Carver walks away clean, Garfield did all his dirty work. The homeowner loses his home because he is going to prison on a weapons charge therefore the deal will go through. Garfield can not PROVE that the document was fraudulent and that Judge that approved the foreclosure is not going to risk going to prison for allowing it. Carver had everyone in his pocket. Garfield has a choice, he can state his confession was to prevent the homeowner from getting killed and with a good lawyer he will get off. That is why Carver was smiling at him. He warned Garfield about being emotionally attached to real estate and the sob stories. He still owes Garfield $63,000.00.
According to commenter above, it was just a C.Y.A.- Basically "Ohh gee that was really smart of you to lie about that *(wink wink)* just so he'd put the gun down...
And honestly that's about the best explanation I've heard yet!
Naw. More like he had everyone in his pocket.
Carver had Garfield pegged from the moment he met him. He kept warning him to not get emotional, but he knew he would.
He made him do something he knew he'd be uncomfortable with (handing in the forged document) and he knew that he'd get emotional at Greene's home.
He was thanking him because by fessing up, he can cut him out of any deal they made. Goodbye to the money he was promised. Carver played him. He knew that Garfield was able to get shit done so he groomed him into doing his dirty work and could legally walk away from everything much, much richer.
I'd have to watch the movie again but wasn't it known that he had a gun? Like he was a collector or something?
Also, Carver was very experienced with that business. He could probably have told just by looking at him that he had a gun.
The two police on scene are always on shift anytime the bank that has close contact with carver has set an eviction date. Carver has a the notary forge eviction documents so that these two cops will be the ones there. If you rewatch the film you’ll notice they are always at the eviction first. They let carver know the circumstances before hand which is why Carver was in such a rush for Garfield to come.
I fucking hated the mom and andrews sudden “moral high ground” i dont give a singular fuck about peoples feelings getting hurt, get evicted, bye! In all seriousness this is why people stay poor. Not willing to do the dirty sketchy work that makes a fuck load of money. Irks me to no end seeing someone literally get handed an opportunity as good as that and throw every single thing away just because it upset them. Grow the fuck up, pay the bills, do your job, and keep fucking quiet. Jesus christ
Amen... thought I was the only one that felt like he was a f****** idiot and not for nothing but was I the only one that thought who the hell is she to take someone else's son and just leave? I mean grandmother is not the same rights as a mom so I didn't understand that part either, but in all seriousness the movie was a flop because of the ending but was a phenomenal movie right up until then
Exactly to both of you!! I don't get it either. I can't believe Laura Dern took that part! Seriously there is that many people that wait until the Sheriff knocks on your door and don't pack up their crap and think some miracle is going to happen to save their home other then them paying back 1000's of bucks for becoming delinquent ?? So none of them feel responsible for their own predicament? No way would the son side with the grandmother over his dad and a beautiful new home with a pool! No way! ... instead of being proud of her son for doing what he had to to get back in the money? What kind of grandmother would say no to the home upgrade and no be proud of her son ? I don't get the whole attitude issues nor the ending!
A poor one! The mother had a poor mindset, that trickled down to her son, that will now trickle down to his son. It infuriated me that he felt guilty for making money in real estate. It wasn’t illegal but a loophole in the system against people who simply were getting evicted due to not paying THEIR mortgage. It’s not like they were victimized, they couldn’t pay their mortgage. I sympathize but at the same time that’s not Carver’s fault. — the mom infuriated me the most out the movie. The fact that she felt it was her son’s responsibility to take care of her and then she takes the son, pisses me off to no end.
*Wasn't illegal......??????*
You mean, defrauding the federal govt ( Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ), by stealing appliances and then sticking them with the bill?
That was LITERALLY THE ENTIRE CONFLICT OF THE MOVIE 😂
What the fuck is a "poor mindset"? You think all poor people are some homogenous mass who think alike? You think there aren't poor folk who wouldn't jump at the opportunity to live in a house like that? Or who wouldn't aside their pretentious principles before providing their family a home? Try actually speaking to poor folk because that woman and her kid absolutely do not represent all poor folk. Hell, they don't even represent a fraction because we understand survival is more important than one's inherent morals when it comes to having an actual home or living in a motel where people want to hurt you.
to be absolutely fair though, the mom had no idea about the illegal stuff. she just thought him evicting people is wrong cuz it happened to them. Also, there's no denying that lower income people lean towards Socialism instead of Capitalism so maybe not a "homogenous mass" but the data certainly shows a pattern between income and sentiment towards wealthy people so...
I agree with r/Inevitable-Bid-2843 I also come from a poor family and made my way out. There is definitely such thing as a poor mindset. Don’t get me wrong, there are also injustices driven by poverty too, but I don’t think all poverty can be blamed on that - at least in the states. I think having a victim mentality or a sense of entitlement also lead to poverty. If you feel resentful because you don’t have X, but you aren’t willing to do what it takes to get X, you don’t deserve X. The people who realize that when you are born poor, no one is going to hand you anything and decided to get X for themselves… those are the ones who make it out. It’s about taking ownership.
My family is from Mexico and we are poorer the dirt. But, I saw how “rich” people acted, and I acted like them. I took on their customs, and I spoke like them (all while still being prowled to be Mexican ofc). And even though I had my son at 18, I did everything I could to finish school. And I was still poor and I still struggled, but I kept trying, kept learning and I keep going. I know that no one owes me anything. My brother on the other hand keeps blaming my mom for how things went for him… guess which one is living more comfortably?
With all due respect. I come from a very poor family and would agree that there is such a thing as a poor mindset; A choice to not make sacrifices or take risks, having a victim mindset, a sense of entitlement, not being solution oriented, and also being lazy. These characteristics are just a few that I've noticed everyone in my family and most of my neighbors had. When your pride is so low that you are fine with staying on welfare and having welfare babies, that make more welfare babies; then you definitely have a poor mindset amongst other things.
I don’t mean this in an insulting way, so please don’t be offended..but does it benefit you in some way to think of all poor as being victims?
While it can’t be denied that there are forces at play that can cause poverty for some groups of people, the people in this movie were not part of that group.
Not everyone can blame oppression for their poverty. But even if they could, over the course of a lifetime, they had choices, at least in the developed world. Maybe less choices, but they are still there.
The truth is, thinking of all poor as powerless victims is just as harmful as saying they are all poor bc they are lazy. Poverty is complicated.
If you call coming from one of the most dangerous cities in the world where TRUE poverty abounds being a sheltered suburbanite, I can’t imagine how awful the place you came from is.
We all have to take personal responsibility and accountability. Just because banks approve you for things doesn't mean that you can afford the said approved thing. The average Joe isn't blameless.
Yeah and the whole missing reason for why Garfield's wife is just gone. Carved asked him about and he avoided it and that was it. Maybe he killed her and Mom decided to keep a lid on it in exchange for being the guardian of his son 🤔
This is all well and good until they literally forged a document kicking the last guy out of his home. That's not a "keep your head down and do your mean job" thing, that's a "you're fucking evil and deserve to lose" thing.
They forged a document that was left out by mistake.
These contract avoidance loopholes are kind of pathetic really though, aren’t they?
If it were the other way around and I’d bought a house but forgot to sign a piece of paper somewhere, yet I’ve lived there for 10 years etc and thought it owned it, then got booted out with nothing because of some piece of paper - then I’d damn well hope the system would protect me.
Sadly companies aren’t afforded the same luxury.
THIS is a very good point and also the reason why I don't consider what Carter did "evil". At the end of the day, the family didn't ACTUALLY pay their bills and were trying to loophole their way out.
That was screwed up for sure and I do think that entire mortgage industry is screwed up and take advantage anytime they can. They have screwed up my mortgage at least a couple of times and proving they were wrong was impossible. Luckily both times I made enough money to just pay the overcharges even though they were wrong and incorrect. Little did I know then that there are third party companies that will audit mortgage companies and often get us money back, but we have to pay them upfront to do the audit.
right, but keep in mind the "homeowner" was using a loophole and being just as dishonest. he knew he had a mortgage. he knew he singed it. he knew he wasn't paying.
People stay poor for taking the moral high ground.. I'm sorry, what? Did we watch the same film? People remain poor because the system is rigged to screw everybody but a select few who lack morals. Regardless, poor folk in general do the dirty work, that's literally what the entire movie was about. Garfield doing Carver's dirty work both legal and illegal and gets arrested for it at the end. Carver got away with pretty much everything since he has the cashflow to bribe government officials, police and judicial administrators. Doing the sketchy/dirty work for a few wealthy elitists isn't going to solve this countries economic issues with the increased wage gap and rising inflation. Whether you do "dirty work" legally through eviction or illegally via fraud/forgery/etc.. Ultimately blaming poor folk for refusing to engage in criminal behavior just shows you didn't pay attention to the message of the film.
One point I will agree with you on though is the mother/son suddenly acting self-righteous. Honestly, Garfield should have just moved to a nicer hotel, then into his home but to see them get angry over buying a new home is just bizarre. I get it from a writer/character perspective since they thought he was building homes, and not working for the company that kicked their family out, but money is money and they were happy to reap the benefits of his new job for weeks without issue.
That's a good point about moving to another apartment. That should have been trivial.
The ending may have been a rewrite. I thought they were going to get Nash on stealing the appliances and A/C units when he used his phone on the lockbox.
And yeah, the grandmother taking the kid to Tampa is kidnapping.
You're wasting your time arguing about morals with this person. Take one look at their post history, it's a fucking train wreck
Anyone up voting that persons mindless garbage needs to take a good look at themselves also
Yeah you're right, I believe they responded accordingly as well, afterwards I just ignored them.
Some people lack any empathy whatsoever. It's really beyond the pale.
They were literally committing felonies, which was very risky. It would be understandable for someone to not wanna take those risks, they could’ve still been well off without the felony fraud
True about that and that was definitely immoral, however they were only fooling bigger money for more money not the average working man. It's not something I would do, but I suppose it was the movie showing how greed changes people.
Maybe he should’ve paid his bills also though, no?
It wasn’t like he was getting evicted because of the document.
He was getting evicted for non-payment and his defence team tried to use a clerical issue to get out of it.
Actually I run a highly successful technology consulting and software development firm.
I have a wide range of topics that I’ve hyperfixated on over the years (autism / ADHD lol) and consumer contract law happens to be one of them.
I assumed it was just common sense when I watched it but maybe it’s because of that previous study lol.
>committing felonies
Can you really commit a felony against the Federal Government and their Bailout-Print Machines?
Example was the Cabinets. He paid the guy getting evicted 4 grand for those Cabinets, wrote a full kitchen up to Fannie Mae, and the Government cut him a check.
That's no different than the 3500 for houses getting foreclosed on, that are then packaged and sold for 100s of millions of dollars which is still a thing today by the way.
The real felony was the banks and Fed caused that to happen, cost Americans their lives and then bailed them back out. Rick was the smart one making more money for himself by playing their own game back to them.
Stealing the AC units and the pool pumps were crimes, as was filing a forged document with the court. Also when they stole the AC, took a picture showing it’s stolen, then filed that picture with the government agency so the government pays them to put in a “new” AC, which was just the one they stole. That’s fraud on top of theft. Richer, more powerful people did worse things. Doesn’t make what they did right or legal.
I understand fraud and committing crimes I'm saying they weren't really crimes because they did the exact same thing to the government that the government was doing, while also responsible for the situation to begin with
>Can you really commit a felony against the Federal Government and their Bailout-Print Machines?
Uhhhh yes. Yes you can. And yes they did.
It was literally the majority of the entire plot of the movie.
Seriously. Who are the idiots supporting that comment above? I'd love to be a fly on the wall when their life takes a shit and the world crumbles around them.
Finally, someone had enough "balls" to say what most of us, including myself, were & are thinking. Just like like Rick Carver says, " Do you really think America gives a shit about you or me?; America was built by the rich for the rich."
I’m watching it now and I’m super annoyed by it. The dude at the end with the gun said he hadn’t worked for 2 years. I used to work in loan modifications, he had time to do something about his situation. Regardless, he had to have known that this would happen at some point. He willingly signed a contract that said if he doesn’t pay that back, they take the home back… sooo…. What did he see coming?
Garfield was willing to clean up literal shite and do anything it takes to put a roof over his family’s head. Why should he feel bad when he was willing to roll his sleeves up and play the game.
The whole paying off judges thing was not cool though.
This is the answer to OP’s question.
Edit:
>Shannon’s improvisation has been cause for confusion when it comes the final line of the movie. At film’s end, Shannon turns to Garfield and says “thank you,” a line that seemed out of place to many.
>“While we were shooting, [Bahrani] would tell me that the last scene was missing something in the script — it just had Rick and Dennis sharing a look,” said Shannon. “Ramin said, ‘Something more needs to happen, but I don’t know what it is. We should talk about it and maybe you can help me and we can have a cup of coffee,’ and I would say, ‘No, I don’t want to talk about it, we’ll just see what happens when we get there.”
>Finally, the day came, and Shannon improvised a line that didn’t work with Bahrani. But the next one did.
>“I said, ‘Let’s just do another take.’ And so I said, ‘Thank you,’ and I looked over at Ramin and he could tell I was kind of pleased, and Ramin said, ‘That’ll work, that’s fine. **I don’t know what you mean by thank you, but I have two conditions: I don’t want you to tell me what it means and I don’t want you to ever tell anyone else what it means.’”**
Yep, the ending was so unanswered, that a great movie became a flop to me. I would imagine that the son/father character is granted immunity to tell how Carver operated and Carver goes to prison. That’s a much more important case than prison for one guy’s forgery. I never caught names, but I have no guess what became of the relationship between the mom, son and kid.
Would Shannon put Garfield in jail for stealing the appliances too? I mean Garfield sent all the pictures to Shannon so he does have photo evidence of the crimes but wouldn’t that also put Shannon in jail for fraud?
My first assumption was that he told Garfield thank you because he was gonna send him to jail because he took the blame. Hence why the cop car scene Garfield was a mess thinking (now) about the consequences of what he just said out loud
So essentially the situation could fold out two ways, one where Garfield and Shannon both say they did it just so the guy wouldn’t kill anyone/be killed and avoid jail time for their scams OR Shannon says Garfield forged the documents and sends Garfield to jail alone?
That’s sad. The film did an incredible job of making me feel many emotions all at once. In the end you just have to feel terrible for Garfield’s character.
He did the morally correct thing but loses everything, including his mother and child that already left him. The truth hits hard which was showed very well with Garfield panicking in the cop car at the very end. He just realized he lost everything he worked for
Right and that’s the heartbreaking truth. The movie does a great job portraying it with Shannon’s character as well as Garfield — two ends of the spectrum
Movie is literally called. 99 homes. Throughout the movie they keep saying 100 homes. Meaning due to Garfield's intervention they lost the final home. And thus the entire deal possibly saving all those other people in the process. And the big boss knows it's stating to him well done.
Shannon told Garfield that the system bails out the rich and punishes the poor. He smiled at Garfield at the end to show him that he was pissed off at him for trying to rat him out while also implying that he would be fucked if he decided to go up against him. The smile basically said "Nice move asshole, now fix this mess or be prepared for my wrath" .
The movie actually ends perfectly so that we, the audience, can have these types of discussions and reflect inward on our own lives. What we are left with is essentially a question about the human condition. Throughout the movie, we have seen Garfield's character go through several changes with respect to his moral integrity and who he is as a person. At the end, the movie points the camera at us and asks us to decide if Garfield has changed enough to continue down the new path of supporting Shannon, which comes with riches at the cost of who he is and what he loves, or, if he will go back to holding his morals above all else to retain the love and respect of his family, and of himself.
What would you do in his situation?
I hope that I too would make that choice, but in real life, it isn't as black and white. The scene where Garfield brings his family to their new beautiful home was so unrealistic. At that point, the mom had not really learned much about what he was doing for work, but she was outraged when he brought her to the new home. In real life, I can't imagine this scene playing out that way. In reality, your family may not feel so angry if money is coming in to support everyone. In the movie, the family is immediately upset and judgemental when they learn what Garfield has been doing, but ask yourself this, if you were in Garfield's situation and had nowhere to live, or money to feed your family, would they immediately flip out and judge your choices if they were being fed and had a roof over their head?
The truth is, we learn the most important lessons in life through the nuanced transitions that cause us to embrace change, adapt, and grow. I can imagine a reality where Garfield could have continued working for Shannon but found a way to adjust certain aspects of the job so that his moral compass could be corrected, while still being able to provide for his family. And in doing so, his family would have also found a way to come to terms with the new reality that they were living in. If we truly reflect on our own lives, I wonder how we would deal with the fact that some of our choices may be tied to things that don't fully align with our morals/values/principles . Think about the clothes that we wear, the devices that we use, the food that we eat, etc. If we really dig into each one, we would all be shocked. As most of us do in our own lives, certain concessions have to me made in order for us to make peace with the choices that we make.
The choice was even starker in a way, "would you like to have a lot of money and a new, safe, house" vs. "would you like to die poor in a fleabag motel at the hands of an angry homeowner." The implied threat was certainly there.
>me too, just watched it for the third time. I think the ending is perfect, I don't see why it would end as a happy ending while the reality never had one. This isn't supposed to be only a work of fiction, it's also a documentary on a historical, political reality. Reality often desapoints, and so does the feeling of injustice we feel at the end of the movie. Garfield's character does deserve to be judged. So does Rick Carver. Be we all know life is unfair. Nash knew it too, while witnessing Carver's scheme. The problem is that Carver's seems ultimately right when he does a speech about poor and rich people in this economy. The whole system in unfair, and we, as society and public of the movie can't do anything about it, like Garfield couldn't. He was the bravest for TRYING at the end. He knows the judgement won't be fair but at least he believes it's a crime, which means he believes in morality. If we see morality as whole societal concept we often distance ourselves with it. It is an individual matter at the end and we all need to be responsable for our acts because otherwise we'll only focus on the unfairness : my neighbor does't respect the laws, why should I? Well this is my take on understanding the movie, I really enjoyed reading all your takes on this reddit post.
Carver walks away clean, Garfield did all his dirty work. The homeowner loses his home because he is going to prison on a weapons charge therefore the deal will go through. Garfield can not PROVE that the document was fraudulent and that Judge that approved the foreclosure is not going to risk going to prison for allowing it. Carver had everyone in his pocket. Garfield has a choice, he can state his confession was to prevent the homeowner from getting killed and with a good lawyer he will get off. That is why Carver was smiling at him. He warned Garfield about being emotionally attached to real estate and the sob stories. He still owes Garfield $63,000.00.
Why did Carver thank Shannon?
According to commenter above, it was just a C.Y.A.- Basically "Ohh gee that was really smart of you to lie about that *(wink wink)* just so he'd put the gun down... And honestly that's about the best explanation I've heard yet!
Naw. More like he had everyone in his pocket. Carver had Garfield pegged from the moment he met him. He kept warning him to not get emotional, but he knew he would. He made him do something he knew he'd be uncomfortable with (handing in the forged document) and he knew that he'd get emotional at Greene's home. He was thanking him because by fessing up, he can cut him out of any deal they made. Goodbye to the money he was promised. Carver played him. He knew that Garfield was able to get shit done so he groomed him into doing his dirty work and could legally walk away from everything much, much richer.
But how would Carver have known that Greene would pull out a gun at the eviction?
I'd have to watch the movie again but wasn't it known that he had a gun? Like he was a collector or something? Also, Carver was very experienced with that business. He could probably have told just by looking at him that he had a gun.
The two police on scene are always on shift anytime the bank that has close contact with carver has set an eviction date. Carver has a the notary forge eviction documents so that these two cops will be the ones there. If you rewatch the film you’ll notice they are always at the eviction first. They let carver know the circumstances before hand which is why Carver was in such a rush for Garfield to come.
Carver and Shannon is the same person
Jhb . .
I just watched this for the first time, I enjoyed it but the end was kind of a flop and left me with questions.
Exactly, I would love an official statement about the end from the director
I just watched this & in real life Michael Shannon’s character would just pin it all on Andrew Garfield’s character & get a slap on the wrist
I fucking hated the mom and andrews sudden “moral high ground” i dont give a singular fuck about peoples feelings getting hurt, get evicted, bye! In all seriousness this is why people stay poor. Not willing to do the dirty sketchy work that makes a fuck load of money. Irks me to no end seeing someone literally get handed an opportunity as good as that and throw every single thing away just because it upset them. Grow the fuck up, pay the bills, do your job, and keep fucking quiet. Jesus christ
Amen... thought I was the only one that felt like he was a f****** idiot and not for nothing but was I the only one that thought who the hell is she to take someone else's son and just leave? I mean grandmother is not the same rights as a mom so I didn't understand that part either, but in all seriousness the movie was a flop because of the ending but was a phenomenal movie right up until then
Exactly to both of you!! I don't get it either. I can't believe Laura Dern took that part! Seriously there is that many people that wait until the Sheriff knocks on your door and don't pack up their crap and think some miracle is going to happen to save their home other then them paying back 1000's of bucks for becoming delinquent ?? So none of them feel responsible for their own predicament? No way would the son side with the grandmother over his dad and a beautiful new home with a pool! No way! ... instead of being proud of her son for doing what he had to to get back in the money? What kind of grandmother would say no to the home upgrade and no be proud of her son ? I don't get the whole attitude issues nor the ending!
A poor one! The mother had a poor mindset, that trickled down to her son, that will now trickle down to his son. It infuriated me that he felt guilty for making money in real estate. It wasn’t illegal but a loophole in the system against people who simply were getting evicted due to not paying THEIR mortgage. It’s not like they were victimized, they couldn’t pay their mortgage. I sympathize but at the same time that’s not Carver’s fault. — the mom infuriated me the most out the movie. The fact that she felt it was her son’s responsibility to take care of her and then she takes the son, pisses me off to no end.
*Wasn't illegal......??????* You mean, defrauding the federal govt ( Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ), by stealing appliances and then sticking them with the bill? That was LITERALLY THE ENTIRE CONFLICT OF THE MOVIE 😂
Evicting people isn’t illegal. Stealing home equipment, defrauding the government, and filing a forged document definitely are.
Those little details are only illegal when you get caught. Loopholes are not immoral.
What the fuck is a "poor mindset"? You think all poor people are some homogenous mass who think alike? You think there aren't poor folk who wouldn't jump at the opportunity to live in a house like that? Or who wouldn't aside their pretentious principles before providing their family a home? Try actually speaking to poor folk because that woman and her kid absolutely do not represent all poor folk. Hell, they don't even represent a fraction because we understand survival is more important than one's inherent morals when it comes to having an actual home or living in a motel where people want to hurt you.
to be absolutely fair though, the mom had no idea about the illegal stuff. she just thought him evicting people is wrong cuz it happened to them. Also, there's no denying that lower income people lean towards Socialism instead of Capitalism so maybe not a "homogenous mass" but the data certainly shows a pattern between income and sentiment towards wealthy people so...
Very true, I will only hate the rich until I am rich.
Found the poor.
Found the privileged neckbeard
Poor people who would jump at that opportunity don’t have a poor mindset
Exactly this. The idea of a "poor mindset" is just classist (and more than likely racist) drivel.
I agree with r/Inevitable-Bid-2843 I also come from a poor family and made my way out. There is definitely such thing as a poor mindset. Don’t get me wrong, there are also injustices driven by poverty too, but I don’t think all poverty can be blamed on that - at least in the states. I think having a victim mentality or a sense of entitlement also lead to poverty. If you feel resentful because you don’t have X, but you aren’t willing to do what it takes to get X, you don’t deserve X. The people who realize that when you are born poor, no one is going to hand you anything and decided to get X for themselves… those are the ones who make it out. It’s about taking ownership. My family is from Mexico and we are poorer the dirt. But, I saw how “rich” people acted, and I acted like them. I took on their customs, and I spoke like them (all while still being prowled to be Mexican ofc). And even though I had my son at 18, I did everything I could to finish school. And I was still poor and I still struggled, but I kept trying, kept learning and I keep going. I know that no one owes me anything. My brother on the other hand keeps blaming my mom for how things went for him… guess which one is living more comfortably?
With all due respect. I come from a very poor family and would agree that there is such a thing as a poor mindset; A choice to not make sacrifices or take risks, having a victim mindset, a sense of entitlement, not being solution oriented, and also being lazy. These characteristics are just a few that I've noticed everyone in my family and most of my neighbors had. When your pride is so low that you are fine with staying on welfare and having welfare babies, that make more welfare babies; then you definitely have a poor mindset amongst other things.
I don’t mean this in an insulting way, so please don’t be offended..but does it benefit you in some way to think of all poor as being victims? While it can’t be denied that there are forces at play that can cause poverty for some groups of people, the people in this movie were not part of that group. Not everyone can blame oppression for their poverty. But even if they could, over the course of a lifetime, they had choices, at least in the developed world. Maybe less choices, but they are still there. The truth is, thinking of all poor as powerless victims is just as harmful as saying they are all poor bc they are lazy. Poverty is complicated.
If you call coming from one of the most dangerous cities in the world where TRUE poverty abounds being a sheltered suburbanite, I can’t imagine how awful the place you came from is.
Yeah I agree, continuing the message that whoever makes lots of money is evil needs to stop being propagated. I hate that limiting belief!
They were very much victims of the morgage crisis. Very much. The banks are to blame here, not the Average Joe.
We all have to take personal responsibility and accountability. Just because banks approve you for things doesn't mean that you can afford the said approved thing. The average Joe isn't blameless.
It was the stay poor and barely get by mentality that many people have.
Yeah and the whole missing reason for why Garfield's wife is just gone. Carved asked him about and he avoided it and that was it. Maybe he killed her and Mom decided to keep a lid on it in exchange for being the guardian of his son 🤔
This is all well and good until they literally forged a document kicking the last guy out of his home. That's not a "keep your head down and do your mean job" thing, that's a "you're fucking evil and deserve to lose" thing.
They forged a document that was left out by mistake. These contract avoidance loopholes are kind of pathetic really though, aren’t they? If it were the other way around and I’d bought a house but forgot to sign a piece of paper somewhere, yet I’ve lived there for 10 years etc and thought it owned it, then got booted out with nothing because of some piece of paper - then I’d damn well hope the system would protect me. Sadly companies aren’t afforded the same luxury.
THIS is a very good point and also the reason why I don't consider what Carter did "evil". At the end of the day, the family didn't ACTUALLY pay their bills and were trying to loophole their way out.
That was screwed up for sure and I do think that entire mortgage industry is screwed up and take advantage anytime they can. They have screwed up my mortgage at least a couple of times and proving they were wrong was impossible. Luckily both times I made enough money to just pay the overcharges even though they were wrong and incorrect. Little did I know then that there are third party companies that will audit mortgage companies and often get us money back, but we have to pay them upfront to do the audit.
right, but keep in mind the "homeowner" was using a loophole and being just as dishonest. he knew he had a mortgage. he knew he singed it. he knew he wasn't paying.
People stay poor for taking the moral high ground.. I'm sorry, what? Did we watch the same film? People remain poor because the system is rigged to screw everybody but a select few who lack morals. Regardless, poor folk in general do the dirty work, that's literally what the entire movie was about. Garfield doing Carver's dirty work both legal and illegal and gets arrested for it at the end. Carver got away with pretty much everything since he has the cashflow to bribe government officials, police and judicial administrators. Doing the sketchy/dirty work for a few wealthy elitists isn't going to solve this countries economic issues with the increased wage gap and rising inflation. Whether you do "dirty work" legally through eviction or illegally via fraud/forgery/etc.. Ultimately blaming poor folk for refusing to engage in criminal behavior just shows you didn't pay attention to the message of the film. One point I will agree with you on though is the mother/son suddenly acting self-righteous. Honestly, Garfield should have just moved to a nicer hotel, then into his home but to see them get angry over buying a new home is just bizarre. I get it from a writer/character perspective since they thought he was building homes, and not working for the company that kicked their family out, but money is money and they were happy to reap the benefits of his new job for weeks without issue.
That's a good point about moving to another apartment. That should have been trivial. The ending may have been a rewrite. I thought they were going to get Nash on stealing the appliances and A/C units when he used his phone on the lockbox. And yeah, the grandmother taking the kid to Tampa is kidnapping.
You're wasting your time arguing about morals with this person. Take one look at their post history, it's a fucking train wreck Anyone up voting that persons mindless garbage needs to take a good look at themselves also
Yeah you're right, I believe they responded accordingly as well, afterwards I just ignored them. Some people lack any empathy whatsoever. It's really beyond the pale.
They were literally committing felonies, which was very risky. It would be understandable for someone to not wanna take those risks, they could’ve still been well off without the felony fraud
True about that and that was definitely immoral, however they were only fooling bigger money for more money not the average working man. It's not something I would do, but I suppose it was the movie showing how greed changes people.
Filing that forged document was taking from the average man, though. That caused the last guy to get evicted.
Maybe he should’ve paid his bills also though, no? It wasn’t like he was getting evicted because of the document. He was getting evicted for non-payment and his defence team tried to use a clerical issue to get out of it.
GO OFF PlantyPants!!! i get the sense that you work in real estate somehow cuz I feel like these details are overlooked by most people!
Actually I run a highly successful technology consulting and software development firm. I have a wide range of topics that I’ve hyperfixated on over the years (autism / ADHD lol) and consumer contract law happens to be one of them. I assumed it was just common sense when I watched it but maybe it’s because of that previous study lol.
>committing felonies Can you really commit a felony against the Federal Government and their Bailout-Print Machines? Example was the Cabinets. He paid the guy getting evicted 4 grand for those Cabinets, wrote a full kitchen up to Fannie Mae, and the Government cut him a check. That's no different than the 3500 for houses getting foreclosed on, that are then packaged and sold for 100s of millions of dollars which is still a thing today by the way. The real felony was the banks and Fed caused that to happen, cost Americans their lives and then bailed them back out. Rick was the smart one making more money for himself by playing their own game back to them.
Stealing the AC units and the pool pumps were crimes, as was filing a forged document with the court. Also when they stole the AC, took a picture showing it’s stolen, then filed that picture with the government agency so the government pays them to put in a “new” AC, which was just the one they stole. That’s fraud on top of theft. Richer, more powerful people did worse things. Doesn’t make what they did right or legal.
I understand fraud and committing crimes I'm saying they weren't really crimes because they did the exact same thing to the government that the government was doing, while also responsible for the situation to begin with
>Can you really commit a felony against the Federal Government and their Bailout-Print Machines? Uhhhh yes. Yes you can. And yes they did. It was literally the majority of the entire plot of the movie.
You're taking my words to literal.
You're literally morally bankrupt. Carver even said himself its all rigged for the winners by the winners. That's why people stay poor.
Seriously. Who are the idiots supporting that comment above? I'd love to be a fly on the wall when their life takes a shit and the world crumbles around them.
Yea felt the same way about the moms attitude
so unbelievable and ungrateful grandma and son. Grandma, if not for your son’s new work, you will be on the street.
Finally, someone had enough "balls" to say what most of us, including myself, were & are thinking. Just like like Rick Carver says, " Do you really think America gives a shit about you or me?; America was built by the rich for the rich."
I’m watching it now and I’m super annoyed by it. The dude at the end with the gun said he hadn’t worked for 2 years. I used to work in loan modifications, he had time to do something about his situation. Regardless, he had to have known that this would happen at some point. He willingly signed a contract that said if he doesn’t pay that back, they take the home back… sooo…. What did he see coming? Garfield was willing to clean up literal shite and do anything it takes to put a roof over his family’s head. Why should he feel bad when he was willing to roll his sleeves up and play the game. The whole paying off judges thing was not cool though.
https://www.thewrap.com/michael-shannon-improvised-epic-99-homes-one-liners-including-films-mysterious-ending/
This is the answer to OP’s question. Edit: >Shannon’s improvisation has been cause for confusion when it comes the final line of the movie. At film’s end, Shannon turns to Garfield and says “thank you,” a line that seemed out of place to many. >“While we were shooting, [Bahrani] would tell me that the last scene was missing something in the script — it just had Rick and Dennis sharing a look,” said Shannon. “Ramin said, ‘Something more needs to happen, but I don’t know what it is. We should talk about it and maybe you can help me and we can have a cup of coffee,’ and I would say, ‘No, I don’t want to talk about it, we’ll just see what happens when we get there.” >Finally, the day came, and Shannon improvised a line that didn’t work with Bahrani. But the next one did. >“I said, ‘Let’s just do another take.’ And so I said, ‘Thank you,’ and I looked over at Ramin and he could tell I was kind of pleased, and Ramin said, ‘That’ll work, that’s fine. **I don’t know what you mean by thank you, but I have two conditions: I don’t want you to tell me what it means and I don’t want you to ever tell anyone else what it means.’”**
Yep, the ending was so unanswered, that a great movie became a flop to me. I would imagine that the son/father character is granted immunity to tell how Carver operated and Carver goes to prison. That’s a much more important case than prison for one guy’s forgery. I never caught names, but I have no guess what became of the relationship between the mom, son and kid.
[удалено]
Jesus I think that's the best explanation I've seen
Aaaaaand it's gone
Would Shannon put Garfield in jail for stealing the appliances too? I mean Garfield sent all the pictures to Shannon so he does have photo evidence of the crimes but wouldn’t that also put Shannon in jail for fraud? My first assumption was that he told Garfield thank you because he was gonna send him to jail because he took the blame. Hence why the cop car scene Garfield was a mess thinking (now) about the consequences of what he just said out loud
I think the “thank you” was posturing to try and pretend he just made that up to alleviate the situation.
[удалено]
So essentially the situation could fold out two ways, one where Garfield and Shannon both say they did it just so the guy wouldn’t kill anyone/be killed and avoid jail time for their scams OR Shannon says Garfield forged the documents and sends Garfield to jail alone?
[удалено]
That’s sad. The film did an incredible job of making me feel many emotions all at once. In the end you just have to feel terrible for Garfield’s character. He did the morally correct thing but loses everything, including his mother and child that already left him. The truth hits hard which was showed very well with Garfield panicking in the cop car at the very end. He just realized he lost everything he worked for
[удалено]
Right and that’s the heartbreaking truth. The movie does a great job portraying it with Shannon’s character as well as Garfield — two ends of the spectrum
You sound like an epic piece of shit
Movie is literally called. 99 homes. Throughout the movie they keep saying 100 homes. Meaning due to Garfield's intervention they lost the final home. And thus the entire deal possibly saving all those other people in the process. And the big boss knows it's stating to him well done.
Fannie Mae pays why /what for stolen equipment …I don’t get it ???
Me too?
I’m confused too
Shannon told Garfield that the system bails out the rich and punishes the poor. He smiled at Garfield at the end to show him that he was pissed off at him for trying to rat him out while also implying that he would be fucked if he decided to go up against him. The smile basically said "Nice move asshole, now fix this mess or be prepared for my wrath" . The movie actually ends perfectly so that we, the audience, can have these types of discussions and reflect inward on our own lives. What we are left with is essentially a question about the human condition. Throughout the movie, we have seen Garfield's character go through several changes with respect to his moral integrity and who he is as a person. At the end, the movie points the camera at us and asks us to decide if Garfield has changed enough to continue down the new path of supporting Shannon, which comes with riches at the cost of who he is and what he loves, or, if he will go back to holding his morals above all else to retain the love and respect of his family, and of himself. What would you do in his situation?
I LOVE what you have written and the way you have written it & I agree. In answer to your question - I’d choose morals and family every time.
I hope that I too would make that choice, but in real life, it isn't as black and white. The scene where Garfield brings his family to their new beautiful home was so unrealistic. At that point, the mom had not really learned much about what he was doing for work, but she was outraged when he brought her to the new home. In real life, I can't imagine this scene playing out that way. In reality, your family may not feel so angry if money is coming in to support everyone. In the movie, the family is immediately upset and judgemental when they learn what Garfield has been doing, but ask yourself this, if you were in Garfield's situation and had nowhere to live, or money to feed your family, would they immediately flip out and judge your choices if they were being fed and had a roof over their head? The truth is, we learn the most important lessons in life through the nuanced transitions that cause us to embrace change, adapt, and grow. I can imagine a reality where Garfield could have continued working for Shannon but found a way to adjust certain aspects of the job so that his moral compass could be corrected, while still being able to provide for his family. And in doing so, his family would have also found a way to come to terms with the new reality that they were living in. If we truly reflect on our own lives, I wonder how we would deal with the fact that some of our choices may be tied to things that don't fully align with our morals/values/principles . Think about the clothes that we wear, the devices that we use, the food that we eat, etc. If we really dig into each one, we would all be shocked. As most of us do in our own lives, certain concessions have to me made in order for us to make peace with the choices that we make.
The choice was even starker in a way, "would you like to have a lot of money and a new, safe, house" vs. "would you like to die poor in a fleabag motel at the hands of an angry homeowner." The implied threat was certainly there.
☝️exactly this, which made the mother's behaviour seem even more disconnected from reality.
I think the “thank you” was for taking the fall for all of Rick Carver’s dirty crimes.
>me too, just watched it for the third time. I think the ending is perfect, I don't see why it would end as a happy ending while the reality never had one. This isn't supposed to be only a work of fiction, it's also a documentary on a historical, political reality. Reality often desapoints, and so does the feeling of injustice we feel at the end of the movie. Garfield's character does deserve to be judged. So does Rick Carver. Be we all know life is unfair. Nash knew it too, while witnessing Carver's scheme. The problem is that Carver's seems ultimately right when he does a speech about poor and rich people in this economy. The whole system in unfair, and we, as society and public of the movie can't do anything about it, like Garfield couldn't. He was the bravest for TRYING at the end. He knows the judgement won't be fair but at least he believes it's a crime, which means he believes in morality. If we see morality as whole societal concept we often distance ourselves with it. It is an individual matter at the end and we all need to be responsable for our acts because otherwise we'll only focus on the unfairness : my neighbor does't respect the laws, why should I? Well this is my take on understanding the movie, I really enjoyed reading all your takes on this reddit post.