# Fargo - S01E09 - A Fox, a Rabbit, and a Cabbage



## thebigmo (Feb 12, 2005)

Just not sure what Lester was hoping to accomplish by confronting Malvo _especially_ after Malvo told him to walk away.


----------



## GoPackGo (Dec 29, 2012)

There were several minutes of show where I wasn't sure if it was Malvo, or some dentist that looked like him!

Also lots of tension as Malvo left the diner only to just miss Molly and the Feds.


----------



## thebigmo (Feb 12, 2005)

Malvo telling the guy who bought Lester's house about the murders in front of the kids. Classic.


----------



## Gerryex (Apr 24, 2004)

I'm no prude but there is certainly a lot of cold blooded killing. It seems to me that its way more than what was in the movie. Sometimes it almost too much in-your-face and somewhat disturbing.

But its a great show and I wouldn't want to miss a minute of it!!!

Gerry


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

thebigmo said:


> Just not sure what Lester was hoping to accomplish by confronting Malvo _especially_ after Malvo told him to walk away.


Yeah. You'd think by now that Lester would know - no matter how drunk he is - the correct answer to Malvo asking, "Do you really want to do this?" is "No!" especially after Malvo said, "Walk away." Lester was soo high on how well things were going.

The stretch of believability here is that Malvo would work 6 months for a measly $100,000 bounty.

Who hired Malvo anyway? He done did in the "Real Estate office."
I guess he's a well known name brand hitter.

Malvo can fake being a dentist.

How did anybody know that Lester was a witness in Vegas?

Lester drops his wives like old socks.

Didn't ya think that Lou was in danger? The music was made to make the scene be tense.

Bill: "Sorry, (FBI) guys, let's go into my office." 
K&P: "This is terrific work, Deputy."


----------



## Ment (Mar 27, 2008)

The elevator scene made me laugh thats some dark comedy right there. Lester be who you are, you get in deep doo doo otherwise. Him sending his wife into the shop to get shot thats the Lester we know!


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Do we think that Malvo knows he shot the wife and not Lester?


----------



## Ment (Mar 27, 2008)

MikeAndrews said:


> Do we think that Malvo knows he shot the wife and not Lester?


Well he knows he didn't shoot Lester. Unknown if he knew who Lester's current wife is. I think Gus will see Malvo again.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Ment said:


> Well he knows he didn't shoot Lester. Unknown if he knew who Lester's current wife is. I think Gus will see Malvo again.


They'll ALL see Malvo again. I just hope that we don't end up with, say, Lou getting killed.

You'd think that Lou would know that Molly had Lester in her sights and would have told her that the weird guy was just asking for him.

How it should go, but nothing on Fargo goes straight: Gus plays a key role as a cop for once. I still say that Lester takes out Malvo. We'll expect the last scene to be Molly having Lester in the car, "So was that all worth it, then?"

And Key and Peele and Bill get offed on the way. Molly becomes chief.


----------



## wedgecon (Dec 28, 2002)

Lester escalated the situation in the elevator because he wanted to watch Malvo shoot them. He later sent his wife into the office, making sure she was in that coat and hood so he could watch Malvo shoot her. Pay close attention to what Lester was doing while his wife was being shot. I am surprised no one caught that yet


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Don't the writers of this show know that there are surveillance cameras everywhere in Vegas hotel casinos? The security guards would have responded in less than a minute of Malvo shooting those people in the elevator. And even if they were asleep or something, they would have recorded it, showing Malvo killing the people, and Lester hitting Malvo in the back of the head and leaving. The Vegas police would have done a lot more than send a small town police officer with vague instructions to interview Lester.

Also, why was Malvo bothering to move the bodies out of the elevator? Just leave them and take off. Or was he really expecting to have time to dispose of the bodies and clean all the blood and gore out of the elevator?

Why did Lester's wife lie to Molly about the reason for leaving the hotel? It was Lester -- not her -- who decided to leave early.

As someone mentioned, it is surprising that Lou did not recognize Malvo's face. Surely Molly showed Lou his picture at some point. Lou obviously sensed that Malvo was not trustworthy, but just as obviously he did not recognize Malvo's face.

If you happen to get invited to Lester's next wedding, a suitable gift for the bride would be protective head gear.


----------



## squint (Jun 15, 2008)

wedgecon said:


> Pay close attention to what Lester was doing while his wife was being shot. I am surprised no one caught that yet


I watched this scene again and still have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

squint said:


> I watched this scene again and still have no idea what you're talking about.


I guess he suspects that Lester was masturbating. But I saw no indication that he was. Lester has always had strange mannerisms. Lester was aware that there was a good chance he was sending his wife to be killed, and he just did not care very much.


----------



## tivoboyjr (Apr 28, 2003)

MikeAndrews said:


> The stretch of believability here is that Malvo would work 6 months for a measly $100,000 bounty.


That struck me, too. He probably had to sink quite a bit of money into his identity (house, lifestyle, etc). But on the other hand, I think Malvo would gladly kill people and ruin the lives of others as long as his expenses were covered. Plus, he gets to lay low for a while (out of the MN area) and torture people while pretending to be a dentist.



MikeAndrews said:


> How did anybody know that Lester was a witness in Vegas?


The impression I got, based on him being a "witness," was that Lester had either gone to the police himself (maybe out of desperation since he knew Malvo would kill him) or someone had identified him ("I saw Lester, the salesperson of the year, talking to those people at the bar").


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Several times during this episode I'm thinking, why on earth would you do that? Lester continuing to chase Malvo instead of running as soon as he saw him...killing everyone in the elevator instead of letting Lester go and getting him later....telling the kids someone died in their house after the dad was so nice to him...cover for your husband when he so obviously is in trouble and not telling you what's going on....(ok, maybe I can see her doing that) 

Do the 2 FBI agents have authority to investigate this? Or is Molly going to get all excited only to have their superiors call and tell them to go home? Assuming anyone lives that long....

Awesome show. :up:


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

tivoboyjr said:


> The impression I got, based on him being a "witness," was that Lester had either gone to the police himself (maybe out of desperation since he knew Malvo would kill him) or someone had identified him ("I saw Lester, the salesperson of the year, talking to those people at the bar").


Or more likely, they saw lobby surveillance video of him getting on the elevator with the victims.


----------



## tivoboyjr (Apr 28, 2003)

stellie93 said:


> Several times during this episode I'm thinking, why on earth would you do that?


I've had those thoughts about the show since the beginning. Kinda turned me off at first, but if you can ignore them, it's pretty entertaining.


----------



## tivoboyjr (Apr 28, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Or more likely, they saw lobby surveillance video of him getting on the elevator with the victims.


Maybe. But then I doubt it would be left to the local small town police to question him when he got back home. And if Lester could be identified based on the video, it seems that Malvo would have been as well.

As someone else posted, it seems like we're to assume that surveillance video doesn't exist. If it did, this is a nationwide manhunt for Malvo with some real cops wanting to ask Lester a lot of questions.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

tivoboyjr said:


> As someone else posted, it seems like we're to assume that surveillance video doesn't exist. If it did, this is a nationwide manhunt for Malvo with some real cops wanting to ask Lester a lot of questions.


It is difficult to reconcile what happened.

Realistically, there would have been video of what happened inside the elevator. All those casino elevators have surveillance. So, the Vegas police would have Malvo's face (but not his real identity, since he surely has that well hidden). And Lester's face would quickly lead to Lester's identity.

But perhaps we are meant to assume something really odd happened. If security were on the ball, they would have captured Malvo in minutes (or been gunned down by him). But it seems Malvo got away without any drama.

If they had video of Lester, Malvo, and the three victims getting into the elevator, then they would have sent Vegas police or FBI to Bemidji to question Lester, armed with the pictures, including a picture of Malvo. And probably called ahead to have Bemidji police hold Lester in custody until they got there. But they just called the local police station with vague instructions to send someone to question Lester, without any pictures or even details of what happened.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

Since when do you need a passport to travel between the U.S. and Mexico?


----------



## wedgecon (Dec 28, 2002)

lpwcomp said:


> Since when do you need a passport to travel between the U.S. and Mexico?


Since about 2008, you can get away with not having a passport if you drive or walk back but you risk secondary inspection which can take a long time to get through.

If you fly or go on cruise ship you must have a passport.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Even with Lester blowing his cover, sorta, Malvo could have waited until they were all back in a hotel room to kill them. Malvo also could have easily covered for Lester knowing him, unless the dentist brother would suddenly be too cautious to let "Aces" meet his brother.


----------



## Odds Bodkins (Jun 7, 2006)

john4200 said:


> I guess he suspects that Lester was masturbating. But I saw no indication that he was. Lester has always had strange mannerisms. Lester was aware that there was a good chance he was sending his wife to be killed, and he just did not care very much.


I think that's what he's getting at too but that's absolutely not what it looked like to me either.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Or more likely, they saw lobby surveillance video of him getting on the elevator with the victims.


Correct.

Based on the questioning of Lester it was clear they knew he got in the elevator with the other 4 people (i.e. "what happend in the elevator?"). They probably had video of Malvo too, but they didn't know who he was.

Realistic? No, because as had been mentioned, real vegas hotels have cameras everywhere, but we're supposed to suspend belief here and just assume they had cameras where they entered the elevator and that was it.

And also based on this "theory", it's not that illogical that they might send the local cop to question him, as at that point he was just a potential witness. I'm sure they knew the 4th man (who's body wasn't there) was probably the killer.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

spartanstew said:


> And also based on this "theory", it's not that illogical that they might send the local cop to question him, as at that point he was just a potential witness. I'm sure they knew the 4th man (who's body wasn't there) was probably the killer.


Actually, it is unreasonable to assume that. Lester is either a triple-murderer, an accessory, or a witness to a triple murder which he did not report to the police and fled the state suspiciously. Either way, he is in trouble.

And considering that one of the victims is the brother of someone in witness protection, who was apparently in or travelling to Vegas, I would expect the FBI or US Marshals to be talking to Lester posthaste.


----------



## ScubaCat (Jun 26, 2003)

I thought it was interesting that Allison Tolman (Molly Solverson) was working a part time temp position ($11/hour) in Chicago when she tried out for the part in Fargo. I have a feeling she won't need to return to her temp job.


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

1) As stated above, ALL major hotel & casino elevators in Las Vegas have security cameras.

2) Sorry, but the comment above that Lester intentionally goaded Malvo to shoot the others in the elevator is ridiculous. While it's unclear (and nonsensical) why he chose to push the confrontation, his expression of fear and surprise at the shooting makes it clear he was not expecting that to happen. Additionally, there's a reasonable expectation that he could - and should - have been shot as well.

3) Re the question about whether Malvo knows he didn't shoot Lester - yes, you could see him lean over and check the body.

Too many things in this episode were simply unbelievable or completely out of character (even for the "new" Lester). Still enjoyable, but certainly not believable (I'm among those who does not accept that this is based on a true incident).


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Don't the writers of this show know that there are surveillance cameras everywhere in Vegas hotel casinos? The security guards would have responded in less than a minute of Malvo shooting those people in the elevator. And even if they were asleep or something, they would have recorded it, showing Malvo killing the people, and Lester hitting Malvo in the back of the head and leaving. The Vegas police would have done a lot more than send a small town police officer with vague instructions to interview Lester.
> 
> Also, why was Malvo bothering to move the bodies out of the elevator? Just leave them and take off. Or was he really expecting to have time to dispose of the bodies and clean all the blood and gore out of the elevator?
> 
> ...


Yeah there were some HUGE holes in the plotline this week. Heck, NOBODY heard gunshots? Still, this is so highly entertaining and fun (in a weird sort of way) that none of this bothered me in the least and took away from the entertainment value of the show.

Lester is some piece of work. He's either just a HUGE coward despite his change in personality in the past year, or, as said in the thread earlier, he just gets off on watching people die. Either way, if I had to root for him or Malvo, I'm rooting for Malvo.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

stellie93 said:


> *Several times during this episode I'm thinking, why on earth would you do that? Lester continuing to chase Malvo instead of running as soon as he saw him...killing everyone in the elevator instead of letting Lester go and getting him later.*...telling the kids someone died in their house after the dad was so nice to him...cover for your husband when he so obviously is in trouble and not telling you what's going on....(ok, maybe I can see her doing that)
> 
> Do the 2 FBI agents have authority to investigate this? Or is Molly going to get all excited only to have their superiors call and tell them to go home? Assuming anyone lives that long....
> 
> Awesome show. :up:


My thought was that Lester thinks he's "all that" now. He's trying to act up to his new macho self, so he confronts the killer as a way to prove he's more of a man than Malvo. But he's really still the same Lester.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> My thought was that Lester thinks he's "all that" now. He's trying to act up to his new macho self, so he confronts the killer as a way to prove he's more of a man than Malvo. But he's really still the same Lester.


Yeah, we saw that last week when he stapled the kid, and then looked like he was about to run in terror until the kid backed down.

And that was a stupid kid, not Malvo. I'm surprised his expensive new suit didn't require special treatment at the cleaner after the elevator.


----------



## EWiser (Oct 2, 2008)

Billy Bob had a silencer on his gun.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

EWiser said:


> Billy Bob had a silencer on his gun.


A silencer, also known as a suppressor, does not really silence a gunshot. It shapes the sound, removing higher frequencies and drawing it out a little. So, instead of a loud crack, you get something that sounds like a very loud foot stomp or a book slammed onto the floor.

Most people would not immediately identify it as a gunshot, but it would still be an unusual loud(ish) noise.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

In case anybody is curious about how to get across the river...

You take the rabbit across first, leaving the fox with the cabbage.
You come back and pick up the cabbage and take it across.
You take the rabbit back to the first side of the river.
You pick up the fox and take it across the river to be with the cabbage.
You go back and get the rabbit, take it across. Now all 3 of you are across the river.

Why the fox and rabbit don't simply run off when left alone is left as an exercise for the reader.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> Yeah there were some HUGE holes in the plotline this week. Heck, NOBODY heard gunshots? Still, this is so highly entertaining and fun (in a weird sort of way) that none of this bothered me in the least and took away from the entertainment value of the show.


This.



Steveknj said:


> Either way, if I had to root for him or Malvo, I'm rooting for Malvo.


And this.



john4200 said:


> A silencer, also known as a suppressor, does not really silence a gunshot. It shapes the sound, removing higher frequencies and drawing it out a little. So, instead of a loud crack, you get something that sounds like a very loud foot stomp or a book slammed onto the floor.
> 
> Most people would not immediately identify it as a gunshot, but it would still be an unusual loud(ish) noise.


I vote we have a 450 post tangent on whether a suppressor can really change the sound enough to make people think it was or wasn't a gun shot.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

astrohip said:


> I vote we have a 450 post tangent on whether a suppressor can really change the sound enough to make people think it was or wasn't a gun shot.


Especially when further muffled by the elevator.


----------



## squint (Jun 15, 2008)

Which shots? The elevator shots or the insurance office shot? In the former, the elevator would make it louder for those inside but quieter for those outside. Probably quiet enough that no one would really notice.

At the insurance office, it was also in a confined space with no one else nearby.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

astrohip said:


> I vote we have a 450 post tangent on whether a suppressor can really change the sound enough to make people think it was or wasn't a gun shot.


I vote you shoot someone in the head with a suppressed gun and ask them what they heard. Oh, wait....


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

astrohip said:


> I vote we have a 450 post tangent on whether a suppressor can really change the sound enough to make people think it was or wasn't a gun shot.


It depends on location the drive system of the elevator in which it is fired.


----------



## tlc (May 30, 2002)

Do you think Malvo was going to kill Lester, after moving the bodies, because he messed up his hit? Or he decided to after Lester hit him and ran?


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

astrohip said:


> ...I vote we have a 450 post tangent on whether a suppressor can really change the sound enough to make people think it was or wasn't a gun shot.


Don't encourage him....


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Awesome, awesome episode....and it's difficult to believe next week is the finale. I guess we better buckle up.....


----------



## tivoboyjr (Apr 28, 2003)

tlc said:


> Do you think Malvo was going to kill Lester, after moving the bodies, because he messed up his hit? Or he decided to after Lester hit him and ran?


It's really hard to understand some of the motivations and thought processes in this show - especially re Malvo. If Malvo wanted to kill Lester, why not just do it in the elevator? Maybe because he thought Lester could be tied to him more readily than the other people? But then he shoots what he apparently thinks is Lester back at the insurance office, where Malvo knows that at least Molly and Gus are onto him and would certainly suspect him in Lester's death. Maybe he wanted Lester to help move the bodies out of the elevator and then Malvo would've killed Lester. But that gets back to the question of why move the bodies, vs just getting away? In other words, I don't know. Malvo seems to be a very rational, irrational person.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

My wife thinks Lester's motivation in the last episode was to show Malvo that he couldn't be picked on anymore. If you look at how all the people that picked on him are gone and how he handled his wife, his brother, and the police he was getting cocky.

However Malvo raised the bar with his ruthlessness sort of like a father telling his son that he still runs the show.

Given Lester specifically took the coat that Malvo recognized and told his wife not to bring hers and then had her where his coat it tells me he pre thought out his wifes demise. Now was this another show off move to Malvo? We will see next week!

Something else that makes wonder is the running time has always been over an hour. This make me think that it might have been originally intended for pay TV without commercials. Anybody have any data on that?


----------



## Ment (Mar 27, 2008)

tivoboyjr said:


> It's really hard to understand some of the motivations and thought processes in this show - especially re Malvo. If Malvo wanted to kill Lester, why not just do it in the elevator? Maybe because he thought Lester could be tied to him more readily than the other people? But then he shoots what he apparently thinks is Lester back at the insurance office, where Malvo knows that at least Molly and Gus are onto him and would certainly suspect him in Lester's death. Maybe he wanted Lester to help move the bodies out of the elevator and then Malvo would've killed Lester. But that gets back to the question of why move the bodies, vs just getting away? In other words, I don't know. Malvo seems to be a very rational, irrational person.


My theory is that Malvo sees his past self in Lester: agreeable and non-confrontational and so feels some sort of kinship to him. If Malvo is an agent of change for Lester to become a more confident person then thats a good thing from Malvo's perspective. There was no need to tie the loose end that is Lester after the Chicago guys.

But the confident Lester has changed to an *sshole who can't be relied to keep his clap shut so he has to go. Malvo would have killed him out of site of the cameras and away from the hotel but Lester high-tailed it. Having Lester help move the bodies was just a delay tactic for the investigation, he wasn't going to put them into a ice hole.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

zalusky said:


> Something else that makes wonder is the running time has always been over an hour. This make me think that it might have been originally intended for pay TV without commercials. Anybody have any data on that?


That's just the way FX rolls. Sons of Anarchy, Justified, and The Americans always run over too.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Malvo as written is between being Satan himself "This is the best apple pie I've had since the Garden of Eden" and an evil one who just likes causing pain and misery..."Did you see the look on his face when I pulled out the gun?" 'Did you know there was a murder in this house? Chief of Police was shotgunned. Lots of blood. Some people have heard thumping on the stairs from the basement." "All of your father's estate is going to go to your brother." "There's a fella peeing in your car's gas tank."

"Some are prey some are wolves." and the similar thing he said to Stavros.

Lou: Do you know how some are animals ...wolves?


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

zalusky said:


> Given Lester specifically took the coat that Malvo recognized and told his wife not to bring hers and then had her where his coat it tells me he pre thought out his wifes demise. Now was this another show off move to Malvo? We will see next week!


First, let me say that I think it's futile to try to apply logic to this show. But I think this is wrong. I don't see how Lester could have any inclination that Malvo was even in town until he saw the lights on in the office. My guess would be that he planned to kill his wife before they ever got to the airport. Having her coat would have just meant more evidence to get rid of.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Next week:

Bill: Ol' Lester Nygaard jest doesn't have any luck with his wives, ya know? Here his wife gets robbed and killed at the office by another drifter.


----------



## Ment (Mar 27, 2008)

MikeAndrews said:


> Next week:
> 
> Bill: Ol' Lester Nygaard jest doesn't have any luck with his wives, ya know? Here his wife gets robbed and killed at the office by another drifter.


He might be another character that needs face punching..


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Actually, it is unreasonable to assume that. Lester is either a triple-murderer, an accessory, or a witness to a triple murder which he did not report to the police and fled the state suspiciously.


Or, he merely rode in an elevator with 4 people (3 of which were eventually killed by the 4th), and they just wanted to know how the group was acting or if he heard anything (like an argument).


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

spartanstew said:


> Or, he merely rode in an elevator with 4 people (3 of which were eventually killed by the 4th), and they just wanted to know how the group was acting or if he heard anything (like an argument).


No, that is not a reasonable assumption.

Lester was seen talking to the three murder victims and the other guy, and Lester got on the elevator with them, the elevator in which three people were murdered, but Lester did not get off the elevator at the floor to his room.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> No, that is not a reasonable assumption.
> 
> Lester was seen talking to the three murder victims and the other guy, and Lester got on the elevator with them, the elevator in which three people were murdered, but Lester did not get off the elevator at the floor to his room.


Since this hotel seems to lack surveillance cameras not only in the elevators but on the residential floors as well, they have no idea where he got off.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

lpwcomp said:


> Since this hotel seems to lack surveillance cameras not only in the elevators but on the residential floors as well, they have no idea where he got off.


It does not matter. Lester was seen talking to the people, he got on the elevator with them, then minutes later he ran through the basement then went to the lobby and back up to his room, checked out early, and caught an early flight out. There is no way the authorities don't make a beeline for Lester.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

john4200 said:


> It does not matter. Lester was seen talking to the people, he got on the elevator with them, then minutes later he ran through the basement then went to the lobby and back up to his room, checked out early, and caught an early flight out. There is no way the authorities don't make a beeline for Lester.


Bill: Dat Ol' Lester Nygaard never gets a break. He goes to Las Vegas to get Salesman of the Year with his wife and some drifter kills people right in his hotel.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

I have a theory not yet offered.
Let's just assume in the Fargo world the elevator didn't have a camera on the elevator (trust me)


I'll suggest that the person who "reported the witness" to police was Malvo, it's exactly his style.


----------



## markp99 (Mar 21, 2002)

dianebrat said:


> I'll suggest that the person who "reported the witness" to police was Malvo, it's exactly his style.


This was exactly my thought when Molly got word of a witness. I said to myself, "Malvo", just as Seinfeld would say, "Newman."


----------



## thebigmo (Feb 12, 2005)

midas said:


> First, let me say that I think it's futile to try to apply logic to this show. But I think this is wrong. I don't see how Lester could have any inclination that Malvo was even in town until he saw the lights on in the office. My guess would be that he planned to kill his wife before they ever got to the airport. Having her coat would have just meant more evidence to get rid of.


I don't think he was planning to kill her. He just figured that Malvo was going to be coming after him so he sent her in wearing his coat so that if Malvo was in there, it would be her to get shot instead of Lester.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

thebigmo said:


> I don't think he was planning to kill her. He just figured that Malvo was going to be coming after him so he sent her in wearing his coat so that if Malvo was in there, it would be her to get shot instead of Lester.


When he sent her into the office it was obvious. What I'm talking about is why he told his wife not to bother taking her coat when they left the house. My point was that he would have no idea Malvo was going to be at the office when they left the house.


----------



## thebigmo (Feb 12, 2005)

midas said:


> When he sent her into the office it was obvious. What I'm talking about is why he told his wife not to bother taking her coat when they left the house. My point was that he would have no idea Malvo was going to be at the office when they left the house.


He did have an idea that Malvo *MIGHT* be there. When they first got home he was looking around at the woods, peeking around corners, keeping watch out the windows to see if Malvo was around the house already. He knew he was going to send her into the office so he made sure that she would be wearing his coat so it would be hard to tell who she was. Then if Malvo isn't there, they are off to Mexico as planned. But if Malvo is there, then it isn't himself that gets shot.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I think when he told her not to take her coat, he was just thinking about going to Mexico. It wasn't him being clever about Malvo; it was the writers being a little clumsy to set up what followed.

(As well as having Malvo turn on the freakin' light while lying in ambush.)


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think when he told her not to take her coat, he was just thinking about going to Mexico. It wasn't him being clever about Malvo; it was the writers being a little clumsy to set up what followed.
> 
> (As well as having Malvo turn on the freakin' light while lying in ambush.)


Malvo had no idea that Lester was going to go by the office, so was he willing to wait until daylight and Lester's return from Acapulco?


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Would a police investigation of a murdered person in the witness-protection program be less overt (i.e., handled differently) than a regular murder investigation?


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

john4200 said:


> No, that is not a reasonable assumption.
> 
> Lester was seen talking to the three murder victims and the other guy, and Lester got on the elevator with them, the elevator in which three people were murdered, but Lester did not get off the elevator at the floor to his room.


Seen by whom?

We know what happened, so you can't base things on that. IF there were merely a camera in the elevator lobby, all the police would know was that the 4 people entered the elevator together, then as the door was closing, another individual stopped the door to get on. They wouldn't necessarily know he was talking to them previously or that he did not get off on his floor.

Now, a little police work would have answered those questions, but this is not a show about stellar police work, nor is it one where the police make reasonable assumptions/conclusions.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

john4200 said:


> It does not matter. Lester was seen talking to the people, he got on the elevator with them, then minutes later he ran through the basement then went to the lobby and back up to his room, checked out early, and caught an early flight out. There is no way the authorities don't make a beeline for Lester.


Again, we don't know if he was seen talking with them. He didn't get on the elevator with them, he got on afterward. We're the only ones that know he ran through the basement and then back to his room.

You're giving too much credit to the police in a show that's mainly about incompetent police work.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> It does not matter. Lester was seen talking to the people, he got on the elevator with them, then minutes later he ran through the basement then went to the lobby and back up to his room, checked out early, and caught an early flight out. There is no way the authorities don't make a beeline for Lester.


I agree that they would have done far more than ask the local police to speak to him, I was simply addressing your contention that they knew on which floor he got off. I guess I should have edited the quote.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

MikeAndrews said:


> Malvo had no idea that Lester was going to go by the office, so was he willing to wait until daylight and Lester's return from Acapulco?


How would Malvo have known Lester was off to Acapulco?


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

DreadPirateRob said:


> How would Malvo have known Lester was off to Acapulco?


That's the point. He wouldn't. He'd hole up in the office for a few weeks. Hope he brought food.

Actually, Malvo might have predicted that Lester was going to high tail it.


----------



## tlc (May 30, 2002)

Malvo didn't know where Lester lived now, so the office was his only hope. It doesn't mean he knew Lester was running, because you wouldn't expect anyone to keep their passport in their office.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

spartanstew said:


> Seen by whom?


The bartender, people in the bar, hotel staff, people in the lobby, etc. This was a Las Vegas hotel casino hosting a conference. Even at night there are people everywhere.

Then there are surveillance cameras all over the hotel. Certainly in the lobby, near the elevators, and probably in the basement, too (security office is in the basement).

You seem to be assuming that Vegas police are completely incompetent. One of the themes of the show is about incompetent small town police (and a couple bad FBI agents). But that is no reason to assume that all law enforcement are morons. And they would have to be complete morons not to put things together given all the easily available evidence.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

getreal said:


> Would a police investigation of a murdered person in the witness-protection program be less overt (i.e., handled differently) than a regular murder investigation?


The BROTHER of a person in Witness Protection, not the person himself in WP.

And no, probably not. Local police would not even be aware that someone was in Witness Protection, and I doubt the Marshal Service would tell them. But the local police might guess there was a connection when US Marshals started asking questions.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

dianebrat said:


> I have a theory not yet offered.
> Let's just assume in the Fargo world the elevator didn't have a camera on the elevator (trust me)
> 
> I'll suggest that the person who "reported the witness" to police was Malvo, it's exactly his style.


It does not matter. The bartender (and probably other people in that lounge, and probably people in the lobby) saw them together. And surveillance in the lobby saw Malvo and the murder victims go to the elevator followed by Lester.


----------



## AeneaGames (May 2, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think when he told her not to take her coat, he was just thinking about going to Mexico. It wasn't him being clever about Malvo; it was the writers being a little clumsy to set up what followed.
> 
> (As well as having Malvo turn on the freakin' light while lying in ambush.)


That orange coat was hanging in the basement, something told me that it was his old coat that he kept as a spare or something. When he got the gun from the basement he looked at the coat for a few seconds, he stares at it for a bit and then grabs it.

To me it looked like he took that coat on purpose since he wasn't wearing the orange one when they got home...


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

You know, I'm all for nit picking, but c'mon people, this is a Coen Brother's production. They barely have a nodding acquaintance with reality.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

john4200 said:


> The BROTHER of a person in Witness Protection, not the person himself in WP.
> 
> And no, probably not. Local police would not even be aware that someone was in Witness Protection, and I doubt the Marshal Service would tell them. But the local police might guess there was a connection when US Marshals started asking questions.


If the brother was still "in good standing" in Witness Protection, his handler would know that the dentist brother was killed and that the target was going to Vegas to meet him. As I know by watching TV, protectees can drop out and go it alone.

See The Family.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

AeneaGames said:


> That orange coat was hanging in the basement, something told me that it was his old coat that he kept as a spare or something. When he got the gun from the basement he looked at the coat for a few seconds, he stares at it for a bit and then grabs it.
> 
> To me it looked like he took that coat on purpose since he wasn't wearing the orange one when they got home...


Yes, it looked like a deliberate plan to me, too. Lester did not especially want to kill his wife, but he did not really care too much if she died, as long as he was okay. So he took the coat to use her as a decoy.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

lpwcomp said:


> You know, I'm all for nit picking, but c'mon people, this is a Coen Brother's production. They barely have a nodding acquaintance with reality.


Inspired by the Coen brothers, but they barely have a nodding acquaintance with this series -- their main contribution is cashing their "executive producer" paychecks.


----------



## Johnny Dancing (Sep 3, 2000)

lpwcomp said:


> You know, I'm all for nit picking, but c'mon people, this is a Coen Brother's production. They barely have a nodding acquaintance with reality.


I agree. I can't believe all the over analysis of this show like it's a real life crime drama. It's a dark comedy and not meant to be realistic. The idea is to dabble in the absurd.

That said, I am loving every minute of it. Brings back memories of season one of Twin Peaks.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

john4200 said:


> The bartender, people in the bar, hotel staff, people in the lobby, etc. This was a Las Vegas hotel casino hosting a conference. Even at night there are people everywhere.


I don't recall it being mentioned that they talked to all those people.



john4200 said:


> Then there are surveillance cameras all over the hotel. Certainly in the lobby, near the elevators, and probably in the basement, too (security office is in the basement).


You're assuming that. I would assume they had cameras in the elevator itself too, but we've already established that they must not have.



john4200 said:


> You seem to be assuming that Vegas police are completely incompetent. One of the themes of the show is about incompetent small town police (and a couple bad FBI agents). But that is no reason to assume that all law enforcement are morons. And they would have to be complete morons not to put things together given all the easily available evidence.


Until they show evidence to the contrary, correct. My assumption, based on the way the show is written is that all police officers (except one) are incompetent. Every officer they've shown (small town, FBI, etc.) is an idiot (again, with the exception of one), so why would I assume that the Vegas PD is any different?

Should they have known Lester was involved? Clearly. But they didn't think so. So, what's your theory as to why they didn't think he was involved and just sent a local cop to interview him?

Are you just going with bad writing? If you don't want to suspend disbelief then come up with another theory as to why they just sent her to question him?

My theory is that there was only the one camera at the elevator. They saw him get in after the group of 4. They have no evidence that he knew them or had ever spoken to them. He got off the elevator, proceeded to his room, checked out and went home. If he would have witnessed a murder, he would have said something (in their view), so they sent the local cop to talk to him and see if he would remember anything important during that brief elevator trip with the 4 strangers.

Does it make sense? Not really, but either do many other things on the show. At least it's a theory/explanation.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

john4200 said:


> The bartender, people in the bar, hotel staff, people in the lobby, etc. This was a Las Vegas hotel casino hosting a conference. Even at night there are people everywhere.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

spartanstew said:


> You're assuming that.


I'm not assuming that the security office is in the basement. That was documented.

And you are assuming a lot of absurd things. What does talking have to do with anything? And why does talking have to be mentioned? Lester talked to the bartender and shared lingering glances with that girl. Malvo talked to at least one waitress in the lounge. The lounge was filled with people who saw Lester and Malvo and company. People saw when Lester went over to talk to Malvo. People saw Malvo leave and Lester follow.


----------



## JTAnderson (Jun 6, 2000)

thebigmo said:


> I don't think he was planning to kill her. He just figured that Malvo was going to be coming after him so he sent her in wearing his coat so that if Malvo was in there, it would be her to get shot instead of Lester.


Bingo!


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

thebigmo said:


> I don't think he was planning to kill her. He just figured that Malvo was going to be coming after him so he sent her in wearing his coat so that if Malvo was in there, it would be her to get shot instead of Lester.





JTAnderson said:


> Bingo!


I think you both missed the same thing I did on first viewing - the printout. He only bought one, one-way ticket, with his name on it.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

lpwcomp said:


> I think you both missed the same thing I did on first viewing - the printout. He only bought one, one-way ticket, with his name on it.


On the screen we only saw his own ticket. But he could have printed another for his wife that we did not see on screen. He had two folded papers in his hand when he asked his wife if she was ready to go. I suppose one of them could be a fake, but if so, why bother? Just have his ticket in his pocket and tell her he has hers, too. I could see it going either way.

If he did only buy his own ticket, then he must not be planning to ever come back to his identity in the US. Or else it could just be his stupidity showing. Hard to tell with him.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> On the screen we only saw his own ticket. But he could have printed another for his wife that we did not see on screen. He had two folded papers in his hand when he asked his wife if she was ready to go. I suppose one of them could be a fake, but if so, why bother? Just have his ticket in his pocket and tell her he has hers, too. I could see it going either way.
> 
> If he did only buy his own ticket, then he must not be planning to ever come back to his identity in the US. Or else it could just be his stupidity showing. Hard to tell with him.


Go look at it again. He sits down at the computer, finishes entering the info, gets the
"GLENDALE AIRLINES - ITINERARY" display which reads "One way, 1 passenger" and "Passenger LESTER NYGARD", prints it, gets up, takes it from the printer and walks to the kitchen. I don't know where the second piece of paper came from but he didn't print it out at that time and it wasn't her itinerary.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

lpwcomp said:


> I think you both missed the same thing I did on first viewing - the printout. He only bought one, one-way ticket, with his name on it.


I looked at again and the screen said 1 passenger. He looked around a couple times and they showed the screen twice and it only showed Lester.

It's pretty clear to me it was premeditated. I also think he was sending a message to Malvo.

Now play nice!


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

lpwcomp said:


> Go look at it again. He sits down at the computer, finishes entering the info, gets the
> "GLENDALE AIRLINES - ITINERARY" display which reads "One way, 1 passenger" and "Passenger LESTER NYGARD", prints it, gets up, takes it from the printer and walks to the kitchen. I don't know where the second piece of paper came from but he didn't print it out at that time and it wasn't her itinerary.


I already looked. As I said, we only saw his ticket on the screen. That does not mean he did not print another "one way, 1 passenger" ticket. I don't know about your computer, by my computer is capable of printing more than is just shown on one screen at a time.

Anyway, it does not make sense for him not to get her a ticket, too. He is obviously well off. He should just buy her a ticket even if he does not expect her to come. That way he is covered no matter how things turn out.

And why hold up something that looks like two tickets if he has only one?


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

john4200 said:


> And you are assuming a lot of absurd things.


Like what? I'm not assuming anything. I'm trying to come up with a semi-plausible reason why they would have the local cop interview Lester - something you've yet to do.



john4200 said:


> What does talking have to do with anything? And why does talking have to be mentioned?


I'm not sure how familiar you are with police procedure, but generally they talk to potential witnesses (hence, the talking). It doesn't have to be mentioned, but if you're claiming they have witnesses that saw Lester with Malvo, they must have talked to those witnesses, no? Since it wasn't mentioned, you're assuming they did. I'm theorizing that they hadn't had a chance to do that yet.



john4200 said:


> Lester talked to the bartender and shared lingering glances with that girl. Malvo talked to at least one waitress in the lounge. The lounge was filled with people who saw Lester and Malvo and company. People saw when Lester went over to talk to Malvo. People saw Malvo leave and Lester follow.


I never disputed any of that.

You still didn't answer either of my questions. What's your theory? Or are you just debating for the sake of debating? Which is fine too, just would like some clarification.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

Theories:

They did not show it but he and Malvo worked out an agreement in the elevator or even before to whack the wife.

He is setting up Malvo and is planning to get the police to arrive shortly.

He has wanted to get rid of the wife for a while and this opportunity presented itself.

He wants to show Malvo he can be just as calculating and cold.

Maybe Malvo and he have a connection we don't know about.

The second piece of paper may simply have been the itinerary or the ticket receipt.
There was really nothing in that scene that indicated he was going to take the wife other than his mouth. All his body language indicated otherwise.

One ticket showed.
He brings his jacket and tells her not to bring hers.
Tells her to go in to get the passports (we're they ever there).
His reaction when she got whacked.




Now play nice!


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> I already looked. As I said, we only saw his ticket on the screen. That does not mean he did not print another "one way, 1 passenger" ticket. I don't know about your computer, by my computer is capable of printing more than is just shown on one screen at a time.
> 
> Anyway, it does not make sense for him not to get her a ticket, too. He is obviously well off. He should just buy her a ticket even if he does not expect her to come. That way he is covered no matter how things turn out.


So we're supposed to assume that they showed the screen - twice - and him printing one page in a deliberate attempt to mislead the observant viewer. As I said, I didn't notice it the first time. It was all of the talk in this thread about Lester's intentions that prompted me to look at it again.



john4200 said:


> And why hold up something that looks like two tickets if he has only one?


To keep his wife from asking the obvious question.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

Whether or not the Coen brothers are directly involved in the production, it's still taking place in their warped universe.

Not to mention that the writer is the creator of "The Unusuals".


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

I also go back to the elevator where Malvo said to Lester "Do you really want to do this"!

Once he got his visual answer Malvo decided to finish his current job and proceed to the Lester job just play out that theory.

Remember in the movie Jerry actually hired the bad guys to kidnap the wife because he needed money. He may have done that with Malvo except to kill her.
We have no idea of their one year later relationship other than they were married. We have no idea of the financial situation with the business.


Now play nice!


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

spartanstew said:


> I'm trying to come up with a semi-plausible reason why they would have the local cop interview Lester - something you've yet to do.


No, your "theory" is not at all plausible. How could the police (see, if you want to be understood, you need to say "police", not just "they") possibly send someone to interview Lester without having viewed the hotel security tapes and talked to some of the people in the lounge and the lobby?

As I have already said, I do not think it is possible to explain what we saw. It just does not make sense without making absurd assumptions.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

lpwcomp said:


> So we're supposed to assume that they showed the screen - twice - and him printing one page in a deliberate attempt to mislead the observant viewer.


How do you know he only printed "one page"? He had two pieces of paper in his hand when he went to his wife.

And you still have not adequately answered my question of why he would hold what looks like two tickets up to his wife. If he was concerned about her asking questions, he could have just gotten her a ticket, or have not shown her anything and told her he had the tickets in his pocket.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

zalusky said:


> I also go back to the elevator where Malvo said to Lester "Do you really want to do this"!
> 
> Once he got his visual answer Malvo decided to finish his current job and proceed to the Lester job just play out that theory.


Actually, Malvo said "Is this what you want?" Lester shrugged and said "uh.." and sort of shook his head in a way that said (at least to me), "I dunno, maybe". Malvo then said. "Lester, is this what you want?... Yes or No?" Lester responded "Yes". From Lester's reaction to the shootings, I think Lester thought he was asking "Do you really want to continue with this confrontation". IMHO,Lester took Malvo's initial denial of him as a "Dis".



zalusky said:


> Remember in the movie Jerry actually hired the bad guys to kidnap the wife because he needed money. He may have done that with Malvo except to kill her.
> We have no idea of their one year later relationship other than they were married. We have no idea of the financial situation with the business.


Sorry, not buy'n it. If that were the case, there would have been no need to have her put on his jacket with the hood up.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

lpwcomp said:


> Actually, Malvo said "Is this what you want?" Lester shrugged and said "uh.." and sort of shook his head in a way that said (at least to me), "I dunno, maybe". Malvo then said. "Lester, is this what you want?... Yes or No?" Lester responded "Yes". From Lester's reaction to the shootings, I think Lester thought he was asking "Do you really want to continue with this confrontation". IMHO,Lester took Malvo's initial denial of him as a "Dis".
> 
> Sorry, not buy'n it. If that were the case, there would have been no need to have her put on his jacket with the hood up.


Thanks for the word correction.

At least in this scenario Lester can say Malvo was out to get me and mistook my wife for me. If she walked in without the jacket then it looks more like a hit on her and people would consider who had motive.

Now play nice!


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> How do you know he only printed "one page"? He had two pieces of paper in his hand when he went to his wife.


Cause unless they cut out quite a bit for no reason, there simply wasn't time



john4200 said:


> And you still have not adequately answered my question of why he would hold what looks like two tickets up to his wife. If he was concerned about her asking questions, he could have just gotten her a ticket, or have not shown her anything and told her he had the tickets in his pocket.


You're just unwilling to accept the answer. Meanwhile, you have completely ignored _*my*_ question as to why they would show the single passenger itinerary and the printing of one page.

In any case, I sure hope we find out what's what next week.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

zalusky said:


> At least in this scenario Lester can say Malvo was out to get me and mistook my wife for me. If she walked in without the jacket then it looks more like a hit on her and people would consider who had motive.


"And just why would Mr. Malvo want to kill you, Mr. Nygard?"


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

lpwcomp said:


> "And just why would Mr. Malvo want to kill you, Mr. Nygard?"


Because maybe the police think your a witness!

Now play nice!


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

zalusky said:


> Because maybe the police think your a witness!


"How did Mr. Malvo know who were and where you lived?"


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

lpwcomp said:


> "How did Mr. Malvo know who were and where you lived?"


The police can just assume Mr. Malvo just asked around in Vegas who is this guy that won't that award. I don't consider it a big deal and in fact it was probably part of the plan to leak that Lester was a witness when most likely nobody saw the murders in Vegas.

We shall see. I also had some other scenarios that I outlined previously

Now play nice!


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

lpwcomp said:


> You're just unwilling to accept the answer. Meanwhile, you have completely ignored _*my*_ question as to why they would show the single passenger itinerary and the printing of one page.


I'm willing to accept any reasonable answer.

And they did not show the printing of one page, so your question is a non-starter.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

john4200 said:


> I'm willing to accept any reasonable answer.
> 
> And they did not show the printing of one page, so your question is a non-starter.


I suggested it could simply be the payment page, itinerary page or even a terms and conditions page. It is not unusual to get multiple pages. They never showed what was in the multiple pages but they did make a point of showing a screen shot of a ticket that said 1 passenger.

Now play nice!


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

zalusky said:


> I suggested it could simply be the payment page, itinerary page or even a terms and conditions page.


Why would Lester fold up a terms and condition page and wave it like a second ticket?


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Why would Lester fold up a terms and condition page and wave it like a second ticket?


As has been previously mentioned, to distract his wife from the fact there's only 1 one-way ticket, heck it could be a blank piece of paper.

It's no accident that they showed the ONE passenger ONE-WAY ticket on the screen TWICE, you keep saying folks are "making assumptions" but the assumptions you're making are far more creative IMO than what anyone else is suggesting.

Lester is already lying about the trip, it's not a stretch to suggest he's got more lies in there, and the show has been very good about showing you that he's moving that way.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> I'm willing to accept any reasonable answer.






john4200 said:


> And they did not show the printing of one page, so your question is a non-starter.


They didn't? You mean the computer screen with the big "Printing" progress bar is not in the version you saw? No wonder you are confused.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

lpwcomp said:


> I think you both missed the same thing I did on first viewing - the printout. He only bought one, one-way ticket, with his name on it.


If that was true, that would kinda be strong evidence that Lester had a hand in the da wife's murder.

It occurred to me that in the end it has to be Lester that kills Bill, jest sos we can see the look on his face.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

MikeAndrews said:


> If that was true, that would kinda be strong evidence that Lester had a hand in the da wife's murder.


Since it is a one-way ticket, I don't think that much concerns him.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

lpwcomp said:


> Actually, Malvo said "Is this what you want?" Lester shrugged and said "uh.." and sort of shook his head in a way that said (at least to me), "I dunno, maybe". Malvo then said. "Lester, is this what you want?... Yes or No?" Lester responded "Yes". From Lester's reaction to the shootings, I think Lester thought he was asking "Do you really want to continue with this confrontation". IMHO,Lester took Malvo's initial denial of him as a "Dis".


Yeah. I'm with you that taking that at face value is all it was. Lester was all aglow and tipsy from his "Salesman of the Year" kudos, the new wife, and how well he pulled off getting away with everything. So he goes up to Malvo as sorta a co-conspirator and Malvo says he doesn't know him and tells him to walk away. Lester thinks that "Super Lester" doesn't have to listen to even Malvo. Lester is wrong.

We didn't mention how Malvo gets off listening to his collection of recordings of hits, including Lesters' phone call.

Those tapes will make for some fine evidence in the end.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

lpwcomp said:


> They didn't? You mean the computer screen with the big "Printing" progress bar is not in the version you saw? No wonder you are confused.


It did not say "printing 1 page". You do know that computers can print more than one page at a time, right?



lpwcomp said:


> Since it is a one-way ticket, I don't think that much concerns him.


You seem to be making a big assumption.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

dianebrat said:


> As has been previously mentioned, to distract his wife from the fact there's only 1 one-way ticket, heck it could be a blank piece of paper.


People keep saying that, but it still is not a reasonable answer. Why not just buy his wife a ticket? Or not show her any tickets at all?


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

john4200 said:


> How could the police (see, if you want to be understood, you need to say "police", not just "they") possibly send someone to interview Lester without having viewed the hotel security tapes and talked to some of the people in the lounge and the lobby?


They did view the tape (singular), which is how they knew he entered the elevator after them. As for interviewing the people in the lounge/lobby, first, the police might not have known they were in the lounge, and second, they might not have done it YET. The local police received the call the next morning to interview Lester. What time did the killing take place? Midnight? They called the local police first thing the next morning. Maybe they hadn't yet talked to any of those people who might be witnesses cause only 8 hours or so had passed during which most of those witnesses would be sleeping or the police wouldn't know where to find them (yet). They knew about Lester only because of the elevator security tape. That's all they have (that we can surmise).


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

spartanstew said:


> They did view the tape (singular), which is how they knew he entered the elevator after them. As for interviewing the people in the lounge/lobby, first, the police might not have known they were in the lounge, and second, they might not have done it YET.


Then the police knew from reviewing video that Lester followed Malvo and company out of the lounge. Then they also knew that Lester circled around and came back up to his room a few minutes later. The police would obviously have retraced Lester's path back to the lounge and talked to people there, certainly the bartender and waitresses. Of course they would have already done that. The police did not just look around and then say, okay, we are going home for a nap.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> It did not say "printing 1 page". You do know that computers can print more than one page at a time, right?
> 
> You seem to be making a big assumption.


I know how computers work. I saw the sequence of events. He went from the payment screen to the Itinerary screen and hit the on screen "Print" button. You can keep insisting that he printed more than page and we just didn't see it, but that is ridiculous. You keep accusing others of "assuming" things but it is YOU that is making numerous assumptions and turning a blind eye to anything that is at odds with your theory.

You continue to ignore the question of why we were shown the single passenger page.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

lpwcomp said:


> You can keep insisting that he printed more than page and we just didn't see it, but that is ridiculous. You keep accusing others of "assuming" things but it is YOU that is making numerous assumptions and turning a blind eye to anything that is at odds with your theory.


Wrong again. There are several things we did not see. We did not see him entering the information to buy the ticket. We did not see him carefully tri-folding up the two pieces of paper that he waved in front of his wife.

But you are right that YOU are making numerous assumptions and turning a blind eye to anything that is at odds with your theory.

I do not have a theory. I said it could go either way.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Wrong again. There are several things we did not see. We did not see him entering the information to buy the ticket. We did not see him carefully tri-folding up the two pieces of paper that he waved in front of his wife.
> 
> But you are right that YOU are making numerous assumptions and turning a blind eye to anything that is at odds with your theory.
> 
> I do not have a theory. I said it could go either way.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Then the police knew from reviewing video that Lester followed Malvo and company out of the lounge. Then they also knew that Lester circled around and came back up to his room a few minutes later. The police would obviously have retraced Lester's path back to the lounge and talked to people there, certainly the bartender and waitresses. Of course they would have already done that. The police did not just look around and then say, okay, we are going home for a nap.


There's no evidence to suggest the video included parts of the lounge. There's no evidence to suggest he was following them. There's no evidence to suggest the police knew what his path was (in order to retrace it). There's no evidence to suggest that the bartender and waitress might have already left work.

If we're comfortable with the belief that this particular hotel didn't have camera's in the elevator (which clearly it didn't), why are you so uncomfortable with the fact that possibly the only camera was right in front of the elevator that just showed people coming and going? If that were the case, they would not know anything about the lounge. And even if they did think he'd been in the lounge, any people that saw Lester (especially those that saw him talk to Malvo, which the bartender and waitress might not have) might not be there any longer. It's not implausible in that scenario to think that they wanted to hurry up and have someone local question him post haste while they were looking/rounding up witnesses in Vegas.

But obviously, nothing I say will persuade you and since you refuse to come up with your own scenario as to why they wanted the local police to question Lester (even though I've asked a couple of times), we'll just leave it as you think the writers did a terrible job with this and I believe they've created a strange world where even the improbable is possible.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

spartanstew said:


> There's no evidence to suggest he was following them.


Of course there is evidence that he was following them. The lobby surveillance shows Malvo and company leaving the lounge and crossing to the elevator, and Lester following them. The lobby employees and lobby patrons also saw it.

The only camera in the whole hotel casino is one right in front of the elevator, and all the employees and patrons magically disappeared from the lobby while this group was going through? Do you have a stand-up comedy show in Vegas, by any chance? 

Of course the nonsense you are posting will not "persuade me". If you insist on coming up with completely absurd scenarios, then you will never "persuade me". I'm certainly not going to invent some ridiculous scenario that is totally impossible to try to fix the problems with the events of this episode.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Wrong again. There are several things we did not see. We did not see him entering the information to buy the ticket. We did not see him carefully tri-folding up the two pieces of paper that he waved in front of his wife.
> 
> But you are right that YOU are making numerous assumptions and turning a blind eye to anything that is at odds with your theory.
> 
> I do not have a theory. I said it could go either way.


ohMYGAWD, I just can not believe that you can't accept our assumptions of items they showed on multiple shots, yet you're asking for them to show every step of minutia in the buying of the tickets.

that's it, I'm not even going to try with this discussion anymore.


----------



## tlc (May 30, 2002)




----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

dianebrat said:


> ohMYGAWD, I just can not believe that you can't accept our assumptions of items they showed on multiple shots, yet you're asking for them to show every step of minutia in the buying of the tickets.


There are multiple sets of assumptions possible. Since it would be easy, and much less suspicious, for Lester to buy two tickets, it would be reasonable to assume that when he held up what looked like two tickets, that they were indeed two tickets. Alternatively, one could assume that Lester is a moron and he did only buy one ticket. It could go either way.

When did I ask "for them to show every step of minutia in the buying of the tickets"?


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Check out this discussion.


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/FargoTV/comments/27vmbh


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

OK, now they are REALLY stretching credibility. There's no Terminal 1 at IAH. They are A through E!!!!!!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Plus Glendale Airlines doesn't even GO to Acapulco!


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

betts4 said:


> Check out this discussion.
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/FargoTV/comments/27vmbh


Thanks for that link, Betts4! More enjoyable and informative thread to read as it doesn't get bogged down and dominated by one (or two) member's frustratingly argumentative posts. :up:

Bookmarked.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

john4200 said:


> If you insist on coming up with completely absurd scenarios, then you will never "persuade me". I'm certainly not going to invent some ridiculous scenario that is totally impossible to try to fix the problems with the events of this episode.


Improbably is not the same thing as impossible. The whole show is based on the improbable. If you can't accept that, this probably isn't the show for you.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

betts4 said:


> Check out this discussion.
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/FargoTV/comments/27vmbh


Several people in that thread pointed out the possibility that there were two things printed. Note the approximately half-size thumb in the scroll bar:


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

spartanstew said:


> Improbably is not the same thing as impossible. The whole show is based on the improbable. If you can't accept that, this probably isn't the show for you.


Improbably is an adverb, impossible is an adjective. The whole language is based on parts of speech. If you can't accept that, then English is probably not the language for you.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

getreal said:


> Thanks for that link, Betts4! More enjoyable and informative thread to read as it doesn't get bogged down and dominated by one (or two) member's frustratingly argumentative posts. :up:
> 
> Bookmarked.


LOL  Well I just googled "lester printing out ticket on fargo".

Google is my friend.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Plus Glendale Airlines doesn't even GO to Acapulco!


Not to mention "Meal Service: L" on a domestic flight that leaves at 11:00 P.M.? Even in first class you don't get "L" on a flight at that time!

(Notice I didn't say anything about the Houston-Acapulco flight -- I'm not making any assumptions, based on what meal I got a couple years ago on a Dublin-Newark flight that left at about 9:00 A.M.)


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I can see the writers sitting around a table going "bwaahhaaha....let's see what else we can put in there to drive those nitpicky fans crazy!!"


----------



## GoPackGo (Dec 29, 2012)

I can see some intern on the CG house's team get saddled with making the airline website graphics, and making it for one ticket instead of two because intern.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

betts4 said:


> Check out this discussion.
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/FargoTV/comments/27vmbh


When I saw that screen I basically said "Lester, that's _cold_". And I was just thinking he was going to run off and abandon his wife; not send her off to likely be killed!

But I was second guessing myelf when he appeared to have two tickets in that next scene and told her that he had both their tickets.

I think the show could have done a better job at avoiding this kind of questioning. If they'd intended for him to only have a ticket for himself they should have better clued the viewers in in that 2nd scene that there was still only one ticket. 
If they'd intended him to have two tickets the displayed computer screen shouldn't have given the impression that he was only getting himself a ticket.
And if they intended the psych out (one ticket but we'll make you think for a second there were two) then they should really have cleared up which it was before the end of the episode.

But it's ultimately a minor point and I'm looking forward to this weeks finale. :up:


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

I going to (slightly) change my position and say he probably did print two sheets out. However, there's something else I noticed on the first viewing that I thought was a mistake. The "Printing" progress bar regresses. I now think he printed the same page twice.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

There is another logical problem here with the argument that he only printed his own page but held up two pages to fool his wife.

That argument is based on the idea that his itinerary says "1 passenger", the apparent assumption being that if he had gotten his wife a ticket, it would say "2 passengers". 

But if that were the case, then he would only need to hold up one page (which would say something like "2 passengers" but he flashed it so that she could not read it so it would be okay if it said "1 passenger") to fool his wife. But the argument I have seen in this thread is that he held up two pages so his wife would think he got two tickets.

Why would he do that if one page could just say "2 passengers"?

Note that what we saw on the screen did not look like an actual ticket, aka boarding pass. It was an "itinerary". When you check in at the front gate, you just show them your ID and then they print your ticket for you.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

john4200 said:


> There is another logical problem here with the argument that he only printed his own page but held up two pages to fool his wife.


But why would clever old Lester make the terrorist mistake and not only buy a one way ticket, but only buy ONE?

"Mr. Nygaard, if your wife was getting money and passport*s* out of the safe for your trip, why didn't you buy her a ticket?"


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

MikeAndrews said:


> But why would clever old Lester make the terrorist mistake and not only buy a one way ticket, but only buy ONE?
> 
> "Mr. Nygaard, if you're wife was getting money and passport*s* out of the safe for your trip, why didn't you buy her a ticket?"


Not that I think this happened but your all presuming that he made real ticket(s) vs just mocking up something in word and printing it to fake his wife out. Assuming that was the case there would be no evidence they were leaving town and what you would have is a murder by someone thinking that it was Lester.

Malvo asked Lester "If he wanted to do this"

Malvo may/may not have alerted the police that Lester may have been a witness to murders in Las Vegas.

Malvo came to town and let it be known he was looking for Lester by asking about him in the diner owned by Molly's father.

Malvo then calmly waited at Lester's new office as Lester drove up and told his wife to go inside wearing his jacket. Why would he wait unless it was prearranged!

After the hit Malvo and Lester then had a quiet look at each other. Fade to black.

All of this makes it look like Lester was the target and he gets off.

In the original movie Jerry deliberately hired the bad guys to kidnap his wife.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

zalusky said:


> Not that I think this happened but your all presuming that he made real ticket(s) vs just mocking up something in word and printing it to fake his wife out. Assuming that was the case there would be no evidence they were leaving town and what you would have is a murder by someone thinking that it was Lester.


Not really sure how Lester can push the fact that the murder was intended for him. I think he knows that he can't turn in Malvo because Malvo knows that Lester killed his wife.



> Malvo asked Lester "If he wanted to do this"
> 
> Malvo may/may not have alerted the police that Lester may have been a witness to murders in Las Vegas.


Makes no sense. I would almost see Malvo saying Lester was the killer, but I see no logic that Malvo would label him a witness.



> Malvo came to town and let it be known he was looking for Lester by asking about him in the diner owned by Molly's father.
> 
> Malvo then calmly waited at Lester's new office as Lester drove up and told his wife to go inside wearing his jacket. Why would he wait unless it was prearranged!


I don't think he was waiting for Lester. I think he broke into the office to try to find out where Lester lived.



> After the hit Malvo and Lester then had a quiet look at each other. Fade to black.
> 
> All of this makes it look like Lester was the target and he gets off.


The lights in the car were off. I'm not convinced Malvo could see Lester.

I just don't buy the prearranged stuff. Malvo was obviously in Vegas to kill the brother of the dentist, not the 3 people in the elevator. And I don't believe the attempt by Lester to knock Malvo in the head would have happened if anything was prearranged.

My thinking hasn't really changed. Lester planned to kill his wife before he left town. He just got lucky, saw the opportunity, and let Malvo do it for him. I don't think he was worried about having the answer questions about 1 or 2 tickets or one-way tickets. I think he expected to be on the run and never have to talk to anyone in Bemidji again.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

midas said:


> Not really sure how Lester can push the fact that the murder was intended for him. I think he knows that he can't turn in Malvo because Malvo knows that Lester killed his wife.
> 
> Makes no sense. I would almost see Malvo saying Lester was the killer, but I see no logic that Malvo would label him a witness.
> 
> ...


Go through the points with this caveat: Lester hired Malvo in Vegas to kill his wife and then they came up with a scenario that makes Lester look like a victim and not somebody who hired Malvo.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I'm a little confused on Lester's thought process if he bought a single one-way ticket. Whether he was planning to kill his wife or whether he was expecting that Malvo would do it, the fact that he bought a single, one-way ticket suggests that he was planning to run and was leaving behind some obvious evidence of how to track him. 

If he really was intending for his wife not to make the trip, then he should have bought both of them tix and then just driven out of town after she died, never actually going to the airport.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

zalusky said:


> Go through the points with this caveat: Lester hired Malvo in Vegas to kill his wife and then they came up with a scenario that makes Lester look like a victim and not somebody who hired Malvo.


I don't think "caveat" means what you think it does. And I don't buy your theory for a second.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

lpwcomp said:


> I don't think "caveat" means what you think it does. And I don't buy your theory for a second.


Ok lets use the word "Premise" or "Hypothesis". I was terrible at grammar!

That aside its a more complete scenario than arguing about little things like number of tickets.

I would not be surprised if it went another way but I am throwing something out there. What are your predictions?


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

zalusky said:


> Go through the points with this caveat: Lester hired Malvo in Vegas to kill his wife and then they came up with a scenario that makes Lester look like a victim and not somebody who hired Malvo.


I don't see it. We know Malvo was in Vegas to kill the brother of the dentist. You think he gave up that whole plan, killed 3 other people instead, just so he could kill Lester's wife? I just don't buy it.

I guess we'll know in a few days.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

zalusky said:


> Ok lets use the word "Premise" or "Hypothesis". I was terrible at grammar!


Lol - that's not grammar.

It's geometrry.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

midas said:


> ...I don't think he was waiting for Lester. I think he broke into the office to try to find out where Lester lived.
> 
> The lights in the car were off. I'm not convinced Malvo could see Lester.


Oh, yeah. It may be that the light was on because Malvo was checking around the office, but I think Malvo would have a flashlight in his toolkit.

Malvo is not going to think that Mrs. Nygaard got to the office on the bus.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

MikeAndrews said:


> Oh, yeah. It may be that the light was on because Malvo was checking around the office, but I think Malvo would have a flashlight in his toolkit.
> 
> Malvo is not going to think that Mrs. Nygaard got to the office on the bus.


OK, so she didn't take the bus. That doesn't mean Lester drove her there. Even in Minnesota women are allowed to drive. That doesn't even take into account that Malvo doesn't even know that it's his wife. Could be any office worker.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

zalusky said:


> Not that I think this happened but your all presuming that he made real ticket(s) vs just mocking up something in word and printing it to fake his wife out. Assuming that was the case there would be no evidence they were leaving town and what you would have is a murder by someone thinking that it was Lester.


If you'll pardon the expression, that won't fly since we see the payment screen also.



zalusky said:


> Malvo asked Lester "If he wanted to do this"


Once again, no he didn't. He asked "Is this what you want?"



zalusky said:


> Malvo may/may not have alerted the police that Lester may have been a witness to murders in Las Vegas


Uh, what?



zalusky said:


> Malvo came to town and let it be known he was looking for Lester by asking about him in the diner owned by Molly's father.


Only after going to his old house and finding there were new owners who didn't know Lester's new address. And then going to his office (which was closed). He's trying to track him down.



zalusky said:


> Malvo then calmly waited at Lester's new office as Lester drove up and told his wife to go inside wearing his jacket. Why would he wait unless it was prearranged!


You're assuming he was waiting. It's more likely he was looking for Lester's new home address.



zalusky said:


> After the hit Malvo and Lester then had a quiet look at each other. Fade to black.


Malvo checks the body, sees that it isn't Lester, then looks for Lester in the car.



zalusky said:


> All of this makes it look like Lester was the target and he gets off.


Lester *was* the target. Lester sent his wife in, dressed in his jacket when he saw the light on in the office.



zalusky said:


> In the original movie Jerry deliberately hired the bad guys to kidnap his wife.


What happened in the movie is irrelevant. Other than the title, the only things the TV show has in common with the movie is it takes place in the same universe and is set in the same general geographic area. Oh, I suppose you could add the Coen brothers and the same bogus claim of being based on real events.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

This article pretty much confirms that Lester set up his wife....with comments from the showrunner.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Did I miss the reason Lester would want to kill his wife? She's cute, young, very nice and easy going. She obviously loves him. (ok, she's stupid) Does he think she's suspicious of him? No way he's going to do better unless he wins the lottery and has millions.


----------



## thebigmo (Feb 12, 2005)

stellie93 said:


> Did I miss the reason Lester would want to kill his wife? She's cute, young, very nice and easy going. She obviously loves him. (ok, she's stupid) Does he think she's suspicious of him? No way he's going to do better unless he wins the lottery and has millions.


He didn't WANT to kill her. He sent her in so the HE wouldn't get killed.

If it was a setup from early on for Malvo to kill his wife then a lot of stuff makes a whole lot less sense than it does already.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

But if he was pretty sure Malvo was in there, then no way she was coming out with the passports, so why send her in unless you just want to get rid of her. Just drive away.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

ADG said:


> Too many things in this episode were simply unbelievable or completely out of character (even for the "new" Lester). Still enjoyable, but certainly not believable *(I'm among those who does not accept that this is based on a true incident).*


OK, this comment made me laugh. You're "among those" who don't believe it? Is there anyone who actually does think it's based on an actual incident? This show was inspired by the Coen Brothers' movie, Fargo, which was released in 1996. IIRC, that movie claimed to be based on true events as well. But this show claims to be based on events that happened in 2006, yet is really based on a movie released in 1996. So obviously, that bit at the beginning about being based on true events is just part of setting up the flavor of the show and is not actually true.



zalusky said:


> Something else that makes wonder is the running time has always been over an hour. This make me think that it might have been originally intended for pay TV without commercials. Anybody have any data on that?


FX is run by John Landgraf, who is widely viewed by most creative types as the best exec in the business. The reason creatives like him is because he largely stays out of their way and lets them be creative, without trying to put his own stamp on every production through mountains of notes. Most show creators struggle with getting the run time of their shows down to 42 minutes to fit in a standard one-hour time slot. They are forced to cut things that would enhance the story just so the network can show more commercials. FX has decided that the one-hour time slot is overrated and they let their showrunners tell the stories they want to tell, even if that means the show runs over the alloted time period. A perfect example of this is the 94 minute episode of Louie that ran earlier this week. It's a show that's normally 30 minutes, and FX allowed him to make a 94 minute episode. That would never happen on most other networks.



stellie93 said:


> But if he was pretty sure Malvo was in there, then no way she was coming out with the passports, so why send her in unless you just want to get rid of her. Just drive away.


Up until that point, Lester wasn't sure whether Malvo had followed him from Vegas or not. I think the thought process was: If she goes in there and comes out with the passports, then we go to Acapulco and disappear forever. And if she goes in there and Malvo is there, then at least I am still alive and I'm now armed with the knowledge that he's here looking for me.


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

IT WASN'T BASED ON TRUE STORY.

The blurb at the beginning of the movie and tv series is just as fictional as the story that follows it.


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

scooterboy said:


> IT WASN'T BASED ON TRUE STORY.


What?!?!?!!! After investing my time into 9 episodes of this, my world is shattered by this revelation.

(Well its at least good to have an admission the truth. I'd always wondered if the claim was completely bogus or just mostly bogus)


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

It's been mentioned in previous Fargo threads as well.


----------



## midas (Jun 1, 2000)

It's a true story. Or should I say, it's truly a story.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Sometimes, inner truth is more important than factual truth.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

stellie93 said:


> But if he was pretty sure Malvo was in there, then no way she was coming out with the passports, so why send her in unless you just want to get rid of her. Just drive away.


Yep, if he'd wanted the passports more than he was willing to have her dead he wouldn't have deliberately given her his quite distinctive coat, that Malvo's seen before, and had her pull the hood up obscuring her face. Because without that disguise there's a decent chance Malvo wouldn't kill her; she wasn't his target and he probably doesn't know she's Lester's wife.

Seems to me he'd either question her (with a decent chance he'd let her go after) or else keep hidden waiting for Lester (in either case she could probably get the passports and leave). Of course there's a risk that she might give up Lester's location either inadvertently, or being pressured to after somehow letting slip that she's Lester's wife (something she said, Malvo looks at the passports).

So even if Lester didn't necessarily want her dead, he clearly preferred a dead wife to one that might lead Malvo to him.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

I'm a VERY logically-minded person and, as such, I don't think I could enjoy a show such as this (and I DO enjoy this show very much) if I were to figure that logic and sensibility were a big part of the equation. 

At least it's smart, humorous, and entertaining - unlike a couple of examples that come to mind (The Dome and The Following).


----------



## PotentiallyCoherent (Jul 25, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> OK, this comment made me laugh. You're "among those" who don't believe it? Is there anyone who actually does think it's based on an actual incident? This show was inspired by the Coen Brothers' movie, Fargo, which was released in 1996. IIRC, that movie claimed to be based on true events as well. But this show claims to be based on events that happened in 2006, yet is really based on a movie released in 1996. So obviously, that bit at the beginning about being based on true events is just part of setting up the flavor of the show and is not actually true.


That it is based on a movie released in 1996 is true. A movie is an event. Therefore, this series actually was based on a true event.


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

PotentiallyCoherent said:


> That it is based on a movie released in 1996 is true. A movie is an event. Therefore, this series actually was based on a true event.


Even if you grant that, it _*claims*_ to be based on events that occurred in 2006.

Its only "real" connection to the movie is the suitcase full of money that Stavros found.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

Maybe they just don't respect the dead.


----------



## PotentiallyCoherent (Jul 25, 2002)

lpwcomp said:


> Even if you grant that, it _*claims*_ to be based on events that occurred in 2006.
> 
> Its only "real" connection to the movie is the suitcase full of money that Stavros found.


Did you think I was serious? Seriously?


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

PotentiallyCoherent said:


> Did you think I was serious? Seriously?


The problem is that some people would _*take*_ you seriously.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

lpwcomp said:


> The problem is that some people would _*take*_ you seriously.


Where would they *take* him?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

dianebrat said:


> ohMYGAWD, I just can not believe that you can't accept our assumptions of items they showed on multiple shots...


Can you believe it now?


----------



## lpwcomp (May 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Where would they *take* him?


To the wood-chipper?


----------



## PotentiallyCoherent (Jul 25, 2002)

lpwcomp said:


> To the wood-chipper?


Nooooo!


----------

