ViceFanMan Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 1 minute ago, Tom said: Unrealistic. Crockett was a Vice cop and had to deal with people with much more juice than Glantz. Naive to believe that it just takes a call from a pissed off celebrity suspect to get a Vice cop booted from the force. Sorry but this is science fiction. Think about what you’re saying. Everyone in Castillo’s Unit would have been terminated long before season 2 going by your logic. This is unrealistic! Crockett was a Vice cop...he usually worked with drug dealers & pimps...not high powered judges or celebrities who had political connections. You tick off a high powered person, you’re going to have consequences. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eillio Martin Imbasciati Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 Just now, ViceFanMan said: Judges, senators, and politicians in real life don’t always need physical evidence to get something done they want. They have enough power & clout to get people below them to carry out their demands & they can fabricate evidence if needed. In reality Crockett would have been in serious trouble. This is true; in life, if anyone in power wants to railroad someone, it will be done. Money talks, the wind blew and we knew, people with connections...and if the evidence there isn't enough, make some of it up. Yeah, I think Crockett dodged a bullet in this episode (but not in 'A Bullet for Crockett'). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 vor 1 Minute schrieb ViceFanMan: This is unrealistic! Crockett was a Vice cop...he usually worked with drug dealers & pimps...not high powered judges or celebrities who had political connections. You tick off a high powered person, you’re going to have consequences. You obviously do not know the series well regarding who they worked on. He often had also to deal with celebrity clients like Bill Proverbs wife or Jorgensen junior. Did eg Jorgensen senior succeed in getting Crockett terminated because he arrested his son? That’s simply ridiculous and unrealistic. Otherwise no cop could do his work properly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 2 minutes ago, Eillio Martin Imbasciati said: This is true; in life, if anyone in power wants to railroad someone, it will be done. Money talks, the wind blew and we knew, people with connections...and if the evidence there isn't enough, make some of it up. Yeah, I think Crockett dodged a bullet in this episode (but not in 'A Bullet for Crockett'). Exactly! He unrealistically dodged a bullet with Glantz. The end was just too strange & goofy. Love the episode but the end could have been done a little differently. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eillio Martin Imbasciati Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 1 minute ago, Tom said: You obviously do not know the series well regarding who they worked on. He often had also to deal with celebrity clients like Bill Proverbs wife or Jorgensen junior. Did eg Jorgensen senior succeed in getting Crockett terminated because he arrested his son? That’s simply ridiculous and unrealistic. Otherwise no cop could do his work properly. With Jorgensen Jr. & sweet Leona Proverb though there was reason for arrest; with Glantz no one wanted to talk, those who did were ignored (Crockett, I think to some extent, was given the brush-off) and the evidence was circumstantial 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 vor 2 Minuten schrieb ViceFanMan: Exactly! He unrealistically dodged a bullet with Glantz. The end was just too strange & goofy. Love the episode but the end could have been done a little differently. How? Crockett apologizing to Glantz? That would be goofy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 1 minute ago, Tom said: You obviously do not know the series well regarding who they worked on. He often had also to deal with celebrity clients like Bill Proverbs wife or Jorgensen junior. Did eg Jorgensen senior succeed in getting Crockett terminated because he arrested his son? That’s simply ridiculous and unrealistic. Otherwise no cop could do his work properly. You can insult me all you want, lol, but the truth is the truth. Were there times Crockett or OCB dealt with some politicians or celebrities...yes. But, normally or regularly no. And Proverb was not the same as Glantz. Glantz was way more politically connected than Proverb. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 vor 1 Minute schrieb Eillio Martin Imbasciati: With Jorgensen Jr. & sweet Leona Proverb though there was reason for arrest; with Glantz no one wanted to talk, those who did were ignored (Crockett, I think to some extent, was given the brush-off) and the evidence was circumstantial With Glantz there was also reason for arrest but not enough evidence. The wrong argument was that it just takes a call from a celebrity to keep a cop off and that’s unrealistic. As proven by many examples in the series too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpaul1 Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 @Tomyou can kill a person with a slap. I can quote you a famous case that happened here in France i totally believe Glantz could have sunk Crockett. known artists are generally very well connected. thus making them 'think twice before shooting' targets. if you attack without proofs an artist, it goes like a snow ball, one newspaper launches a torpedo, then a second newspaper comes in, and so on. well known artists are generally very well connected, not to say considered like a kind of saint of their own 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 1 minute ago, Tom said: With Glantz there was also reason for arrest but not enough evidence. The wrong argument was that it just takes a call from a celebrity to keep a cop off and that’s unrealistic. As proven by many examples in the series too. If the celebrity is connected right, then it lots of times does just take one phone call...that’s sadly reality, not just TV. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 vor 1 Minute schrieb ViceFanMan: You can insult me all you want, lol, but the truth is the truth. Were there times Crockett or OCB dealt with some politicians or celebrities...yes. But, normally or regularly no. And Proverb was not the same as Glantz. Glantz was way more politically connected than Proverb. Are you worried now because someone has a different opinion? I did not insult you in any way. And you do not define what truth is. Me neither. It’s just a subjective opinion. But all you say is unrealistic as I have shown with examples from other parts of the series. You can of course fantasize that a TV celebrity like a proverb is less juicy than Glantz but it is just your opinion and does not sound realistic given the pressure Proverb made on Tubbs, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eillio Martin Imbasciati Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 Just now, ViceFanMan said: You can insult me all you want, lol, but the truth is the truth. Were there times Crockett or OCB dealt with some politicians or celebrities...yes. But, normally or regularly no. And Proverb was not the same as Glantz. Glantz was way more politically connected than Proverb. I agree, Proverb was more of a guy who fit in a certain niche; he had a following, but he didn't seem quite national yet. With the Jorgensen clan, that's finance, and not everyone in the world pays attention to financial folks, or are aware of, for example, who the heck people like Ivan Boesky (Boesky beat? no, not a Smalltown Boy) or Mike Milken (Got Milken? Milken good) are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 Just now, Tom said: Are you worried now because someone has a different opinion? I did not insult you in any way. And you do not define what truth is. Me neither. It’s just a subjective opinion. But all you say is unrealistic as I have shown with examples from other parts of the series. You can of course fantasize that a TV celebrity like a proverb is less juicy than Glantz but it is just your opinion and does not sound realistic given the pressure Proverb made on Tubbs, Lol!! I’m just stating reality compared to the episode...but laughing with your insults. Proverb was not politically connected like Glantz...however he still screwed with Tubbs over something he didn’t do...let alone what Glantz would have done to Crockett for what he did do! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 vor 5 Minuten schrieb jpaul1: @Tomyou can kill a person with a slap. I can quote you a famous case that happened here in France i totally believe Glantz could have sunk Crockett. known artists are generally very well connected. thus making them 'think twice before shooting' targets. if you attack without proofs an artist, it goes like a snow ball, one newspaper launches a torpedo, then a second newspaper comes in, and so on. well known artists are generally very well connected, not to say considered like a kind of saint of their own Theoretically You can also die eating a cake. Sorry but a discussion on this level does not make sense. You know what I mean. Crockett gave him slaps to avoid visible injury as he did not lose control completely but thought about a middle variant to reach his goal. And an artist is not more dangerous to a cop than any celebrity who gets annoyed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicegirl85 Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 9 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said: Exactly! He unrealistically dodged a bullet with Glantz. The end was just too strange & goofy. Love the episode but the end could have been done a little differently. Eh, I don't know that it was unrealistic or goofy. Glantz was considered an avant-garde artiste (perhaps!) but really? someone who makes snuff films would seem to be operating in a very shady area and I would not think that seriously powerful politicians would want to be associated with the action of "going to bat" for him. Crockett performed some vigilante justice and if it had been done with the knowledge of Castillo or other superiors I feel that he may have gotten a suspension. But again I feel that Glantz was in a shaky position and would have been well-advised to lay low for some time, rather than to file a complaint about police harrassment. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 vor 1 Minute schrieb ViceFanMan: Lol!! I’m just stating reality compared to the episode...but laughing with your insults. Proverb was not politically connected like Glantz...however he still screwed with Tubbs over something he didn’t do...let alone what Glantz would have done to Crockett for what he did do! No insults here from me. I have to laugh about so much paranoia. I just see a royal highness type of guy who gets pissed when someone dares to contradict his opinion. will stop talking to you. This is a hobby forum and I don’t want to spend my time with your negative and slanderous attitude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 2 minutes ago, vicegirl85 said: Eh, I don't know that it was unrealistic or goofy. Glantz was considered an avant-garde artiste (perhaps!) but really? someone who makes snuff films would seem to be operating in a very shady area and I would not think that seriously powerful politicians would want to be associated with the action of "going to bat" for him. Crockett performed some vigilante justice and if it had been done with the knowledge of Castillo or other superiors I feel that he may have gotten a suspension. But again I feel that Glantz was in a shaky position and would have been well-advised to lay low for some time, rather than to file a complaint about police harrassment. Glantz was totally sleazy and sick...but he had several politicians and judges & people with power in his “world”...he had them in his pocket. None of them would have made it public...they would have gotten Crockett demoted or fired behind the scenes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 vor 4 Minuten schrieb vicegirl85: Eh, I don't know that it was unrealistic or goofy. Glantz was considered an avant-garde artiste (perhaps!) but really? someone who makes snuff films would seem to be operating in a very shady area and I would not think that seriously powerful politicians would want to be associated with the action of "going to bat" for him. Crockett performed some vigilante justice and if it had been done with the knowledge of Castillo or other superiors I feel that he may have gotten a suspension. But again I feel that Glantz was in a shaky position and would have been well-advised to lay low for some time, rather than to file a complaint about police harrassment. Exactly . Thanks for that reality check. Glantz was shady arthouse oerson 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 Just now, Tom said: No insults here from me. I have to laugh about so much paranoia. I just see a royal highness type of guy who gets pissed when someone dares to contradict his opinion. will stop talking to you. This is a hobby forum and I don’t want to spend my time with your negative and slanderous attitude. Lol!! I’m not angry at all...I just explain defend & stand by my statements or thoughts. But, this seems to bother you when I don’t just bow down to yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 11 minutes ago, Eillio Martin Imbasciati said: I agree, Proverb was more of a guy who fit in a certain niche; he had a following, but he didn't seem quite national yet. With the Jorgensen clan, that's finance, and not everyone in the world pays attention to financial folks, or are aware of, for example, who the heck people like Ivan Boesky (Boesky beat? no, not a Smalltown Boy) or Mike Milken (Got Milken? Milken good) are. Agreed...Proverb wasn’t connected the same way Glantz was. But, he even still messed with Tubbs. In reality Glantz would have gone after Crockett, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 Gerade eben schrieb ViceFanMan: Lol!! I’m not angry at all...I just explain defend & stand by my statements or thoughts. But, this seems to bother you when I don’t just bow down to yours. You contended twice I insulted you and that’s a lie. So stand up to it. You are the one who is bothered and started a fight for no reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViceFanMan Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 Just now, Tom said: You contended twice I insulted you and that’s a lie. So stand up to it. You are the one who is bothered and started a fight for no reason. Lol!! I only lie about my age. I just call things how they are...and people usually are loving it or hating it, but it’s usually for the same reason. Returning to the episode, and a different question...was Margo really one of the girls Glantz included in the film, or was she a lie/cover for the other two? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eillio Martin Imbasciati Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 11 minutes ago, vicegirl85 said: Eh, I don't know that it was unrealistic or goofy. Glantz was considered an avant-garde artiste (perhaps!) but really? someone who makes snuff films would seem to be operating in a very shady area and I would not think that seriously powerful politicians would want to be associated with the action of "going to bat" for him. Crockett performed some vigilante justice and if it had been done with the knowledge of Castillo or other superiors I feel that he may have gotten a suspension. But again I feel that Glantz was in a shaky position and would have been well-advised to lay low for some time, rather than to file a complaint about police harrassment. He was a painter as well though (he still makes me think of the Eric Masters character from "To Live and Die in L.A." in that regard), and I believe Miami's mayor had some of his painting. I don't know, I think he had enough influence to make some noise, although I wouldn't have minded slapping him around myself (I'm only a Vice citizen though, so I might be okay)! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 vor 1 Minute schrieb ViceFanMan: Returning to the episode, and a different question...was Margo really one of the girls Glantz included in the film, or was she a lie/cover for the other two? We will never know exactly. That’s what I love about this episode. It’s not exactly clear who was who and different options are possible around the 3 girls involved which was plotted by Glantz on purpose to conceal the kill with confusion. My perception was that Margo was the dead eyes only as Glantz said at the party. They killed Amy Rider on set and did not bother to film her eyes at this point. So they filmed it later. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eillio Martin Imbasciati Posted July 12, 2021 Report Share Posted July 12, 2021 7 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said: Lol!! I only lie about my age. I just call things how they are...and people usually are loving it or hating it, but it’s usually for the same reason. Returning to the episode, and a different question...was Margo really one of the girls Glantz included in the film, or was she a lie/cover for the other two? I think Margot was a cover, but I'm not 100% on that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.