MovieChat Forums > Night Falls on Manhattan (1997) Discussion > Goofs

Goofs

posted 20 years ago by gkgk
2 replies | jump to latest

Interesting that 1,419 votes have been cast and only one comment (before mine) thus far...

As for goofs (seems to be wide-open, as the IMBd reports none), one thing I noticed is that while the defendant, Jordan Washington, was on the stand, just before he physically attacks Sean Casey, there are about three close-ups where the flag behind him show the lettering backwards on the flag. Lumet had two cameras going at once in this scene so maybe that accounts for the mirroring.

Something else, when Peggy Lindstrom, Casey's new love, picks up her Haagen Daaz, there doesn't seem to be anything in it. It's not sweating (nor does it appear with frozen condesation on the outside), as an ice cream container would do. It seems to be a little light as she picks it up (she doesn't "act" as if there is any true weight in the pint of ice cream). And, when she eats it, it looks like sour cream.

I also found the editing a little dislocated in places.

Anyone else notice any goofs?

None of this kept me from giving this movie a 10. I was riveted. Loved it. I am definitely a Lumet fan now. The special features with his commentary is excellent!

[–] BoxOfficePoison 17 years ago

I'm not a lawyer, but since Jordan Washington was convicted and sent to prison for killing the cops, rather than for the drug charges named in the warrant, it seems to me that the falsification of the warrant wouldn't necessarily exonerate him (although the falsification itself may bolster his claim of self-defense against the cops).

That aside, though, I love this movie! An intelligent, thought-provoking, US-made drama, that can also hold a viewer's interest, is definitely a treat.

[–] padzok 16 years ago

There's three issues.

Firstly, if the arrest is illegal, then you're entitled to use reasonable force to resist. For sure, it could be said that JW used excessive force, but at the very least there'd need to be a retrial, because the prosecution would have to prove a different case.

Secondly, the officers committed perjury. Obviously that casts doubt over some of the other parts of their evidence.

Thirdly, like you say, the defence would claim that the officers were using a fake warrant as part of the conspiracy to murder JW.