Episode #89 "Deliver Us From Evil"

[fakespyder]

23 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said:

Sorry...but reality is Hackman had a gun & tried to shoot first. That was the point of showing it.

I can see the argument you're making and yes, you see the gun (at the end). But I don't recall him trying to shoot first. Even in reality that is never shown. It might have happened, it might not have. What you're suggesting is a theory just as valid as any other and only partially supported by reality.

Edited February 16, 2021 by fakespyder

[Robbie C.]

1 hour ago, ViceFanMan said:

Again...we don’t need to see Hackman pulling a gun. The whole point was to purposely not show that at first...for the split second shock of thinking Crockett might have shot Hackman in cold blood. Then we’re purposely shown that wasn’t the case...then we are shown Hackman’s gun & that he’d tried to pull it & shoot Crockett first.

But, Crockett wasn’t stupid, nor crazy...yet (that came in the next few episodes ). He saw, and was probably expecting, the gun...as Hackman would never be unarmed at any time! No matter how many ways we try to “cut” it, nor how many ways we want to beat the proverbial dead-horse...we can’t get around the fact Hackman had a gun, it was shown in his hand, and that’s why Crockett ultimately fired...in self defense.

I totally get that you & some others like, want it to be, and would have preferred the shoot, in-cold-blood, for revenge scenario. That’s totally cool for personal preference!  

But, like it or not, we can’t get around the fact that the network changed that & went with the self defense version instead. Otherwise, again, there’d be no purpose or reason to show & include Hackman’s gun. Any other “chosen” interpretation or ideas are just what-if or alternate scenarios...as interesting or cool as they might be. 

Sorry, but based on your own "we have to see it in the show for it to be canon" standard you can't say Hackman tried to shoot Sonny. I broke the scene down for you almost second by second, and there is ZERO indication Hackman fired or did anything. If you wish to believe he did...there's nothing wrong with that. But you can't insist your position is show canon when there is nothing in the scene as released that shows it.

Show canon based on the scene breakdown is Sonny fired a shot and Hackman is dead. There was a gun close by his hand when the shot panned back (only one finger touching the gun in the first glimpse we get of it). Did Hackman produce it from somewhere or did Sonny drop it there? We don't know, because the scene doesn't tell us one way or the other. The scene breakdown also shows there was no change in Sonny's expression before or after he fired the shot.

I get that you and some others really want this to be Sonny being the faster gun and shooting Hackman as soon as his pistol clears leather. But the reality of the scene as shot is we don't know that. We also don't know if Sonny just shot him and dropped the gun there. Your chosen interpretation is as valid as anyone else's based on your concept of show canon. But it's still an interpretation.

Why show Hackman's gun in the aftermath? To satisfy the network. To create a sense of ambiguity about the scene. I tend to think it was in no small part to satisfy the network, but it was done in such a way that it created more questions than it answered. Which, visually, might have suited them better.

[Robbie C.]

10 minutes ago, fakespyder said:

I can see the argument you're making and yes, you see the gun (at the end). But I don't recall him trying to shoot first. Even in reality that is never shown. It might have happened, it might not have. What you're suggesting is a theory just as valid as any other and only partially supported by reality.

Hackman didn't shoot. When I broke the scene down earlier I was actually watching the DVD and using the timestamps. Hackman doesn't do anything we see once he eases back in the deck chair and closes his eyes. The scene focus remains on Sonny after that, aside from a pan-over showing Hackman in the chair with a bullet hole through the book over his heart and his hand just touching the gun on the side table. And by just touching I mean the end of the butt is resting on his index finger. It looks like they repositioned it a bit for the longer shot at the very end of the episode, but it's hard to tell.

[ViceFanMan]

21 minutes ago, fakespyder said:

I can see the argument you're making and yes, you see the gun (at the end). But I don't recall him trying to shoot first. Even in reality that is never shown. It might have happened, it might not have. What you're suggesting is a theory just as valid as any other and only partially supported by reality.

 

8 minutes ago, Robbie C. said:

Hackman didn't shoot. When I broke the scene down earlier I was actually watching the DVD and using the timestamps. Hackman doesn't do anything we see once he eases back in the deck chair and closes his eyes. The scene focus remains on Sonny after that, aside from a pan-over showing Hackman in the chair with a bullet hole through the book over his heart and his hand just touching the gun on the side table. And by just touching I mean the end of the butt is resting on his index finger. It looks like they repositioned it a bit for the longer shot at the very end of the episode, but it's hard to tell.

Hackman didn’t shoot, true...as Crockett didn’t give him time to shoot! That was the whole point of showing Hackman had a gun, was that he attempted to pull it out and shoot...but Crockett saw what he was doing and got off his shot first. 

Again...that was the whole point of making you think for just a second that Sonny had just outright shot him. You didn’t hear nor see Hackman’s shot. But then you’re shown Hackman did have a gun in-hand, and Crockett was able to shoot him first...before he got a shot off. Otherwise there literally would be no purpose or point for Hackman’s gun! 

Again...no matter how much “we” want it to have been in cold blood, the network & writers ultimately did not go with that scenario. They chose to go with & show the self defense one...however, Crockett still got to take Hackman out once and for all. 

[fakespyder]

ViceFanMan

You make a convincing argument, I'll give you that.

I still lean toward Sonny just shooting him but you've shaken my resolve a bit.

[Mr. Vigilante]

To be honest, I never even noticed Hackman had a gun upon my first viewing.  I can remember being so wrapped up in the fact Sonny tracked him down and shot him that I didn't really pay attention to the camera shot after.  I was more or less cheering for Sonny.  That said, I don't remember any indication that Hackman was a threat at that point.  He didn't need a weapon, because he thought Sonny would "follow procedure".  Sonny jumped in head-first to Mr. Vigilante land at this point!

Edited February 16, 2021 by Mr. Vigilante

[Robbie C.]

9 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said:

 

Hackman didn’t shoot, true...as Crockett didn’t give him time to shoot! That was the whole point of showing Hackman had a gun, was that he attempted to pull it out and shoot...but Crockett saw what he was doing and got off his shot first. 

Again...that was the whole point of making you think for just a second that Sonny had just outright shot him. You didn’t hear nor see Hackman’s shot. But then you’re shown Hackman did have a gun in-hand, and Crockett was able to shoot him first...before he got a shot off. Otherwise there literally would be no purpose or point for Hackman’s gun! 

Again...no matter how much “we” want it to have been in cold blood, the network & writers ultimately did not go with that scenario. They chose to go with & show the self defense one...however, Crockett still got to take Hackman out once and for all. 

Once again you're making assumptions that are not supported by what we see in the episode. Before, during, and after Crockett's shot he doesn't react. His eyes don't widen. He doesn't even blink. His point of aim never shifts, and he doesn't react after the shot except to say "Wrong." You say that's sarcasm, but Crockett doesn't look or sound sarcastic (and the series showed him that way enough times we should know).

Again, no matter how much "we" want it to have been some Western "he pulled on me and I shot first" scenario, the scene just doesn't show that. The scene is, as I've pointed out and demonstrated, ambiguous. The gun is produced after the fact, and isn't even in Hackman's grasp.

 

[Robbie C.]

9 minutes ago, Mr. Vigilante said:

To be honest, I never even noticed Hackman had a gun upon my first viewing.  I can remember being so wrapped up in the fact Sonny tracked him down and shot him that I didn't really pay attention to the camera shot after.  I was more or less cheering for Sonny.  That said, I don't remember any indication that Hackman was a threat at that point.  He didn't need a weapon, because he thought Sonny would "follow procedure".  Sonny jumped in head-first to Mr. Vigilante land at this point!

He wasn't a threat. He was smug, satisfied with his arrangement with the locals, and thought he had Sonny down. The cross rattled him for a moment, but only for a moment. The last we see of him alive, he's reclining in his deck chair with his eyes closed (or at least fully slitted) and not looking at Sonny at all. The shot then cuts back to Sonny, and the shaking in his hand is gone.

[ViceFanMan]

10 minutes ago, fakespyder said:

ViceFanMan

You make a convincing argument, I'll give you that.

I still lean toward Sonny just shooting him but you've shaken my resolve a bit.

 

I’m not trying to “destroy” or “shake” anyone’s wants or wishes for the episode...I’m sorry if I’ve upset anyone. I’m just going by what is there, shown, and portrayed. We can’t get around that. There would be no purpose for Hackman’s gun if it was an in cold blood shooting. 

9 minutes ago, Mr. Vigilante said:

To be honest, I never even noticed Hackman had a gun upon my first viewing.  I can remember being so wrapped up in the fact Sonny tracked him down and shot him that I didn't really pay attention to the camera shot after.  I was more or less cheering for Sonny.  That said, I don't remember any indication that Hackman was a threat at that point.  He didn't need a weapon, because he thought Sonny would "follow procedure".  Sonny jumped in head-first to Mr. Vigilante land at this point!

Hackman would never be unarmed...he viewed anyone & everyone as a possible “threat”. Even if he thought Crockett would follow procedure...in his mind that still gave him a way to take Crockett out—hence the gun. But, Crockett knew what he was doing and shot him first. 

1 minute ago, Robbie C. said:

Once again you're making assumptions that are not supported by what we see in the episode. Before, during, and after Crockett's shot he doesn't react. His eyes don't widen. He doesn't even blink. His point of aim never shifts, and he doesn't react after the shot except to say "Wrong." You say that's sarcasm, but Crockett doesn't look or sound sarcastic (and the series showed him that way enough times we should know).

Again, no matter how much "we" want it to have been some Western "he pulled on me and I shot first" scenario, the scene just doesn't show that. The scene is, as I've pointed out and demonstrated, ambiguous. The gun is produced after the fact, and isn't even in Hackman's grasp.

 

I’m sorry, but the gun was in Hackman’s hand/grasp. That was the point...to show he was armed and had attempted to shoot Crockett first. 

There’s no “John Wayne/western” thing at all...true. It’s “darker” than that. It’s just flat out shown in the scene that Crockett fired once he saw Hackman had a gun and tried to shoot. Again...that’s the point of the gun. If it was the shooting in cold blood, there’d be no purpose or reason to show Hackman’s gun.

We can try to take things & twist them into what we want or would have preferred multiple different ways...but it doesn’t make them anymore true. They just aren’t so...it isn’t what happened in the episode. Again, I’m not against those that would have preferred the revenge/in cold blood idea...but whether I or anyone else likes it or not, that’s not what happened or was shown in the episode. 

[Glades]

Several issues are overlapping in this discussions:

1) Can it actually be self-defense of Sonny if Sonny tracks down Hackmann, points a gun at Hackmann, Hackmann in turn pulls a gun, and Sonny subsequently kills him?

I would intuitivly say no. And I really would like to understand why some see it differently. How exactly they define "self-defense"? And my next question would be, for what purpose did Sonny seek out Hackmann? What did he want to do? Bust Hackmann, shoot him, talk to him?

 

2) The key problem with the interpretation of this scene, in my opinion, is the fact that apparently the network did not want to show vigilante justice.

So the main question is, did the producers show the gun in Hackmann's hand only because of pressure from the network and against what they actually wanted to show or did the producers, like the network, really want to show an ambiguous situation (which was quite typical for MV)?

In the first case, we can simply ignore the gun in interpreting the scene. Because the gun shouldn´t be there at all. In the second case: read up here in the thread! There are many interesting thoughts on this.

I tend to the first case. Actually mainly because I was like Mr. Vigilante, I didn't see Hackmann's gun. Not at all. I only read here in the forum that it was there. Now of course I do see it, the scene is on my DVD too. But it feels completely wrong and out of place. Which usually doesn't happen to me with MV.

 

3) There are two possible comments from MV and DJ about this scene.

The first comment is from MV himself: In "Borrasca" there is a clear case of self-justice. And everything points to Castillo being the killer. Even if, typical for MV, it is not shown directly. Is this supposed to be an after-the-fact justification for Sonny's act?

In "Nash Bridges," a clear act of self-justice by Nash is shown most directly: a man kills Nash's colleague. Nash pursues the man, confronts him, the man gives up. And the man says that he has achieved everything he wanted. He's going to be famous. He doesn't care if it's on the outside or in prison. Nash then kills him without the man being any threat to him anymore. Period. In this case, the camera shows everything very clearly.

I found this a very brutal scene and always wondered if it was meant to be a commentary on Sonny and Hackmann. Of course, it doesn't have to be.

 

My original question yesterday was in fact about what exactly is self-defense and not whether Sonny acted in self-defense or not...

 

Edited February 16, 2021 by Glades

[vicegirl85]

Glades, I agree.  Over the years I've gone back and forth in my mind about this (not that it consumes every waking moment, LOL).  

If it actually comes down to a question of self-defense, though...

Sonny already has his gun out, aimed, and (possibly) cocked or whatever needed to be ready to shoot.  He's in an advantageous position, compared to Hackman.  If Hackman does have a gun on him (and I tend to feel he'd always want to be prepared), it seems to me he's not in a very good position to shoot first. 

Sonny is ready to let Hackman have his chance, mano a mano; Hackman refuses.   He's smugly self-assured and certain that Crockett won't shoot him.  Hackman doesn't care about anyone else but himself, so he lacks insight into Sonny's true state of mind.  Sonny hunted him down and aimed his gun--not really in cold blood but in a desperate, knowing betrayal of his oath as a police officer, because he wants to eliminate the man who killed Caitlin and his unborn child after successfully tricking Sonny into getting him released from prison.   I think Sonny didn't care if he lived or died at this point, but he definitely wanted Hackman dead (this is my interpretation, although I'm not necessarily arguing the script tells us so).

For a moment, it seems that Sonny might change his mind about taking his own vengeance (when his hand shakes).  Ultimately, he doesn't change his mind.  He does what he came to do, and he shot first (even if Hackman drew a gun on him, he never shot it).

From Sonny's position, he was prepared and had the advantage, even if Hackman did pull a gun on him (which we didn't see).  Whatever it was, I can't see that it was self-defense on Sonny's part.

[RedDragon86]

13 hours ago, ViceFanMan said:

I see what you’re saying...but like it or not, Hackman pulling the gun makes it justified for Crockett. In the real world...who knows? But in MV-world, the aspect of showing Hackman had a gun & tried to pull it first, shows self defense for Crockett. 

Sorry...but reality is Hackman had a gun & tried to shoot first. That was the point of showing it. Maybe originally they were going to have Crockett shoot him unarmed...but ultimately they chose not to do that, & went with the self defense idea instead. Like it or not, that’s “reality” for the episode & MV. Anything else is just supposition, what-ifs, or alternate ideas/scenarios. 

I think we did see the original version with a gun just placed in his hand, I mean Hackman was laying back with his eyes closed, he wasn't in a threatening position.

I fully respect your view but I think it was just gun placement, because the producers (Wolf, Brams?) might of thought the audience might have not liked Sonny turning wrong side of the law.

It was similar to what happened in Lethal Weapon ll with that controversial, deleted scene where Riggs kills 2 goons with a chain, choking him to death and slamming they others head with a car door, pretty brutal. Richard Donner said fans might not like to see him do that so he took it out of theatrical release. 

Edited February 16, 2021 by RedDragon86

[ViceFanMan]

34 minutes ago, RedDragon86 said:

I think we did see the original version with a gun just placed in his hand, I mean Hackman was laying back with his eyes closed, he wasm't in a threatening position.

I fully respect your view but I think it was just gun placement, because the producers (Wolf, Brams?) might of thought the audience might have not liked Sonny turning wrong side of the law.

It was similar to what happened in Lethal Weapon ll with that controversial, deleted scene where Riggs kills 2 goons with a chain, choking him to death and slamming they others head with a car door, pretty brutal. Richard Donner said fans might not like to see him do that so he took it out of theatrical release. 

There was only one version, and that was with the gun in Hackman’s hand. It was never “placed” or planted there later or by anyone else. Hackman was psycho, but he wasn’t dumb. He wasn’t going to just yank his gun out in some obvious, wildman manner...he was going to have it secretly hidden in-hand off to the side—under magazines I think. But Crockett still saw it as he tried to use it/pull it out. That was the whole point of ultimately showing us Hackman had the gun. Again, if they had gone with the in cold blood scenario there’d be no purpose for Hackman’s gun. 

I know that supposedly originally the idea was to have Crockett shoot Hackman out of revenge, in cold blood. But, like it or not the producers/network made them change it to have the gun. I think they didn’t want the idea of vigilante justice.

But, regardless of what the “original” idea for the episode was...that idea was never done. It never came to be. We have to ultimately go with what was done & shown in the episode...even if some want or wish it to have been the other way. 

Edited February 16, 2021 by ViceFanMan

[Robbie C.]

@vicegirl85, Sonny was using a Smith & Wesson 645...a semi-automatic with a double action/single action mechanism. What that means is the first shot can often come with the hammer down (it doesn't need to be cocked) and subsequent shots are fired with the hammer back (thanks to the slide). The safety is off in the scene, so he can fire that first double-action shot at any time. Speed's almost the same..the only real difference is the trigger pull.

I've watched this scene (all four minutes of it) about fifteen times in the last day or so. Sonny's hand stops shaking after Hackman breaks eye contact with him and sinks back in the deck chair (closing his eyes and grinning his smug little grin). Sonny's facial expression does not change from that moment until after he says "Wrong" and lowers the 645. The gun is NOT in Hackman's gasp when we first see it. It's mostly resting on the side table, with perhaps an inch of the butt (down around the magazine well) in contact with his index finger. It's angled up and away from him, and his left arm (Hackman was left handed) is at full extension. Also of note, the book hasn't moved much from the position we last saw it (over Hackman's chest). At most it slipped down a bit, but was not displaced to either side. In a bit of a goof, the gun is repositioned in the final shot of Sonny walking away, making it look more like it was in Hackman's hand...but the first establishing shot makes it very clear he was not gripping the weapon. To claim he was only reveals a misunderstanding of firearms.

I'm sorry if some people are uncomfortable with an ambiguous ending like this, but Vice was always about the grays and not black and white. We can say Sonny acted in self-defense (very doubtful based on the initial image of the gun) or we can say that he didn't. But the episode does NOT make it clear one way or the other. It's the ultimate ambiguous ending for a show that loved to hand us these. Given the changes in gun position between two shots, I'm inclined to think it was placed there to placate the network. That is what is shown in the episode. We do not see Hackman produce the gun while he's alive (and are never shown him even looking at Sonny after he leans back in his chair). We are not shown Sonny reacting to a threat of any kind. We are shown him shooting and saying "Wrong" with no change in expression. We are then shown a roughly cut set of frames with Sonny leaving the shot and then a jump to his back as he's walking away. The shot then turns to a dead Hackman....book barely disturbed and with a gun just in contact with his index finger (not gripped in his hand). The switch to the long shot changes the position of Hackman's gun, but it's not how we first see it. That's the visual record...totally open to interpretation but with the "out" of a gun near Hackman so one interpretation can be self-defense.

TL:DR - The scene does not show Sonny acting in self-defense, but it creates a window for that interpretation. It also doesn't make it clear Sonny simply gunned him down, although again it creates that window given how the gun is placed and the fact that it feels like an afterthought in the scene. Those are the facts as presented on the screen. If you're not comfortable with it...then Vice accomplished its mission.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Robbie C.
Clarifying

[RedDragon86]

A fan visiting the location in 2014 

 

[ViceFanMan]

I totally understand that some want it to be the original idea of shooting in cold blood, and yes MV had a lot of “gray” in the episodes. 

But, again like it or not the original idea was not done. Regardless of the model of gun Hackman had, or how hidden it was under the book or magazines or whatever...the point was he eventually tried to pull it out enough to shoot Crockett off guard. But, at some point...Crockett saw this and fired first. This was the point of ultimately showing us as viewers he had a gun & Crockett did not end up shooting him in cold blood.

This part is my opinion or theory...but it sort of appears to me that it might have been some kind of a compromise between the producers & the network. If the original idea was to have Crockett shoot him in cold blood, but the network said no...then they agreed to let us think for a split second he had shot Hackman that way, then we’re ultimately shown he didn’t, as Hackman had the gun.

I’m not saying either way should have been done, or I’m glad or not happy with either way...I’m just going with what ultimately was done & shown in the episode...regardless of what I wished or wanted done.

[ViceFanMan]

3 minutes ago, RedDragon86 said:

A fan visiting the location in 2014 

 

I think I’ve seen this before.  

[Robbie C.]

3 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said:

I totally understand that some want it to be the original idea of shooting in cold blood, and yes MV had a lot of “gray” in the episodes. 

But, again like it or not the original idea was not done. Regardless of the model of gun Hackman had, or how hidden it was under the book or magazines or whatever...the point was he eventually tried to pull it out enough to shoot Crockett off guard. But, at some point...Crockett saw this and fired first. This was the point of ultimately showing us as viewers he had a gun & Crockett did not end up shooting him in cold blood.

This is never shown, either. You continually contend Hackman pulled his gun, but they do not show us that. Ever. They show us the aftermath, but not the act. They don't even show Crockett reacting in any way. His expression is unchanged the entire time they focus on him until he lowers his own gun. That is what we're shown.

We all know DJ has great facial reactions. His eyes could have widened. He could have shifted in some way. There are any number of non-verbal cues he could have used to show Hackman did something. But he doesn't. Again, that's what we're shown. Like it or not, we are given NO indication Hackman pulled a gun. Zero. I'm happy to be proven wrong if you can point to a part in the scene prior to Crockett's shot I might have missed that shows either the gun coming out or Sonny's expression changing.

Like Red Dragon, I think the gun was added after the fact to keep the network happy. It doesn't really fit the scene (as demonstrated by the number of people here who didn't even notice it the first time they saw the episode), and the fact that it changes positions (combined with the jerky editing just before we see it) is a further indicator. Maybe Hackman pulled it. Maybe Sonny realized what he'd done and staged a crime scene. Either view is an interpretation because the episode doesn't show us one way or the other. Perfect ambiguity...perfect Vice gray ending.

[ViceFanMan]

The gun in Hackman’s hand is to show us he’d tried to pull it.

 It very well may have been added to appease the network. But the fact is...they added it! We can’t get around that no matter how much you might want to. 

 No matter how many different ways we try to twist it or make it into something else, or how many different ways we try to split the proverbial hairs, we can’t get around the fact that they added the gun scene there to show that Sonny shot him in self-defense. 

 I know that there are  those who wanted it to be the original or other way, I get that. But no matter how we try to turn it back into that original idea, it just isn’t there. They ultimately did not do that.  We have to acknowledge that even if we don’t like or want to. 

(PS: Confused emojis don’t make it any less true. )

Edited February 7, 2022 by ViceFanMan

[Adrian321]

On 2/16/2021 at 9:24 PM, ViceFanMan said:

The gun in Hackman’s hand is to show us he’d tried to pull it.

 It very well may have been added to appease the network. But the fact is...they added it! We can’t get around that no matter how much you might want to. 

 No matter how many different ways we try to twist it or make it into something else, or how many different ways we try to split the proverbial hairs, we can’t get around the fact that they added the gun scene there to show that Sonny shot him in self-defense. 

 I know that there are  those who wanted it to be the original or other way, I get that. But no matter how we try to turn it back into that original idea, it just isn’t there. They ultimately did not do that.  We have to acknowledge that even if we don’t like or want to. 

(PS: Confused emojis don’t make it any less true. )

Them putting the gun in Hackman's hand was a bad idea, especially of what happened in the next 3 episodes. The "Self-defence" is just a stupid regulation in the show's policy, and I consider the gun scene to be a "goof" like any other in the series. For me, it just doesn't make sense for Crockett to say "Wrong" to Hackman's final comment "I'm sure as hell the same way you couldn't let an innocent man be executed, that you can't shoot an unarmed man". The gun is simply a stupid goof, that can't even be considered otherwise, and I just explained.

This episode could've been "perfect" if it was not for this stupid decision. While most fans, might not even notice the first time watching this masterpiece, it's cannon that it was there........ 

If it wasn't for that stupid gun, the Burnett saga would actually be more "Credible" in the eyes of the fans that did not enjoy that part so much (even if I do). It would have depicted Sonny as...... half-broken, angry, bitter and make the amnesia story more in tone with the context of when and how it happened in the show.

Edited February 18, 2021 by Adrian321
error

[fakespyder]

1 hour ago, Adrian321 said:

If it wasn't for that stupid gun, the Burnett saga would actually be more "Credible" in the eyes of the fans that did not enjoy that part so much (even if I do). It would have depicted Sonny as...... half-broken, angry, bitter and make the amnesia story more in tone with the context of when and how it happened in the show.

Good point Adrian321.

When Sonny loses his memory he'd be more inclined to believe he's a criminal if he'd already crossed a line that had caused internal conflict. Whether it was Sonny gunning down Hackman or self defence, Deliver us From Evil is a turning point for Sonny.

It left him primed to want to forget his past. Not just because of the grief over the loss of his wife and child but over his own actions.

If you had amnesia, it would be easier to believe you were a criminal if you actually felt like one beforehand.

[Adrian321]

13 minutes ago, fakespyder said:

Good point Adrian321.

When Sonny loses his memory he'd be more inclined to believe he's a criminal if he'd already crossed a line that had caused internal conflict. Whether it was Sonny gunning down Hackman or self defence, Deliver us From Evil is a turning point for Sonny.

It left him primed to want to forget his past. Not just because of the grief over the loss of his wife and child but over his own actions.

If you had amnesia, it would be easier to believe you were a criminal if you actually felt like one beforehand.

I'd say the "gun goof" is the 2nd biggest in the entire series, only behind the filthy "Daytona" goof in the S3........ Really........... It's so high on the "alteration scale" (the impact it gives on the entire episode or even next episodes, like in this case). And it is a goof....... a pity, unwanted, ###### goof...... This could be a "perfect" episode of MV, IF IT WASN'T FOR THIS STUPID small DECISION. Didn't ever think before that such a small piece of #### can have such a tremendous impact on something, but as long as that small thing alterates the concept of the whole thing, it can really ruin it........

[ViceFanMan]

2 hours ago, Adrian321 said:

Them putting the gun in Hackman's hand was a bad idea, especially of what happened in the next 3 episodes. The "Self-defence" is just a stupid regulation in the show's policy, and I consider the gun scene to be a "goof" like any other in the series. For me, it just doesn't make sense for Crockett to say "Wrong" to Hackman's final comment "I'm sure as hell the same way you couldn't let an innocent man be executed, that you can't shoot an unarmed man". The gun is simply a stupid goof, that can't even be considered otherwise, and I just explained.

This episode could've been "perfect" if it was not for this stupid decision. While most fans, might not even notice the first time watching this masterpiece, it's cannon that it was there........ 

If it wasn't for that stupid gun, the Burnett saga would actually be more "Credible" in the eyes of the fans that did not enjoy that part so much (even if I do). It would have depicted Sonny as...... half-broken, angry, bitter and make the amnesia story more in tone with the context of when and how it happened in the show.

You’re probably right, and make some good points...if they had done the idea of shooting him in cold blood & not done the gun scene, it possibly could make the Burnett saga somewhat more “understandable”. They may not have even needed the boat explosion injury, if Crockett had already supposedly lost his mind before.

However, personally I feel the Burnett saga episodes were still so ridiculously over-the-top, unrealistic (even for MV), and destructive to the character of Crockett...that I think ultimately they still would have hurt the show’s ratings. After all that, Crockett should have been sent to an insane asylum, and he definitely would never have been allowed back as a cop or law enforcement officer of any kind, nor to carry a gun of any kind anymore.

But, they did put the gun scene in, whether it was forced by the network, or producers/writers decided it, whether it was the right decision or not, or we like it or not...it’s there, and to ultimately show the self defense/justified shooting. So, we have to ultimately acknowledge that & it is MV-canon. 

[ViceFanMan]

2 minutes ago, Adrian321 said:

I'd say the "gun goof" is the 2nd biggest in the entire series, only behind the filthy "Daytona" goof in the S3........ Really........... It's so high on the "alteration scale" (the impact it gives on the entire episode or even next episodes, like in this case). And it is a goof....... a pity, unwanted, ###### goof...... This could be a "perfect" episode of MV, IF IT WASN'T FOR THIS STUPID small DECISION. Didn't ever think before that such a small piece of #### can have such a tremendous impact on something, but as long as that small thing alterates the concept of the whole thing, it can really ruin it........

In my opinion even if they had not done the gun scene, this still would not have been a “perfect” episode! It would still destroy the character of Crockett, and he wouldn’t be “legit” or “valid” anymore. He’d just be a whack-job killer with a gun...which he ended up becoming in the Burnett episodes. 

I know there are those fans that didn’t like the gun scene or that they made that decision, however I think the majority of fans are fine with it. It showed that after everything he’d been through Crockett still had some control...he was still sane to some degree. I know I am not alone, but personally I do not view this is some “goof” or mistake. I also do not view the fake Ferrari is that big of a deal, LOL. At the time they worked with what they had, and they made it work for sure! Most fans didn’t even know it at the time.  

[Adrian321]

Just now, ViceFanMan said:

You’re probably right, and make some good points...if they had done the idea of shooting him in cold blood & not done the gun scene, it possibly could make the Burnett saga somewhat more “understandable”. They may not have even needed the boat explosion injury, if Crockett had already supposedly lost his mind before.

However, personally I feel the Burnett saga episodes were still so ridiculously over-the-top, unrealistic (even for MV), and destructive to the character of Crockett...that I think ultimately they still would have hurt the show’s ratings. After all that, Crockett should have been sent to an insane asylum, and he definitely would never have been allowed back as a cop or law enforcement officer of any kind, nor to carry a gun of any kind anymore.

But, they did put the gun scene in, whether it was forced by the network, or producers/writers decided it, whether it was the right decision or not, or we like it or not...it’s there, and to ultimately show the self defense/justified shooting. So, we have to ultimately acknowledge that & it is MV-canon. 

Unfortunately yes..... it is a canon thing, even if such a hurtful one.

The Burnett saga is another topic, but all those 3 episodes are top 10 of mine, (6th,7th,8th places). I actually don't mind them being over-the-top as you said, and I don't dissagree that they aren't, but personally, having 4 top 10 episodes in A ROW was a joy...... Is it neccesarily bad they were over-the-top ? Depends..... MV was kinda over-the-top, with our characters dodging so many bullets, that, by probabillity seems near impossible and other things, it isn't like it went from a silent, black and white series with '30s visuals to an over the top series, with many visuals and sounds and entertaining story, but, to be fair, it went through the entire roof with the new arc, and no one was expecting that.

That boat explosion seems a bit ridiculous, but it is what it is, ATLEAST we got something entertaining, unlike other weak episodes from S4, like that ###### Missing hours, The big thaw, God's work,etc. I remember the first time watching them, and remember being very pleased with this approach.

Also, I think the Burnett saga was good in the way that it squeezed the bit of the stuff the show could offer with its new writers. These really made me think that S4 and 5 really have some good stuff to offer, and, for me atleast, they did proove that. 5 episodes from my personal top 10 are from these 2 seasons alone.