|
|
|
|
Back to the forum Re: A question for HEAT afficianados
Hmmmmm, intriguing stuff, Marty. I'm kind of inclined to agree that, "Maybe Albert was protecting his cuz (family first) from coming too close to the HEAT." It's hard to get a read on Albert's feelings about family. As we learn from Pacino's questioning, Albert has a hard time falling in love. That makes me question his capacity for altruism. You also say, "He could deny knowledge by secondhand association (he had the info, not me), but when Pacino starts squeezing his lemons, he reveals that he might have a lead," which sounds a little more specious. I'd have to go back again and wonder WHY he asked Ton Loc about the case in the first place. Albert could have REAL plausible deniability if he never asked Ton Loc in the first place. Next, you suggest, "He arbitrarily sets up the meeting time and place on the spot, and tells Ton Loc that he’d better be there, or else there are issues of complicity." This COULD seem reasonable. If Ton Loc somehow hinted that he didn't want to meet but decided to for some more compelling reason. I guess he does snitch on the chop-shop competition by dropping the dime on those stolen Porsches, so maybe we can infer that he was initially reluctant about meeting with Pacino. But this begs another question, what happened with those stolen cars?!
|
|
|
|