MovieChat Forums > Sicario (2015) Discussion > Why choose Kate?

Why choose Kate?

posted 7 years ago by fountainhead (323)
6 replies | jump to latest

I get that this is fiction, but doesn't it seem kinda strange for a highly illegal CIA op to bring a couple of FBI agents on board who are uncomfortable with their way of doing things? You're telling me they couldn't have found a pair of feds who were just as gung-ho about bending the rules and executing cartel members? I'm sure there are plenty and they would have fit in better and everything would have gone smoothly (by their standards). Why pick someone who is a flight risk like Kate and her partner?

[–] Renovatio (2990) 7 years ago

They wanted a patsy... Kate fit the bill, even Reggie, her partner, didn't...

The last thing they want is someone going Bruce Willis on them...

[–] fountainhead (323) 6 years ago

They wouldn't need a patsy if, like I suggested above, they instead recruited an FBI agent of the same mentality as their team; someone who would willingly cross the border, carry out summary executions and sign whatever papers need signing if it "gets the job done" fighting the cartel. That should not be hard to find, given the type of people attracted to law enforcement.

Instead, they picked the idealistic, naive Kate who needed to be threatened at the point of a gun to keep her mouth shut.

[–] Renovatio (2990) 6 years ago

But the idealistic Kate works betrer as the innocent, but heroic idealist avatar for the audience... It allows us to see the events subjectively from her perspective... This is key to exploring the key themes of the movie... This isn't a G.I. Joe altogether movie...

The disdain CIA has for FBI is well known (they think of them as mall cops)... The second scenario would also imply FBI being in on the team actively and that they would have a say... Even Kate at the end realises the power she had and threatens going to the relavant channels, but is only cowed by phsycial violence as well as the disorientation and isolation of being in over her head...

[–] Tmac (11) 6 years ago

Thought the same thing. Call that a plot hole. Bring in an honest cop when there's millions of corrupt ones. Only for dramatic reasons.

[–] KBiker (985) 6 years ago

Not a plot hole, no matter how you interpret it. Look up the meaning of plot hole. Kate was there, as you said, for dramatic reasons.

[–] mobocracy (892) 5 years ago

On paper she was a good choice -- clean record, good tactical skills, and she provides someone with no obvious bias/history of being a gung-ho paramilitary thug. It was only once the operation was in motion that she got so much conscience about what was actually going on.

I think where they screwed up was not giving her the speech she got from her boss later in the film at the beginning, explaining that this wasn't some locally driven task force, but this had come down from way on high and had the full buy-in of people way at the top. This might have assuaged her guilt enough to not be a problem.

They also screwed up by not zeroing out her partner from day 1. They didn't like that guy from the first meeting, yet they let him keep hanging around and keep fueling Kate's conscience and questions.

Mostly I found her kind of plausible in the narrative, but obviously the need to drive some kind of dramatic tension pushed it over the edge. Plus if the operation has so much approval from on high, why have the FBI there at all on the ground? Just liaison with the FBI in official meetings. If they need dishonest FBI signed paperwork, just get that after, you don't literally need an FBI agent on the team.