There's a scene where he's told that his pension will never increase because the Republicans and Democrats were mad at him. The dialogue is not clear, and with the captions on, it says "because of what you did to their houses!"
Since this is a pivotal point in the character's decision to steal the money and go to Mexico, you think it would have been made clearer what he did that was so bad.
What did he do?
Thanks!
The actual dialogue is:
"Because they know that you personally were more responsible than anybody else for closing down the houses."
Gambling houses? Houses of prostitution? Maybe both? I imagine they avoided getting any more specific so viewers could make whichever interpretation suited them.
Poe! You are...avenged!
Thank you the exact dialogue! It is just said in passing and in a frenetic way that I imagine it went over the head of many.
I still think that since it was a huge plot point for Culpepper to turn "dirty" (although not a surprise due to the musical cues and other big hints) that they should have made it clear as he is probably the character that most wish had gotten the money, a dedicated civil servant who is being oppressed by the system he has loyally spent his whole career on, and whose family is so dysfunctional and uncaring that he deserves a new life in retirement. Then they snatch it away and NO one gets it.
They make much of scene with another cop who blackmails one of the politician to get his pension raised, a flurry of activity to reach him on the radio to let him know...all of that time wasted that hinges on a plot point that they never even explain. Things like that could have been cut since they are lengthy scenes that don't end up adding anything to the story.
So if you're going to steal the most satisfactory ending, it should be made clear why the city council is SO OUTRAGED with him, that they have vowed that if the subject of his pension is even brought up to decrease it. That's pretty severe for shutting down gambling dens and brothels. I'm sure they all could find other sources for that fun in a city like San Diego.
All that being said, the phrase "houses" does imply some organised illegal activities of some kind.
Just wish they had made it clearer, since as I said, he was a beloved actor and the most sympathetic character.
Was there a book that this movie was based on? Maybe it spells it out in appropriate detail to fill up that pretty big plot hole.
It was an original screenplay by William and Tanya Rose; there may have been a subsequent "novelization," but I'm not aware of one.
The point you raise about Aloysius blackmailing the mayor and city council is one I always interpreted as indicating how corrupt the entire structure of city leadership was, so it's easy to surmise that whichever kind of "houses" they were, there were kickbacks involved, with everyone from the mayor on down getting their cut. Aloysius' knowledge of "road contracts, harbor and cannery projects" and other corruption hints at him being a go-along-to-get-along kind of guy - and he does include himself among all those who could be "behind bars for the next 20 years" if he goes public - but sets Culpepper apart as possibly the only honest man anywhere in city government.
So there would be years of resentment against him for having dried up their under-the-table revenue, but they couldn't really have done anything about it without exposing themselves. And when Culpepper brings up the idea of raising the pension, they finally have their chance to punish him for it.
That's the way it's always seemed to me.
Poe! You are...avenged!
Yep. When Aloycious explains it to him he ends with "You're an honest cop. You've always been an honest cop. And you've got that. And that's all you've got." (meaning: no pension). All of this takes place as Culpepper's wife and daughter are screaming at each other over the 2 phones. It's no wonder he decides to take the money and run!
_____________
"Maybe I should go alone"
- Quint, Jaws.
In the final scene, Culpepper tells the others that the only reason they will likely get off lightly is because the judge will have him to throw the book at.
Maybe the character played by Demerest (and possibly other Culpepper supporters) will blackmail the judge or other officials into seeing to it he does get off.
One of my problems with the film is when his car turns and goes off in another direction, rather than follow the others in the taxis to the police station. They immediately know he's running off with the money. But how did they really know? Couldn't he say he was taking money to a secure location of some sort, as a defense? After all, he told them to turn themselves in, meaning without his help. So maybe he could go to court explaining that he figured they would change their minds about turning themselves in and, figuring that only one cop was between them and the money, turn around and come after him for it. He was running from them just to keep them from getting the money, he'd say. That could have got him off. No?
"All necessary truth is its own evidence." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
There is a point in the film where William Demarest says "arrest Culpepper ". I believe this occurs after Culpepper doesn't acknowledge radio contact as he is running away with the money.
It's apparent that the police know he's turned thief. He might try to alibi but I don't think it'd work.
> It's apparent that the police know he's turned thief. He might try to alibi but I don't think it'd work.
Once Culpepper stepped on the gas and headed towards Mexico, there was no turning back. He would have in the boat and gone had the taxis not followed him.
--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?
As a libertarian, I don't approve of closing houses.
shareWas it ever said how much Culpepper's pension was supposed to be? I just remember Aloysius (William Demarest) had them triple it.
share