MovieChat Forums > The Sting (1973) Discussion > Was Hooker in on his own arrest?

Was Hooker in on his own arrest?


Was Hooker in on his own arrest when Snyder took him to Agent Polk? He had to be, right?

reply

Yes. If I remember right, didn't Gondorff find out about Snyder chasing Hooker just before that?

I always thought the scene was about Hooker making things look convincing to Snyder while throwing the viewers off-track.

reply

I saw this movie a million times and I never thought of that question. Seems even if Hooker did not know Polk was fake, he would have behaved the exact same way.




Enter my contest! I need help for a new signature! Maybe I'll choose yours and you'll win a cash prize!

reply

[deleted]

That's what I was thinking too because earlier Hooker showed us how careful he was about going into his room by rigging his door with the piece of paper, yet when Snyder nabs him outside his room Hooker doesn't appear at all cautious. This movie winks at us often, but not so much with the Snyder/Hooker B-story.

... kinda like the Solino story. Ever notice Dimitra Arliss is credited in the main titles as Loretta and not Solino? That would be a non-wink. 

reply

Another part that was unusual to me was how often Loretta and Hooker were alone, prior to the day of the sting, and yet she waited until broad daylight to finally make her move? That makes no sense. I don't care how "professional" they claimed her to be. Plus why would Hooker even make the first move toward her, sexually? She was homely and rebuffed him twice, yet he pursued her. Why would he even go into her diner in the first place? Why twice? The food wasn't even good. This was the biggest puzzle in the whole story.




Enter my contest! I need help for a new signature! Maybe I'll choose yours and you'll win a cash prize!

reply

[deleted]

So Hooker just happened to choose a diner where a big-deal mob hit-woman was jockeying a cash register all day, hoping he would come in? And not only eat there, but hit on her? And he did comment the food was poor.

"Maybe I should have had the meatloaf."
"It isn't any better."



Enter my contest! I need help for a new signature! Maybe I'll choose yours and you'll win a cash prize!

reply

[deleted]

It still sounds like a pretty big setup just to shoot a guy in broad daylight in the open streets.



Enter my contest! I need help for a new signature! Maybe I'll choose yours and you'll win a cash prize!

reply

[deleted]

I agree. The whole plot line with the waitress is unnecessary and illogical.

reply

She wasn't shot in the open street. It was in an alley. In broad daylight.

Short Cut, Draw Blood

reply

First, the place was across from Hooker's apartment. Hooker ask Salino what happened to the previous waitress and the reply was that she'd "quit". This indicates that Hooker had been eating there on a regular basis to recognize a change in waitress. Salino did something to get rid of the other waitress (killed, scared, or paid off). She'd probably already determined Hooker was a regular and then got rid of the waitress to get closer.

reply

[deleted]

That never quite clicked for me, either. Much greater chance of someone seeing her shoot him down in the alley than someone (other than "Mrs. Hillard", who likely wouldn't have known squat about her) in her flophouse.

Loretta was no prize, but I wouldn't exactly call her "homely." And since being rebuffed wasn't something Hooker was used to, that alone could have elevated her in his eyes.

Or maybe he'd never shared a toilet stall with any other dame before. ;-)

reply

I admit Loretta did have an unspoken understated charm. And she DID look a little like that stripper from the beginning of the movie when he lost the three grand on fixed roulette. I liked the toilet stall comment.




Enter my contest! I need help for a new signature! Maybe I'll choose yours and you'll win a cash prize!

reply

Only other movie I ever saw actress Dimitra Arliss in was "Firefox."

Her Russian accent wasn't particularly good, but she had plenty of company in that department.

reply

why would Hooker even make the first move toward her, sexually? She was homely and rebuffed him twice, yet he pursued her
Men often want what they can't have, and he didn't seem to have many women to choose from. His stripper girlfriend wasn't much to look at, neither was his manicurist. Besides, he knew it would be a short term thing/one night stand. What did he have to lose?

reply

Yes, he was playing along in a plot to get rid of Snyder. If you recall, he was never really arrested--just brought to Polk. From that point forward, Snyder would not be a threat to Hooker or the con, since he was under the impression that Hooker was being "taken care of" by the FBI.

R.I.P., Charles Durning! You were the best! I hope you and Jack Klugman are now shooting a game of pool.



He who conquers himself is mightier than he who conquers a city.

reply

"R.I.P., Charles Durning! You were the best! I hope you and Jack Klugman are now shooting a game of pool."

Too true! The supporting cast (Harold Gould, Ray Walston, Charles Durning, Eileen Brennan, Dana Elcar and yes the aforementioned Dimitra Arliss et al) were all so good.

reply

Of course, they had to neutralize Snyder so he wouldn't ruin the whole con.

A heart can be broken, but it still keeps a-beatin' just the same.

reply

Gondorff was aware that Hooker had some past issue he was dealing with and hadn't shared with him. He must have found out that Snyder (Charles Durning) was chasing Hooker all over town. Later we learn that Gondorff had a man tailing Hooker and "watching out" for him (the same guy who shot Loretta). This guy probably warned Gondorff of the situation.

The "FBI Agents" were in on the con. I think initially Gondorff let Hooker sweat it out a bit-he let him believe that the FBI Agents were real. I believe that eventually, in a scene the audience is not privy to, Gondorff comes clean to Hooker and explains to him that the Agents are in on the con. In that same conversation, I believe they planned for Gondorff to "shoot" Hooker after the agent tells Hooker "he can leave now" as it would appear Gondorff believes Hooker has betrayed him to the FBI. Everybody in the room after Lonnegan left (including the two FBI agents) was in on the con. The only people who weren't in on the con were Snyder- the cop chasing Hooker (Charles Durning), Lonnergan and his goons.

I first saw this movie in a theater in 1973, when it first came out-I was eleven. Admittedly, it has taken several viewings for me to understand all the twists and turns of the plot. When I finally figured it all out my admiration for the film soared-the script is outstanding. In the past I had focused on the acting and the set design-now I realize what an amazing script they had to work with as well.
"Gentlemen you can't fight in here!" "This is the war room!" Dr. Strangelove

reply

Yes, I totally understand ALL of what you said. I understand that Hooker was in on the con. But think about when Snyder surprises Hooker while he's in the phone booth and hauls him into the "FBI" guys. This is where I am getting caught up in the logic of the con. Hooker was blindsided by this, just like he was when Snyder caught up with him earlier on the street. Right? I guess people could say that Hooker knew that Snyder was going to surprise him in the phone booth, but it doesn't play that way. Not at all. Think about it. It doesn't check out.

reply

I must not have answered the question well because I was aware you knew Hooker was in on the con-I don't think Hooker was initially in on his own "arrest". He had been running from Snyder for what appears to have been some time and obviously Snyder was legit. I think when Hooker was hauled by Snyder into the make-shift "FBI Office" he believed the Agents were real and didn't find out until a few days later that they were not. So, to be clear, Hooker was not initially in on his own "arrest". He believed the agents were as legit as Snyder. At some point between his "arrest" and the movie's climax he was apprised of the situation-most likely by Gondorff.

Cheers.






.

"Gentlemen you can't fight in here!" "This is the war room!" Dr. Strangelove

reply

Actually, I tend to believe that Hooker knew all along that the "FBI" guys were part of the con. Chances are, once Gondorff found out about Snyder hunting Hooker, he immediately arranged the FBI thing and told Hooker all about it. If you notice, Hooker didn't make any attempt whatsoever to flee from Snyder when he snatched him at his apartment--something completely out of character for Hooker.





"He who conquers himself is mightier than he who conquers a city"

reply

Yes, he was in on it. The FBI agent had two parts to play: get Snyder off Hooker's back so as not to ruin the con...and to then hustle Lonnigan out of Shaw's place after the "shooting".

However, the reason anyone might question if Hooker was in on it, is because they had to make it appear that Hooker wasn't in on it for us the audience.

Therefore in the end, you really might think that Hooker and Gondorf have a falling out, and that Hooker really might have ratted out Gondorf to save his own ass...setting up the surprise ending.



Whose idea was it for the word "Lisp" to have an "S" in it?

reply

Excellent reply-wish I'd written that.

"Gentlemen you can't fight in here!" "This is the war room!" Dr. Strangelove

reply

Of course. Their fake shooting at the end was supposed to be about Hooker selling out Gondorff. If he knew about the fake shooting - which he clearly did - then he would have needed to know about the fake meeting with Polk.

http://tinyurl.com/nqdpspm

reply

[deleted]

I wondered what he put in is mouth before he went. After it happened I realized they must have been the capsules of fake blood. So of course he was in on it.

I saw this movie when it came out and even at the age of 20, I didn't really grasp everything that happened. Watched it again last night, it is BRILLIANT! One of the all-around, best made movies.

reply

[deleted]

We also see in the initial grift that Hooker can play the part - to be in the know and act dumb

reply

Yes, Hooker knew what was going on. That whole scene was for Snyder's benefit to make him believe that Hooker was necessary to the FBI so he'd leave him alone.

reply