What was up with the crazed Vietnam Vet holding hostages scene? Were the writers/director making a statement or just trying to punch up the normally unexciting process of homicide investigation?
shareI reckon it was just a token action sequence to pep the film up a bit.
share[deleted]
It was unrelated to the case and therefor we weren't given much detail about it. The reason it's in the movie is because the incident took place shortly after the shootings on the bus, and believed to be performed by the same crook. When it turned out that the fellow only had one leg they realized it couldn't be him, and whatever the hostage taking and shooting concerned probably became another case for some other policemen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju67DqaRE7k