MovieChat Forums > Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) Discussion > people have gone over this but still did...

people have gone over this but still didn't explain it.

posted 10 years ago by mrwnmero
7 replies | jump to latest

Smith has been accused of owning the land and trying to benefit from it, although he would benefit more if the dam thing goes through. I have a few questions concerning this...

first: why didn't he use this as a proof that he is innocent and if he just wanted money he would let the dam bill be approved?

second: did Taylor think the whole accusation through? I mean what happens if Smith really backs off then asks for his right when they build the dam since he owns the land?

third: suppose that Taylor can will get rid of the forgery he made in the hall of records so Smith doesn't own anything any more, wouldn't that raise questions as how come Smith would get money from the camp and not the dam since he owns the land anyway?

fourth: according to the accusation that Smith owns the land, doesn't that give him the right to refuse the bill of the dam? after all it is his land and can choose not to sell it to the government. or does the government force the owner to sell in cases like this?

that's all I have to say, however the first question's possible answer is that he didn't think of that at the time because he was shocked by all the accusations being thrown at him. but still all the rest of the questions mean there is a plot hole in this movie.

Nobody panics when things go "according to plan." Even if the plan is horrifying!

[–] fanaticita 10 years ago

But he didn't own the land. I think this will answer your questions. . .hopefully.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Smith_Goes_to_Washington

[–] Flosive 10 years ago

This bothered me too at first, but forgery or not, the deed is valid and Smith really does own the land. But he doesn't own all the land that'll be sold when the dam is built, only some of it, and some is enough to prove his guilt. Taylor will still be making a large profit when the sale goes ahead. At least, this is what I've reasoned out. If this rather hokey film gave a detailed explanation at any point, then I must have missed it.

*
Last seen: Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) 6/10

[–] fanaticita 10 years ago

How could the deed be valid if it was a forgery? Wasn't that the whole point of the film, proving he was innocent?

[–] Flosive 10 years ago

How could the deed be valid if it was a forgery? Wasn't that the whole point of the film, proving he was innocent?

It's valid simply because it's a legal document with his signature on it, or at least what people believe to be Smith's signature. Smith owns that land because Taylor put his name on it.

If Smith didn't own the land, as soon as it was sold to make way for the dam, he could demand that the Senate (or a journalist, or the police, or whoever) follow the paper trail to prove that he wasn't involved in the sale. Then, following on from uncovering that deception, the Senate would dig even deeper to find out what was really going on and who was really behind it.

So, if it was just a worthless bit of paper and Smith didn't own the land, all that Taylor would have achieved is getting Smith kicked out of the Senate, but the truth would still have come to bite him shortly afterwards.

*
Last seen: The Station Agent (2003) 8/10

[–] Rex16 10 years ago

Your points sound valid. I suppose that Smith would have thought of these points in his defence had he been in a calmer frame of mind. As we see in the film, he was such a naive idealist that seeing Senator Payne testify falsely against him completely devastated him, and he left without defending himself.

From Taylor's perspective, I guess he didn't have time to come up with a better plan, and simply counted on the public and other senators turning against Smith on hearing that Smith had a hidden interest in the land. However, I agree that had Smith or even someone like Saunders' reporter friend raised these issues, Taylor would have been left struggling to explain how Smith would have benefited from the boys' camp.

[–] Flosive 10 years ago

Taylor would have been left struggling to explain how Smith would have benefited from the boys' camp.

This is explained in the movie when Taylor's stooge gives his testimony. He tells the hearing that Smith said the government would pay 4 times what the land was worth, and that Smith would then split the money with him.

*
Last seen: Juan de los Muertos (2011) 7.5/10

[–] whocares007 9 years ago

second: did Taylor think the whole accusation through? I mean what happens if Smith really backs off then asks for his right when they build the dam since he owns the land?

you mean BEFORE they set him up ? yeah, they would have cut him in, but they didn't forge the documents until AFTER he was trying to expose them, and at that point the dam wasn't going to get built there, and if it did, they would have probably killed him if he asked them.

third: suppose that Taylor can will get rid of the forgery he made in the hall of records so Smith doesn't own anything any more, wouldn't that raise questions as how come Smith would get money from the camp and not the dam since he owns the land anyway?

i'm not for sure I understand what you mean on this one. at That Point, I think they abandoned the whole dam(n) plan. They had to ruin Smith cause he was trying to bring down the whole Taylor machine cause they wanted to stay in business and didnt want to go to jail and all that s hit. they had to sacrifice the dam scam to get rid of him. now if I misunderstood and they went government STILL built the dam at willet creek after they got Smith expelled from the senate, He would still be a disgrace to his state for trying to rip off kids and no kid would want to be part of his boy ranger organization

fourth: according to the accusation that Smith owns the land, doesn't that give him the right to refuse the bill of the dam? after all it is his land and can choose not to sell it to the government. or does the government force the owner to sell in cases like this

there is a thing called imminent domain or something where they can force ya, but they "proved" that he was 'planning" to scam the state's boys and girls of their " nickels and dimes ", when he introduced his bill for the camp. that would have been bad enough .

My Signature...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrB0BW9azRQ