Please explain.....


I don't think the whole thing was a set up from the beginning because that would make absolutely no sense, since the wife already knew about the "three-marble" story.

Jerry saw a great idea in the three marble story that Mike told at dinner just before he leaves. So then they go and do that business and Mike sees this, so he goes to sue. Then we find out they have all this information on them that no one else knew, except the wife, who is later revealed to have betrayed Mike. So is it safe to assume that she was the one who gave them all this info? It seems that they relied too much on coincidence to happen for them to pull such a card like that. (Lawyer tried to kill cop, gave watch to cop to cover it up story).

The fight at the end didn't make much sense to me. Someone would have broken it up, no? Security? Plus I had no idea who the opponent was at the end until I read about it after. The last scene, which was great, didn't make much sense to me. Did the Master know it was fixed? Did Mike reveal the whole thing is fixed? It's an odd and unsatisfying way to end the film.

The Tim Allen character was pretty much useless. They could have combined him and his manager Jerry into one character, make it less confusing as to who was responsible for what.

Mammet leaves too much not answered in the film, which irks me.

http://onefilmadayreview.blogspot.com/

reply

I agree with some of your points. I don't think it was set up from the beginning. I believe his wife was faithful until she got blinded by greed. Many of the other characters were simply greedy to begin with.
As for security breaking up the fight - initially a number of people did try to stop him unsuccesfully. Once the main fight started there might have been a consensus not to break it up since it seemed like both fighters could take care of themselves. (Hockey fights go on without intervention as well) Also, the other fighter was running the event so security might have been reluctant to stand in his way.
The Master at the end did not have to know it was fixed to make the final gesture. What he saw was a man who wanted to speak, and had to fight to get his voice heard. This alone may have moved him emotionally.
Not everything was answered, but this movie may have been more symbolic/metaphorical, - the idea of trying to be an honourable person in a not-so-honourable culture.

reply

[deleted]