The apartment always bothered me too. But not enough to spoil things for me. The writers could have just had Hooker hole up in a cheap hotel for the duration, surely. And then he has to go back to his apartment (not being dropped off by Lonnegan) for a minor reason, which is when he could be ambushed. The assassin in the diner bothers me a lot less. You’d assume a little ‘pressure’ could be exerted by Salino (or Lonnegan) to get her hired. Lonnegan might have been running protection on the diner anyway.
That, to me, woud have assumed they knew who Luther’s partner was. And surely they would have be able to determine he was the Kid in on the scam.
Again, fun watch. Focus on the popcorn.
“It ain’t that kind of movie, kid.”
Ha, good point. I think I’ll just cover my ears and go lalalalalala
I’m with you guys on that, the whole Salino bit is complexity addiction that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.
The Salino thing was the worst for me.
The other stuff didn’t even cause a blip on my radar–it’s not such a stretch to figure one hand doesn’t know what the other is doing in a large criminal organization. Heck, compartmentalization would mean that any bad guy wouldn’t know the details of what the other bad guy was doing.
But the Salino side story, complete with “The Glove” as a special hidden bodyguard for Hooker…I was never happy with that.
Regarding her connecting the dots, I doubt Lonnigan would have revealed his business dealings with anyone at her level. To him this was not a con, so why would he tell anyone at all.
That is why Gondorf needed the poker game on the train. THAT was the seed money that he won from Lonegan,..to pay for the Sting
Apart from the implausibilities that have been pointed out, that was one hell of a shot by the secret bodyguard. A “silenced” pistol from, what? 200 feet? And he hits the center of her forehead while she’s in motion? I’m a pretty good shot with a pistol, but I would have zero confidence in my marksmanship in that situation.
I can’t believe how much I now want to see an ultra-serious heist movie where the crew plainspokenly reviews their plan to steal a hundred million dollars: “Step One: we steal fifty million dollars…”
Oh yes…wasn’t that a silenced revolver? For those unfamiliar, that is an impossibility–the noisy gasses escape from the gap between the cylinder and barrel.
One thing that always puzzled me was in the lead up to the poker game on the train. They’ve done research on Lonnegan looking for his weaknesses, and discover that he cheats at poker, usually giving himself four-of-a-kind, with eights or nines, as I recall. That’s how Gondorf knows to give himself four jacks to win. How would they research that, though. Does Lonnegan really give himself four eights or four nines often enough to be predictable, but none of the people he plays with have ever noticed?
I was thinking that Johnny gave Lonnegan his money back after the card game, but then I remembered better. He gives Lonnegan’s wallet back, and says he’ll alter Shaw’s books to make it look like Lonnegan has paid his debt, but Gondorf does keep the money that was stolen, plus whatever else he won in the game. And that serves to get Johnny into Lonnegan’s good graces.
One other question about the whole “place it on Lucky Dan” thing. If the con was already supposed to end with the (fake) feds bursting in and Sneider hustling Lonnegan out, what difference does it make if he won the bet or not? Why trick him into making a losing bet if the plan was to scare him away before he could collect his winnings?
But that would make the chances of the plan succeeding instantly plummet to near-zero!
One other question about the whole “place it on Lucky Dan” thing. If the con was already supposed to end with the (fake) feds bursting in and Sneider hustling Lonnegan out, what difference does it make if he won the bet or not? Why trick him into making a losing bet if the plan was to scare him away before he could collect his winnings?
That isn’t the issue. The issue is that these kinds of bets have a very specific syntax, and if Lonnegan has gambled at all on the horses before he should be all too well aware of the syntax in question, wouldn’t he? Would the con gang be that sanguine that he would be certain to misinterpret the tip in that way?
‘Silenced’ revolvers bug me like front wheel drive cars with rear airfoils.
The issue is that these kinds of bets have a very specific syntax, and if Lonnegan has gambled at all on the horses before he should be all too well aware of the syntax in question, wouldn’t he?
I believe that “Place it on Lucky Dan” thing was straight out of The Big Con. It was intentional, and part of the con, possibly to cause a significant distraction at the time of the “bust”…besides being a great distraction (anger at possibly losing over such a stupid mistake), it could cause him to rationalize that he would have lost anyway and let the whole thing blow over with less fight. As Gondorf said, you have to keep his con after you win.
Would the con gang be that sanguine that he would be certain to misinterpret the tip in that way?
For what it’s worth, the phrase is ambiguous enough that they could say he misinterpreted it whichever way he bet (i.e., claim that it meant “bet on Lucky Dan to win” or claim that it meant “bet on Lucky Dan to place”).
One other question about the whole “place it on Lucky Dan” thing. If the con was already supposed to end with the (fake) feds bursting in and Sneider hustling Lonnegan out, what difference does it make if he won the bet or not? Why trick him into making a losing bet if the plan was to scare him away before he could collect his winnings?
Really, just insurance. If things had gone even a little bit sideways (say, the raid was delayed for a few moments), Gondorff and company had an excuse: “You’ve never played a place bet before, you always bet to win. What did you think we’d book when you stepped up to the window?”
There is a specific syntax to placing a bet with the mutuel teller at the track, so there can be no misinterpretations: (A) track name, (B) race number, (C) wager amount, (D) type of bet, (E) horse number(s). For example:
“Lincoln Fields in the fifth, two bucks on 5 to win.”
“Narragansett in the third, two dollar part wheel exactor, 5 on top with 3 and 6.”
“Place it on Lucky Dan” can be interpreted as “Put it on Lucky Dan.” However, if Lonnegan was too smart for that and bet on the horse to place (i.e. come in second), Gondorff would have delayed the payoff somehow until the raid occurred. And when it did, the raid would have cancelled any hope Lonnegan had of collecting anyway.
[as always, the very next post ninja’s my ass, thanks Spoons]
Here’s a really low stakes question:
The first time Lonnegan comes into the fake betting shop, Gondorff comes out to greet / taunt him. When Newman emerges from the back office he grabs a handful of white objects from the bar and starts eating them. What are they?
Being white, popcorn? When Erie Kid goes to the bar after running Blue Note down he dips into a bowl and snacks on something white as well.
One thing that always puzzled me was in the lead up to the poker game on the train. They’ve done research on Lonnegan looking for his weaknesses, and discover that he cheats at poker, usually giving himself four-of-a-kind, with eights or nines, as I recall. That’s how Gondorf knows to give himself four jacks to win. How would they research that, though. Does Lonnegan really give himself four eights or four nines often enough to be predictable, but none of the people he plays with have ever noticed?
The games take place on a train, so I’m guessing it’s a different group of fish every week. The conductors and porters are wise to Lonnegan–and one of them, presumably well compensated, tips off Gondorff–but not necessarily the other players.