MovieChat Forums > Heat (1995) Discussion > Plot hole....

Plot hole....

posted 8 years ago by jgt-12830
16 replies | jump to latest

How did Waingro know the exact time and date they would be robbing the bank? They show Waingro going to Van Zant and Waingro tells Van Zant about the bank robbery and Van Zants assistant Benny (Henry Rollins) calls up the detective at the office and tells him this and the detective alerts Hanna and his team and then they drive there and catch these crooks coming out of the bank. That's ridiculous, a total plot hole. And even if Waingro knew the exact date and time, why the hell would McCauley keep the same date and time if he knew that Waingro knew it. He HAD to know Waingro would rat him out.

reply

[–] justxme 8 years ago

Do you remember the scene when the crew is waiting at the diner and Trejo calls Neil from the payphone, telling him he's being followed by the police?

Waingro and Hugh Benny went to Trejos house.There they took Trejos wife hostage and made him tell where Neil is. Trejo told them they are going to rob a bank. Then Waingro made Trejo drive to a payphone to call Neil and to see if the bank heist will still happen. When Trejo confirms that the heist will indeed take place, Hugh Benny (who is a police informer) calls the police to report the robbery.

Here's a deleted scene they probably should have left in the movie:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ6Sc-YLoS4

reply

[–] The LA Baker (971) 8 years ago

Here's a deleted scene they probably should have left in the movie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ6Sc-YLoS4

Yup. They really should have left that in.

reply

[–] BourbonKing (5787) 8 years ago

Justxme answered your question, but for me the big plothole from this same situation was how did Vincent Hannah's crew trace Benny's call? Benny wasn't naive enough to make the phone call about the bank heist from his own home because that's basically what Vincent implicates when they arrest Benny. That makes no sense considering that Benny is suppose to be Van Zandt's "cleaner". These type of men know all the ins and outs when dealing with both the underworld and law enforcement.

reply

[–] Martoto (5180) 7 years ago

IIRC, I think that Benny had actually put someone else up to tipping off the LAPD. I'm sure when the cop give the message to Hannah's guys in the Major Crimes Unit, it's a different name that he says left the message.

The CI who made the call must have given up who passed the tip on to him.

reply

[–] BourbonKing (5787) 7 years ago

I remember the call to the HQ, but don't recall hearing the conversation. Even if Benny used a 3rd party, did that idiot call from his home?

reply

[–] Martoto (5180) 7 years ago

A CI is someone already known to the police. If he gave the tip to his contact in, say, the narcotics or vice squad, he may not be expecting homicide to roll back on the tip off so zealously. Or expected that the cops would capture McAuley's gang and the original source of the tip would not be put under such scrutiny.

Actually. The cop does say Benny's name. But like I said. He expected them to be captured. Not for it to come back to him.

reply

[–] BourbonKing (5787) 7 years ago

Whomever it was it just felt like a convenient plot device to get Hannah's crew to the bank heist in time for best cops vs robbers shoot ever filmed, and to turn Neil McCauley's game plan sideways.

reply

[–] Martoto (5180) 7 years ago

All plot devices are a convenience. If it's an unrealistic or gratuitous convenience, that's another thing.

CIs give tips. If the cops make a score off of it, fine. If the CI is lying then it's a problem.

But they couldn't predict the carnage that ensued. So why would they think it such a bad idea to phone in the tip.

reply

[–] BourbonKing (5787) 7 years ago

I am saying that its unrealistic and gratuitous because it is extremely convenient that Hannah's crew got the information within an hour of the heist. This was not a good plot device because it extremely vague in its origin, and even if it was what you speculated it to be the film did not portray it in the movie.

A plot device can be subtle or it can be major but it should always tie into the narrative web that progresses the story forward.

reply

[–] Martoto (5180) 7 years ago

It's only remotely vague if you've been ignoring the Van Sant/Waingro subplot for the entire film.

Van Sant hasn't heard anything from McAuley following the bonds fiasco (because he's busy planning the bank job) and he cannot stand it any longer. He gets Benny to try and get to him first. Waingro, who has been looking for work, has something on McAuley they can use. They apprehend Trejo as he is making his way to the job and get the information about the job that McAuley's crew are doing that day.

What's unrealistic about that? When were they realistically supposed to get the information? When is Van Zant supposed to, realistically, try to go after McAuley? When is Trejo, realistically, supposed to be fingered by Waingro? (maybe when he's broke cover to go do a bank job he's been laying low in anticipation of.)

reply

[–] BourbonKing (5787) 7 years ago

Interjecting the Van Zandt/Waingro plot into your argument does not explain away the vagueness of Hannah conveniently getting a call about the bank heist within an hour of it happening.

My point still stands that it doesn't make sense that Benny bumbled the hot tip call and exposed himself in the process. He's got to be one of the most incompetent cartel henchmen in movie history.

reply

[–] Martoto (5180) 7 years ago

It's not vague if you follow the plot. If the timeline and the sequence of events leading up to the tip being phoned in can't be discerned from the plot of the movie, where is it supposed to be taken from?

How exactly did he bumble it? The tip source is only an issue because the job turned into a massive battle. If Chris doesn't see the cops before getting in the car, Benny and Van Zant are home free.

Trejo spells out the betrayal all pretty clearly to Neil later on. So how you think it and the timing is vague is a mystery.

reply

[–] BourbonKing (5787) 7 years ago

You're not following what my original complaint. I'm not disputing that Benny tipped off Hannah, I'm disputing why he's so incompetent that the phone call got traced to him. THAT'S what the movie tells us, not what you speculated earlier.

He bumbled it because he got caught, which in turn would expose Van Zandt's cartel connections since he cleans their money using bearer bonds which Hannah knows all about due to the first heist in the movie.

Let's agree to disagree and that Benny is a dumbass. Capiche?

reply

[–] Martoto (5180) 7 years ago

CIs (confidential informer) are people already known to police. Benney is a serial informer. That's why the tip is given credence. He gave his name so that it would carry weight. It wasn't because the call got traced that they know it was Benny.

The issue of how Benney got the tip only came up because the job turned into a firefight and Hanna was determined to nail McAuley after it.

reply

[–] BourbonKing (5787) 7 years ago

"He gave his name" to the cops thinking it would help his criminal boss Van Zandt? Plot hole

reply

[–] Martoto (5180) 7 years ago

Benney hasn't committed a crime here.

There's no connection between Benney's tip and Van Zant's operation. Unless you think McAuley would rat on Van Zant if captured. What would McAuley know about Van Zant's cartel dealings anyway?

The cops are already investigating the truck heist at the beginning of the film. If Van Zant was under any suspicion for anything then it would have been from that job where his bonds were stolen and for which he is claiming the insurance.

I think you've misinterpreted the violent contempt that Hanna shows towards Benney because he's a rat as proof that what he did, calling in the tip, was somehow recklessly incriminating.

reply