about why his neighbors would lie. It's laid out very carefully you just have to dig for it. Excellent movie, excellent performances, excellent message.

He was heartbroken, thats obvious. Nothing there lets you think Chantel had anything to do with the murders.
Yeah, they should have told him why they released him. Now that I remember it, it was really stupid of the writers to release Henry like that.

while watching the movie i was initially excited that i had been caught so off guard. i thought the writer's blindsided me and that the wife had somehow set Henry up. i thought that Freeman's character was staring in disbelief at the wife, because he figured out that SHE had set her husband up and that she was about to be locked up. part of me wanted to have this ending, because the wife seemed so cold. i thought it would be fitting to have her switch places with henry and be thrown in the hot seat.
but by the time they sat on the park benches, i started thinking that the wife truely believe that Henry was a rapist/murderer. Henry truely believe that his wife had set him up. but he loved her so- that he confessed to the crimes.
when the pictures were (by my recollection) brought into the scene, it led you to believe they were found in HENRY's car. but then they explained it was in the "murder's" car. "they got him". if Chantel (wife) had been in on it, i do not think she would have had her accomplice rape and kill on a night that Henry was to give a speech in front of so many witnesses.
and, we never see anyone explain anything to Henry as to why he is released. maybe he is heartbroken that his wife had little faith in him.. or maybe he still thinks she set him up.

aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggg !!!!!!

Actually Owens (Tomas Jane) said "One hundred beep percent guilty". The line that you are trying to associate with the character is from Victor (Morgan Freeman), who actually says, "You're wife was kind enough to bring these out of your dark room." (or something close to this). But the like "The wife told us where to find these" was not mentioned in any way.
But this one's eatting my popcorn!

QUOTE:

this thread is completely OFF
Thomas never said anything that resembles "the wife told us where to find these." or whatevers
Henry confessed because he broke down through the interrogation and lack of belief from everyone around him.
and Henry lied at the beginning because he knew he had photos and some relations with the victims. and it will just complicate the matter. so a lie would make things a shorter process. well atleast he thought.

No it was not Thomas that said it, it was Morgan Freeman's character that said it. He said it as part of his ploy to pit the two against each other to get a confession.
Hackman did confess, not to protect her as one person offered, but because he was giving up. He was convinced that his wife's jealousy had caused her to set him up to prove a point. He says this.
I do believe that Hackman's character wanted children and loved children but not in a sick way. She thought he was a sicko with kids and she overreacted.
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=21312696

I agree; that's the way I took it. Hackman was psychologically exhausted at the end, and he believed that he was guilty because everyone close to him thought so.
No lies to protect his wife, etc. He lied in the beginning because he didn't want it getting out that he was visiting hookers in the alley, and looking at young girls on the internet.
Hindsight being 20/20, if he had told the truth from the beginning it would have been better, but he thought he was going to be in and out in "10 minutes"..

I know this is old but it made me laugh that people watch something and don't understand it, yet post their version as fact anyway.
He didn't have the photos in his car, they were in the car of the real killer. Which is what the female detective was telling Morgan Freeman's character, and why they let Henry go.

I don't think he EVER thought his wife killed those girls, I think he was just driven to distraction by the betrayal by his 'friend', the cop, and his wife, and his general frustration with life. Maybe also his own conscience hurt him, "As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he." And he DID like young women/girls, as he said.
But he didn't kill them.
The illogical part is why a smart lawyer would let the situation get out of hand. When he first realizes his 'buddy' has done so much to investigate the case, he should have pulled in all the other lawyers.
"He who swaps his liberty for the promise of 'security' deserves neither." Ben Franklin