I mean Shaker gave back Sean. Tom said that he would pay 10 times as much if the kidnapper had kept his word. So why did Tom trap Shaker if Shaker gave back Sean? I mean he even said that if he (Shaker) gave back Sean, he would withdraw the bounty and presumably drop all charges. If Tom got his son back thanks to Shaker why did he trap Shaker?
shareDid you actually watch this movie?? Shaker KIDNAPPED Tom's son! He didn't help get Sean...He was responsible for Sean being gone in the first place. I'd have, at the VERY least, called the police when I realized who Shaker was. And he planned to kill Sean. Who's to say he wouldn't have done this a other rich families? He most certainly didn't deserve a reward.
You should go back and watch the movie again. You must have missed some key plot points.
But Tom said that if he gave back Sean he would withdraw the bounty and drop all charges. Am I right? If Shaker gave up Sean why didn't he drop all the charges?
shareIt was Tom being the great businessman that he is and out-bargaining Shaker. First thing Tom did was get Shaker away from his family by demanding they go to the bank by selling that going to the bank was in Shaker's best interests. Once they were on their way to the bank and his family was safe, Tom knew he had to stop Shaker because of the possibility of "Jimmy Shaker Day" when he might kidnap and murder his son in the future. Not only that, Tom probably felt that once he helped Shaker escape with the money that Shaker would kill him. Tom didn't have anything to lose at that point.
Promise me, no matter how hopeless things get, keep on trying, OK? Keep coming chin-up, OK?
If Shaker left the country as he wanted, how would he kidnap Sean again?
shareI think that Tom told the kidnappers that he would withdraw the charges and the bounty if they returned just to make them comply. After his son was returned, Mullen obviously thought all the kidnappers were dead until Shaker inadvertently revealed himself to be the kidnapper at the apartment, so Mullen still wanted Shaker to pay for kidnapping Sean. I thought it was pretty obvious.
shareAlso it's not that Shaker returned Sean out of kindness. He returned him just to make it look like he killed the kidnappers and saved Sean. Which was not the case. And whose to say that he wouldn't kidnap Sean again in the future and whose to say that he wouldn't have done this to more rich families. Remember that before he realized who Shaker was, he said he would have paid 10 times as much if he had assurances that the kidnappers would keep their word? So if Shaker had returned Sean only out of kindness, I believe he would have withdrawn the bounty and drop all charges.
share