Although a spoiler alert may be a moot point with the film being quite old. But since it concerns the ending, here goes:
SPOILER ALERT: this post discusses the ending of the film, so read at your own risk!
So, in the end, Senator Baynard just gets away with a broken nose and a punch to his gut? He is guilty of corruption after all. Would've been nice to see him get his.
Just because its an "old" film doesn't mean its okay to spoil it for people who have yet to see it.
I agree though, they should have shown him being taken away in cuffs or something.
I don't see how it mattered. I mean you know he would've gotten busted, and besides the nice bookend of Hallenbeck punching him again in the nose, just like when he was in the SS, was cool.
shareYeah, that's why I included the "Spolier Alert"
shareI thought he got off lightly too bearing in mind he was the pig who sexually assaulted a woman in his hotel room and then got Joe fired. He was lucky all he ended up with was a busted nose. No doubt he resumed his political career with no issues.
According to the Trivia Page he was originally meant to be the President or a former POTUS, and his son was going to be the main villain. It's a shame that the film didn't go in that direction because as it stood Senator Baynard seemed to be rather superfluous to the entire plot, and tying him directly to the main villain, his son, would have made more sense. It's a shame there hasn't yet been a film or TV show (at least none I know of) where the President's kid has turned out to be the bad guy whose daddy dearest is covering up for him (in 'Murder at 1600' and the first season of "24" the various POTUS or future-POTUS's sons turned out to be the victims of set-ups).
I always figured there wasn't any resolution for that Senator due to the fact that the Bush Administration at the time was going through so much scandal/scrutiny with Senators/Congressman collecting bribes, and making unethical transactions to shady groups.
share[deleted]
Although intense personal political opinions are quite fine to have, and to express, I must point out that your post here is not only misplaced, but in reference to the wrong period of time as well.
The movie was made in 1991, when the FIRST President Bush was in office, and there was a scandal involving bribery and unethical transactions, as vincevega918 said. Here is a link you can follow to learn more, should you choose the option.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_scandals_in_the_United_States#1989.E2.80.931993_George_H._W._Bush_Administration
With that said, your message was also misplaced, and you should consider posting your political message elsewhere. There are MUCH more appropriate forums for your ideas, ones not dedicated to movies.
The stuff that dreams are made of.
SO? That still doesn't negate my post. And until "Ocommie" takes over even more of the US Constitution than he has already I can post my political messages anywhere I want. Sorry. Just get over yourself already.
K/H D
If there's a way to screw something up..."O'Commie" will find it.
[deleted]
He will go to jail for what he has done. The police only treated him well, because he was a senator and because they needed him as a witness against the other commitee members. That´s why they also didn´t do anything, when Hallenbeck punched him, whose testimony will be even more appreciated.
They probably will offer the senator a reduced sentence in exchange for his testimony against the other senators.