The Tap has been placed in Harry's saxophone.
Re-watch the scene at the convention when Harry confronts Martin stett (Harrison Ford).
As they are talking a man very quickly walks past them. when the man is out of shot Harry is for a split second distracted by him. Almost as if something has registered in his sub-conscious.
Now play this scene back in slow motion. The man is carrying a Saxophone.
Why should they take the saxophone out of Harry's appartement and transport it to the convention? Does not make a minimum of sense to me.
---------------------------------------
They don't give you the leads, they don't give you the support, they don't give you dick. (Dave Moss)
Mmm, no I think they just meant that it triggered something in his mind that it could be his saxaphone that was tapped...not that the person at the convention was carrying HIS personal sax, but that this nearly clued him in...just not enough for him to figure it out.
An interesting observation at any rate.
Kudos to the OP! It's a great observation, even though I don't think it nails down his saxophone as the definite location of the tap. There are still other clues pointing to other locations.
shareIf they put it in the saxophone, and Harry plays it, then surely all they are going to hear is the massively loud blasting of the music?
sharejust like it shows Harry adjusting the sounds at the beginning of the movie to make them better, they can adjust the levels in the saxophone to sound distant, and not peak the mic. he also can't talk while playing sax, it was just to show to him that they can listen.
shareI don't think that it would be possible to hear any background music if the mic were placed inside the saxophone.
shareThe big irony of the tap is that Harry never receives visitors in his flat, and only uses his secret phone in emergencies. Basically there is very little to no conversation to be tapped in his apartment anyway.
shareWhich is why they knew he was home when they called. Because he was playing his sax and it was really loud. Otherwise it would be dead silent as he didn't have visitors and like you said, didn't talk on his phone.
Some fellows get credit for being conservative when they are only stupid.
- Kin Hubbard
Just asking: Could the tap have been in Caul's eye glasses? I remember that Meredith took them off of him when they spent the night together. Could she have been trained to put a bug there before she took the tape? If they had a bug small enough to fit into a pen back then, maybe they had one that could fit in someone's glasses.
shareI'm not wearing glasses, but I'm sure Harry would notice that the glasses aren't balanced anymore.
----------------------
They don't give you the leads, they don't give you the support, they don't give you dick. (Dave Moss)
Chandler-47 "Why would they take the saxophone out of Harry's appartement & transport it to the convention?"
Good question.
It's a Saturday in San Fransisco, you want someone's appartement bugged. You ring round all the local wire-tappers and they're all out. Where are they? Of course they're all at the wire-tappers Convention. So you gain access to the targets home, take something out that would be hard to dismantle to find a bug(something like a saxophone) and transport it downtown to the convention to get one of the best buggers on the west coast to rig it up for you.
The other way to look at it is that the saxophone that was walked through the scene at the convention wasn't actually Harry's saxophone but was only meant to represent it. It was just a subliminal visual clue given to us by Francis Ford Cappola, letting us know where the tap really is.
If you watch the scene closely you will see this is not just some random extra or even someone who is meant to be a musician walking passed. The man with the saxophone is not holding it the way a musician would hold it, for a start a musician would have it in a hard case. No, this man looks more like someone Martin Stett would be associated with.
"The other way to look at it is that the saxophone that was walked through the scene at the convention wasn't actually Harry's saxophone but was only meant to represent it. It was just a subliminal visual clue given to us by Francis Ford Cappola, letting us know where the tap really is."
It has some meaning, for sure, but I doubt it tells us where the tap is. It can be that Ford Coppola (who made this film post Watergate) tells us how paranoid you become if you take all for serious. If the viewer takes the saxophone in the convention as a hidden hint he might be himself part of the paranoia.
You can of course read this as a metaphor. The saxophone is Harry's most intimate thing, but there is no intimacy where the tappers are.
----------------------------
They don't give you the leads, they don't give you the support, they don't give you dick. (Dave Moss)
Regardless of the meaning, Coppola would not have had someone walking between the two characters and the camera holding a saxophone unless it were intentional. It is hard to imagine that a saxophone is not somehow significant at one point in this film when it is at other times.
shareThe Tap is in the phone. This is why he Francis gives us an entire explanation/demonstration at the convention. Caul wasn't impressed and called it "junk". Not thinking that this particular technology would be able to successfully survey the party on the other line, Caul doubted. This is all a call back for the audience to pick up on.
That's why two phone calls are made at the end of the film. One of silence and then one to show that they are in fact listening. Remember, the assistant was at the convention as well an possibly saw this demo at some point. Something so simple yet a piece of technology that Caul discredits.
The pen(tap) was something else that was so simple and right under his nose, however, Caul failed to pay it any attention as well, until his buddy showed him.
The problem with your theory is that they clearly show him dismantling the phone while he's tearing through everything in his house.
Some fellows get credit for being conservative when they are only stupid.
- Kin Hubbard
I also thought the phone being tapped was given to us earlier by the long explanation of the technique. There's not a device physically IN Harry's phone for him to find, remember? The tap is just activated by the harmonica note on the tapper's end, which as I understood it caused the "tapp-ee" line to be left open for listening.
shareHarmonica taps were real but required adding hardware to the phone. If the home had another phone, an extension, it would complicate matters. The device did not work exactly as described in the film but close enough for movie purposes. BTW when Caul said it was "junk", he said that from the viewpoint of being a guy that's technically advanced and makes his own gear... far better gear.
BTW, the technique he used to tease out the voice is based on selective bandwidths and frequencies. Voice would never come out as clear as he got it but if your lucky you can get some intelligible content.
Better yet would be having fixed mics stationed all over and using subtractive techniques based on the speed of sound to reduce unwanted noise. With today's digital post software it's very possible to tease out good voice audio.
These days, few people would mount an effort like this. Gov't tappers simply look at your computer and phone records, confront you or a confederate with it and it's game over. Private investigators rarely bother with audio. It's too easy to get video. Granted in this movie it was all about getting good audio.
@eYeDEF: you couldn't understand what LowPro19 said.
@LowPro19, you are 100 percent right, there was the harmonica based tap, nothing else.
I agree. The tap was in the phone for all the reasons you suggest.
There is another reference to the saxophone in the opening scene. When Harry is recording the couple and walking round the park there are some musicians jamming in the street, including another saxophone player. Harry even watches him play for a few seconds, and you can hear him play on the tape afterwards.
But then I don't think it actually matters where the tap is, or even if there was one.
Life is a horizontal fall.
Although you have to admit, a guy holding a saxophone in an odd way walking through a wire tapper's convention is pretty abnormal in itself. It's definitely a clue by Coppola of some sort.
I think it does matter because the absence or presence of the bug is the key to understanding the ending of the film. When Caul rips through his apartment and can't find the bug there are only two solutions to be drawn. Either he really can't find the bug because there wasn't one ... which implies that he had gone mad. Although I find the "madness" theory a highly unsatisfying conclusion. But if there WAS a bug and he didn't find it, then the ONLY possible place it could be would be in the saxophone since he had looked EVERYWHERE else.
But it's difficult to conclude with any certainty that it was in the saxophone EXCEPT that Coppola chose to place it ever so briefly in such an unusual place. The symbolism of that scene tips the scales and allows us to feel more comfortably certain about the bug-in-saxophone conclusion. Whether it was really his saxophone or not is what is not so important. But if there's one thing we know Coppola is big into ... it's symbolism.
Some fellows get credit for being conservative when they are only stupid.
- Kin Hubbard
I've carried my horn that way. The Sax the musician is carrying is on a stand, so, you pick up the horn and the stand in such a way that the horn is supported, but it's still on the stand. Also, the mouthpiece on that horn was metal, and the one Hackman was playing was rubber.
"Hitler! C'mon, I'll buy you a glass of lemonade."
Like other commenters have mentioned, I don't think the details of the horn matter, it's there as a visual clue.
I'm still torn between sax/eyeglasses, though.
Hot lesbian witches!
We can rule out eyeglasses as the tap. That kind of technology doesn't even exist today and most certainly did not back then with. Eyeglasses have a very tactile and balanced feel that even the slightest shift would be noticeable to anyone. A new pair (huge fat frames) would be required, at the very minimum, to counter balance issues, but no evidence of this exists in the story and to say a guy fascinated with surveillance wouldn't take notice is just ridiculous. Note I am trying to stick with realistic applications here, and not some kind of solution you'd find in an episode of star trek.
The tap in the sax is also implausible. The mic would be overloaded by the internal sounds of the sax itself. While maybe useful for musician espionage, that wasn't the goal here.
Instead, I believe the tap was simply a tiny hole from the neighboring unit that pierced the wall with an instrument and picked up the sound inside. The instrument probe then was withdrawn. I bet the phone call was made by the guy in the neighboring unit right then and there. Really, it's as simple as that. I believe what some of the other posts suggested, where they weren't interested in a full wire tap, just enough to hone in and spook the guy out for the rest of his life. After the way he charged into the office building, almost getting shot by the guard in the process, it doesn't take much ingenuity to realize they were dealing with someone who lost his marbles.
The tap has not been placed anywhere specific. Trying to figure out where the tap is indicates that you don't really get the point.
shareYeah, but it sure is fun. I think it's in his...Oh, what's it called... Not necklace... Well, he wears it around his neck. I'll watch it again, I know what it is, just not what it's called.
Inside the sax wouldn't work. It would just pick up loud, unidentifiable noises. I think Meredith took off Harry's necklace thingamajig when he was asleep.
I'm just an old fashioned cowboy
I agree, the location of the tap is not important, there may not even be one. The mere suggestion of its existence was sufficient to drive the paranoid Harry nearly crazy. It assured that he would be too paralyzed by fear to do anything. Especially considering this is a movie about something that seems so real and concrete being an illusion in reality. This wouldn't be the first time Harry has mistaken reality and ran with it, both times pushing him to the edge of sanity. It was, however, a very interesting observation and if I felt the location was significant, I would probably agree with you; it is clever.
shareYes, Ultimately the location of the tap is not important or significant to the central point of the film. Only the fact that Harry believes one exists which he can't find is important.
It is interesting though that in the DVD commentary by Francis Ford Coppola during the final scene he talks about the location of the tap in Harry's appartement, falling short of actually revealing the location he tells us that the answer is somewhere in the film. I believe that answer is in the Harry & Martin Stett scene at the convention.
It doesn't matter that technically it may not be the best place for it in terms of getting that recording of Harry when he is playing along to the record. It's just the idea that Harry's most personal possession has been violated. Harry himself did a similar thing with someone's Parakeet.
But how could there NOT be a tap in his apartment if they called him and played a recording of it? Of course there's a tap.
But, yes, I think if you throw out the actual technical logistics of such a thing [and you would HAVE to], the tap must be in the saxophone.
Ummmm... There is a lot of evidence Harry is crazy, and the entire film has been imagined. But it's less fun to look at it like that.
Last films seen:
The Third Man (1949) 6/10
The Legend of Bagger Vance (2000) 7/10
His apartment was taped by using one of Moran's phone recorders. The one where you blow into a decoder before you dial the final number.
shareHey, hey hey hey hey! Brilliant! That is brilliant! I love it!
Wait, wait. I just forgot. Harry disassembles the phone. And I think you have to install a mic in the phone, so Harry would have seen it.
Proud to be the Mole's last victim - AGAIN!
Yeah, but because Harry wasn't interested in the telephone bugger at the convention, he has no idea what it looks like or how it works. It's probably disguised as just a normal telephone component.
My conclusions about the final scenes:
- It's Moran's device, used in a twist of poetic justice for Harry being so disinterested. Harry's supposed to be a collector of information, after all.
OR:
- Harry cannot cope with the guilt of suspecting the wrong people and possibly encouraging a murder. He imagines his apartment is bugged, his own worst fear, as "punishment" for his sins.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!
That makes sense. I don't agree with it, but it makes sense. There aree only so many ways to disguise a mic, I would think. Especially back in the '70s. Besides, Harry is paranoid. At that point, he checks using many instruments and may just imagine it's there because he wants it to be there. I prefer that theory over he goes crazy, imagines the phone call, but can't find anything.
Once I watch this again I'll come back to this. I think I'm on to something, but I'm just not sure.
Proud to be the Mole's last victim - AGAIN!
Well done Yrag-3 for spotting such a brilliant clue hidden in this film. I believe your assessment to be correct.
sharePorbeagle nailed it.
shareThat's ridiculous. You obviously don't know too much about electronics or telephones or have taken one apart but I do and I have and someone like Harry would have as well. He was disinterested in Moran's because he designed his own devices to bug people (in which he probably had customized a far superior feature set) but if there was a bug in it it would be totally obvious to me (and someone like Harry) because I'm already familiar with every other piece and electronics device in the phone and know exactly what it's function is for; down to every chip on the circuit board if there is one. It wouldn't matter if I was familiar with Moran's specific unit or not. And yes, it was implied earlier in the film that Harry had an electronics background. He would easily have spotted the bug.
Furthermore, when a techno geek like Harry is presented with a bleeding edge gadget with new capabilities that he's never seen before it's just not possible for such a person not to marvel at it. The only reason he could be so disinterested is because he knew the technology inside and out and there's nothing new he could have learned from Moran on the subject.
Some fellows get credit for being conservative when they are only stupid.
- Kin Hubbard
Although it is meant to be ambiguous, and a little besides the point, I think it is meant to be the Moran S-15 Interceptor, in which you blow a harmonica before dialling the last digit, which is showcased by Harry's rival.
The fact is that no-one would have been able to get into Harry's apartment; furthermore the saxophone thing is meaningless, except as a possible visual clue: obviously there is no way Harry's saxophone could have been replaced, and it would have been literally impossible to get into Harry's apartment. I think that symbolically it makes more sense to have the 'phone that does not exist' (he denies having one to his landlady) the only key to his world, especially an invention of his rival, and amoral alter-ego.
Also, the phone rings once, and they check that it is really him (they also got his number). The recording you hear after it is Harry playing the saxophone having just put down the phone.
For me, it can't be the saxophone simply because the saxophone playing would completely drown out the record in the background. The recording we hear seems to be fairly equidistant from the two.
Anyway, the last scene is really a demonstration of how Harry strips his world - his soul - down to something inhuman and unliveable, simply so he can do something insignificant and useless to others (i.e. playing the sax) in provate.
I think it is meant to be the Moran S-15 Interceptor, in which you blow a harmonica before dialling the last digit, which is showcased by Harry's rival.
What speaks against the S-15 is that it doesn't ring in the targets home and that Harry would have found it when he disassembled his telephone.
The fact is that no-one would have been able to get into Harry's apartment
Then how would they have been able to install the S-15? The actual fact is that his landlady had copies of his keys and put birthday presents in his apartment. She also opened and read his mail.
the 'phone that does not exist' (he denies having one to his landlady)
He talks to her on the phone! He denies it to anyone else though (including his mistress).
Also, the phone rings once, and they check that it is really him (they also got his number).
They didn't need to check. Stett had called him earlier in the movie, and if they were bugging him they wouldn't need to call him to know if he was at home.
The recording you hear after it is Harry playing the saxophone having just put down the phone.
Yes, so it seems. However, for another disturbing fact, note that while he is playing the saxophone the phone rings for the second time, and this ringing sound is missing on the recording you hear. Continuity goof or deliberate clue? Nobody knows...
Hmmmm... How long does the recording play? I think it was pretty short, so it may not have played long enough for him to hear the phone.
Last films seen:
Cinderella Man (2005) 8/10
Operation Petticoat (1959) 6/10
OK ...
1. You install the S15 by RINGING. You don't have to install it.
2. Therefore, he wouldn't have found it.
3. Yes, apologies: he denies having one to other people. That was besides the point a little, anyway, apart from the symbolic factor.
4. He got his keys back, although I grant you, I had not thought of that.
5. "They didn't need to check" - I maintain, however, that the fact it rings twice is of significance.
6. You have made a good case against it; however I believe that the inclusion of the S15, as well as all the other breaches of Harry's guard (the pen in his breast pocket, etc.) are designed to give the film ambiguity. The case for it being the S15 is as strong as any other.
Hang on; maybe they ring to check he's in, and THEN start bugging before ringing again. That seems to make sense.
They don't actually need to check on him, a fact made more poignant by his self-destruction. They won't have actually been bugging him for days. The more I think about it, the more my phone theory makes sense.
You install the S15 by RINGING. You don't have to install it.
You activate the S15 by ringing, but first you have to install the device in the target's house. This was stated twice at the convention, not to mention that it is impossible to turn a telephone into a room microphone just by ringing and using a gadget on the caller's side. Manipulating the receiver hardware is inevitable - that's why Watergate happened.
He got his keys back, although I grant you, I had not thought of that.
I guess the point of the birthday presents was to imply that Harry's privacy had already been invaded, in defiance of his security measures. People could enter his flat without him noticing it, consequently the S15 could have been installed. But it wasn't, obviously, otherwise he would have found it.
"You'll notice here it has its own nickel [pentium?] power source, so it CAN NOT be detected on the line. Once installed ... the receiver will be turned into an ACTUAL ROOM MICROPHONE"
The man then listens in to his wife "having an affair" (which must also be a recording). This is the direct opposite to Harry, who is being tapped by the people having an affair making a recording of him (thus, symbolically, turning the table).
The saxophone mike, apart from the impossibility of getting the clear recording played on the phone, and having to assume that the double ring is meaningless, just isn't symbolic enough for me. The idea of being tapped with his amoral rival's invention, and the irony of the reversed situation (especially considering the showcase scene) is just too potent in my book.
You have definitely convinced me that they used copies of the landlady's keys, or whatever, to plant it, though.
"You'll notice here it has its own nickel [pentium?] power source, so it CAN NOT be detected on the line. Once installed ... the receiver will be turned into an ACTUAL ROOM MICROPHONE"
It's nickel-cadmium (NC), a widespread type of rechargeable battery. But anyway, you conveniently omitted the most important part of the demonstration:
"Once installed, the S15 can be phoned from any telephone in the world."
and
"And now, by way of an actual demonstration, we've installed one of these units in my very own home. I will now dial that number."
In other words, you install the S15 on the target's phone, then you can phone it from any place and turn the target's phone into a microphone. That's how it works. The only way the S15 could have been used is if they installed it, recorded Harry, removed it and later called him to play the recorded "evidence". This would explain why they had to call him twice and why the ringing could not be heard on the recording.
Hang on; this is loose conjecture here.
You are assuming that the telephone with S15 would not work as a telephone, unlike any other bug.
If the damn telephone didn't work, there'd be very little merit in not being able to detect the bug on the line.
The truth is that the S15 is portrayed in the movie as being undetectable; furthermore, it has a scene of some length EXPLAINING what it does.
Anyone who understands the basic language of film should see that it would be illogical for Coppolla to include details such as this and the phone ringing twice; furthermore, although this is a more minor point, the saxophone is weak symbolically. Along with the fact that a mic-in-sax would make the sounds you hear on the recording sound like 'blehauuuooohhawaaa'.
Hang on, I have just picked up on the fact you pointed out, that THE RINGING COULD NOT BE HEARD. Surely this provides a very good case for it being the S15?
Yes the Scene at the convention explaining the S15 is a scene of some lenth. I feel this scene's major funtion is to;
1: Establish the presence of William P."Bernie" Moran
2: Establish the presence of Meridith
3: Allow us too see some more of the world that Harry inhabits
However I don't believe that Francis Ford Coppola would need to spoon feed us the explination of the bugs where-abouts.
The whole film is too subtle for that. I think that he would be more likely to give us a subliminal clue to the where the bug is. This clue has been revealed at the very beginnng of this thread by Yrag-3.
This film is like a puzzle with many pieces missing. Each viewer is going to complete the picture in a different way. In the end there is no right or wrong as to what you think has actually happened or not.
Some people are going to think the bug is in the Telephone & some people are going to believe the bug is in the Saxophone. Some people will say that Moran is lying under the sink next to the toilet in the appartement next to Harry's pushing a listening device through the wall to get the recording of Harry.
Peronally I Like the Saxophone theory only because of the clue hidden in the film within the scene at the convention.
You are assuming that the telephone with S15 would not work as a telephone, unlike any other bug.
No, I'm not. All I'm saying is that the S15 has to be installed in the target's home, like any other bug, and as stated in the film. Frankly, I don't understand why you keep challenging this simple fact.
The truth is that the S15 is portrayed in the movie as being undetectable
Undetectable on the line (because of its independent power source), not undetectable in situ.
Anyone who understands the basic language of film should see that it would be illogical for Coppolla to include details such as this and the phone ringing twice
Maybe so, but the same logic defeats your argument: If Coppola wanted to say that the S15 was used, it would be illogical to have Moran state that the phone does not ring in the target's home, and then have Harry's phone ring before the recording starts. It would also be illogical because the S15 has to be installed in the target's home, but Harry took his home to pieces without finding anything. Logic rules out the S15.
Hang on, I have just picked up on the fact you pointed out, that THE RINGING COULD NOT BE HEARD. Surely this provides a very good case for it being the S15?
No, it merely suggests that the recording played to Harry could not have been made just moments before, regardless of the type of bug used. However, I assume that this is a continuity goof rather than a clue.
It couldn't be agoof, because we hear the very same song. They rewind the tape, to the point where Harry's phrase on the saxophone is the same as we hear him make as the phone rings a second time. I think this is a vital clue.
HOWEVER. If it had been the phone, we would have undoubtedly heard it ringing. Plus, I have noticed that the saxophone is turned towards the record player, so that we would hear the music after all (at least in theory).
All in all, I have decided that on looking at a few of the scenes again, I have also missed out the symbolism of Harry' saxophone playing - that this is the closest he comes to real freedom. If the mic were placed in the only thing he felt he could let himself go for, then this would indeed be a poignant ending for Harry: it is significant, of course, that the sax is the only thing not destroyed (and something I didn't have at the front of my mind when arguing for the phone).
I absolutely agree with you, and the person above. The S15 scene does work as a 'introducing Moran' bit, particularly with the affair thing and the way it relates (how he considers affairs as opposed to Harry, etc.). Plus, the foreboding shot of the phone could not be so fluid without the first ring, after which it centres on the phone for a good ten seconds in true Hitchcockian style.
Anyway, nice talking to you. I like discussing random parts of film in-depth, it's been interesting.
It couldn't be agoof, because we hear the very same song. They rewind the tape, to the point where Harry's phrase on the saxophone is the same as we hear him make as the phone rings a second time.
Exactly. The solo phrase was identical, but the ringing sound could only be heard while he was playing live, not on the recording. The recording did not match the actual sound. Furthermore, they rewound the tape for at least five seconds, way too long considering that the part they played had happened only seconds before.
This may very well be a goof, but it might also be a very intricate clue: The point to consider is that the whole film is shot from Harry's perspective - we hear and see what Harry believes to hear and see. So, if the recording roughly matches the live sound, it means that Harry believes what they want him to believe: that he has just been recorded and that his room must be bugged.
But the above mentioned inconsistencies may hint at a darker reality behind this scene: that the conspirators rewound their tape recorder to fool Harry into believing that the recording had just happened and that there was a bug hidden in his room, when in actuality the phrase they played was a random passage they had recorded earlier, before removing the bug. Rewinding the tape, thus, was a very clever trick to convince him that the recording had happened just seconds ago. Naturally, his conclusion that there was a hidden bug and his inability to find it would push his paranoia and anxiety to the limit - precisely the effect the conspirators had in mind: sheer intimidation. They were not interested in bugging him at all, they only wanted him to stay out of their affairs.
it is significant, of course, that the sax is the only thing not destroyed
Some people have also suggested his glasses as a possible location of the bug. As a matter of fact, there is a remarkable shot showing Ann fumbling around with Mark's glasses, which is repeated several times throughout the film, most notably after Harry has smashed his apartment. Another scene shows the prostitute taking away Harry's glasses before sleeping with him. Did she manipulate or replace his glasses while he was asleep?
Anyway, nice talking to you. I like discussing random parts of film in-depth, it's been interesting.
Yes, it's always fun, and informative as well. People on this forum have found amazing things, and I'm sure there are further clues and symbolisms waiting to be uncovered.
"I guess the point of the birthday presents was to imply that Harry's privacy had already been invaded, in defiance of his security measures. People could enter his flat without him noticing it, consequently the S15 could have been installed. But it wasn't, obviously, otherwise he would have found it."
You are right. The only possible way for Mrs. Evangelista to go into the appartement was through the window. The key she had does not help since Harry locked the door with different keys.
I think they taped Harry's saxophone play with a microphone from the outside, like Harry did with the conversation. Moran was impressed by this. Also Stan could have given him interesting information.
----------------
They don't give you the leads, they don't give you the support, they don't give you dick. (Dave Moss)
[deleted]
The director trusts Stett a lot, and when he thinks the couple is having an affair, he gets Stett to look for a surveillance expert for him.
The director hired Caul personally, and Stett very likely didn't know about it before Harry called for an appointment. This follows from the dialogue between Harry and Stett. Besides, I guess no one in their right mind would discuss embarrassing private matters with his employee at the job.
Another devastating blow to this theory is the fact that the couple talked about the murder conspiracy during the conversation, albeit indirectly. Obviously, had the conversation been staged, they wouldn't have disclosed their true intentions.
[deleted]
"What if they know they're gonna be watched, so they disclose their true intentions, knowing Harry will pick up on it, and then there will be no evidence against because he should go crazy enough that no one would believe him. There would be nothing against them once they burn the tapes. It's a thought."
Because it's nonsense. Not even Moran thought you can tape this conversation (Mary even said: Let's go close to the noise, and shot the policeman Harry engaged). It's one thing to talk seriously about a movie or to make it sound like slapstick.
---------------------
They don't give you the leads, they don't give you the support, they don't give you dick. (Dave Moss)
[deleted]
The Cindy Williams charecter is called Ann NOT Mary.
shareThe tap may be in every location we discussed...or with modern technology more places than even harry knew or that were shown in the trade show.
some of the suspects
the phone
the phone lines into the building
the glasses
in the wall
in the sax (it even has phone in its name)
Caul knows that he's been beaten at his own game...they could find the tap on the boat...and he cant find it in his apartment...his knowledge is just too behind the times.
I think that that the point is that you are not meant to know where the bug is. We already know that Stett was able to find out that Harry had a home number when he tells absolutely no-one about it. I think that this is the first clue to showing us that Stett and the two involved in the conversation are involved in something much bigger and more complex that what at first is shown. They have power behind them to take over the company, we are not told what company it is, so perhaps even political power of some sort, with access to surveilence equipment that Harry can only dream of.
they employ him to record the staged conversation that sounds like lovers running away, but is in fact thinly veiled talk of murder. But to the directors ears this all sounds like an affair and the impatiality of Harry is what makes him believe that its true. By getting someone from the outside to record to conversation, the director had to believe that it was true (also because of the difficult circumstances of the recorded made him believe that the conversation was never meant to be heard).
It was all a set up, on the director and on Harry. The bug may be in the apartment, or may not, but I think the point is that it just shows that they have the power to bug him and could have bugged "the conversation" easily themselves, but chose to bring in an outsider with a history of "accesory to murder" (via his New York wire tap) so that he could be spooked into staying quiet out of guilt if nothing else.
So in all, the bug could be anywhere and nowhere, but the point is that it got the better of the best man in the business, cos they are soooo much better than him in the first place. Where it is, is not important, but him not being able to find it is of massive importance.
"All I wanna do is do it"
Interesting. This is the best post I have read that makes a good case in favor of the "staged conversation" theory.
I have not watched "The Conversation" for 18 months. I expect to Watch it again at christmas and will take this theory into account.
There are however many things that don't seem to add up with this theory which have already been discussed on this and other threads. For example; the fact that it seems that the Director directly hired Harry himself. Although maybe Stett realised that Harry would be the obvious choice for the Director to choose as Harry was the best and to get a recording in Union Square on a busy lunchtime you would need to hire the best. And of course the Director is rich so naturally he is going to hire the best.
When the film starts the story of the couple and Stett is already well advanced. We join shortly after Harry becomes involved so we can only speculate as to what has already transpired.
I think that Stett knew all along that Harry was being used for this job, but trys at every turn to make sure that Harry's time with the director and therefore knowledge of who he is, what he looks like etc, is limited to the extreme. The less harry knew about the director, the easy it would be to cover up what really happened to him.
also, they were ready and waiting for the director in the hotel, they had everything ready to kill him and this was not a crime of passion. they staged to conversation so that he would be at the hotel room on that exact moment to have an argument with his wife about leaving him just so that he could be murdered.
"All I wanna do is do it"
I think that Stett knew all along that Harry was being used for this job
How? The director hired Harry personally, and I doubt that he told anyone about it.
they staged to conversation so that he would be at the hotel room on that exact moment to have an argument with his wife about leaving him just so that he could be murdered.
Why would Stett interfere with the delivery of the tapes if the conversation was staged? That makes no sense to me.
"How? The director hired Harry personally, and I doubt that he told anyone about it."
how do you know he called him personally? Caul may have thought that the deal was only with the director (and of course we know that the director is aware of the deal with harry) but all Caul knows is that he has a deal and the contact is directly with "the director". Who this previous conversation is actually with, we are not allowed to conclusivly know. we are not shown this build up/conversation etc. so we can only believe what we think happened prior to the time frame of the movie.
"they staged to conversation so that he would be at the hotel room on that exact moment to have an argument with his wife about leaving him just so that he could be murdered. (my comment)
Why would Stett interfere with the delivery of the tapes if the conversation was staged? That makes no sense to me. "
harry was obviously not going to give the tape to the director through his own guilt over what he thought would happen as a result, but stett needed the director to hear it so that he WOULD go to the hotel room at the designated time. if stett had not stolen the tapes before the set time of the killing, then the tapes were useless. unless it was for blind curiosity (which it clearly isnt) why else would he force the tapes into his hands. he goes to extreme lengths to make sure that he has the tapes... perhaps to make sure that the correct conversation is taped, or that no mistake as been made on the parts of the "the couple". but in all, he is so obviously proactive about getting the tapes so that the trap can be set. without the tape, then the planned killing COULD NOT take place.
"All I wanna do is do it"
how do you know he called him personally?
Because Harry said so in the movie. He said that he had arranged personal delivery with the director. Stett, on the other hand, didn't even seem to know about Harry and the bugging operation when the latter called for an appointment. This was a contract between the director and Harry. Stett was not involved, that's why Harry didn't trust him.
harry was obviously not going to give the tape to the director through his own guilt over what he thought would happen as a result...
Wrong. Harry didn't know of any possible consequences when he first met with Stett, because by that time he hadn't yet realized that the tapes were potentially dangerous. He didn't want to hand them out because of the personal delivery arrangement. It was only after Stett had warned him about the tapes being dangerous that he re-examined them and found out "the truth". From that point on, you're right - he didn't want to turn them in anymore; in fact, he wanted to destroy them.
...but stett needed the director to hear it so that he WOULD go to the hotel room at the designated time.
That's true, but the director would have heard them anyway, there was no need to interfere with the delivery - unless Stett had to hear the tapes before the director, namely because he had to check if there was anything on the tapes that would betray their murderous intentions. When Stett stole the tapes and realized that they were "clean", he passed them on to the director and made sure that the director would be convinced of his wife having an affair, so he would go straight to the love nest and confront the lovers with the taped evidence.
MARK: I can't stand it....I can't stand it anymore!
shareActually thinking about it again, If the conversation in union square was staged why would Ann (Cindy Williams) expose one of the people tailing her.
ANN: Look there that man with the hearing aid... he's been following us.
MARK: It's nothing.
PAUL: (in the van to Harry) She looked right at me.
The only "staged" conversation in the film was staged by Moran at the convention when he demonstrated the Moran S15. We hear a staged conversation supposedly of Moran's wife and her lover.
However, supporters of the "Staged" conversation theory will maybe say that this is a subtle clue to the fact that the Union Square conversation was staged.
I can't remember now but doesn't Coppola say something at the beginning of his commentary to the affect of "The couple may or may not know that they are being taped."
Maybe someone can help me out here.
I believe you have the right of it, ciphoid 9, your reasoning is sound.
I'm new to this thread, and so have not worked my way through this entire thing yet, so if this has been mentioned, I apologize, but...
....In the convention scene with Stett, when the scene opens on Harry trying to call his old girlfriend Amy, the camera pans up from a scale model of the very plaza where the original bugging took place. Could this be pointing to the fact that they undertook the bugging of his workplace while he was so throughly caught up in the days' work downtown, that they knew there was no possible way he or any of his people would be within miles of the shop? The model figures prominently in the scene, and watching the actor's places throughout the scene with the model in the foreground so prominently seems to convey that the park means something more than just where they got the conversation. Besides, who would keep a scale model of a hotel in their elevator lobby?
...Oh, and I'm betting that Meredith copied his keys via wax impression while he was knocked out, she or one of the team who must have come in and made off with every inch of tape the room held.
...And I wish they had used the name Harry Caul in Enemy Of The State, since both characters are basically in the same line of work.
"they employ him to record the staged conversation that sounds like lovers running away, but is in fact thinly veiled talk of murder. But to the directors ears this all sounds like an affair and the impatiality of Harry is what makes him believe that its true. By getting someone from the outside to record to conversation, the director had to believe that it was true (also because of the difficult circumstances of the recorded made him believe that the conversation was never meant to be heard).
It was all a set up, on the director and on Harry."
I simply don't believe this. I have seen the movie several times before I talked about here and I never got the idea it could be this way. The first impression is the best, as we say.
Fact is: Harry got the job directly from the director.
I suppose Stett didn't know about it ("whatever was arranged"). Harry then meets Stett and the director isn't there. Stett WANTS the tapes (I can only understand his behaviour because he doesn't know what was recorded; if he knew he wouldn't have made such a trouble). After the tapes were stolen and Stett listened to them, he thought it is a good idea to execute the murder plan that he must have had before with Ann and Mark (the relationship between Stett and Mark/Ann is btw. completely unclear).
The more I think about it the more I come to the conclusion that the movie is very much influenced by Watergate. This is nothing new, but it explains why we have many loose ends here. I doubt you could make a movie like this today, and even in 1978 it would have been different.
---------------------------------
They don't give you the leads, they don't give you the support, they don't give you dick. (Dave Moss)
Francis Ford Coppola wrote the screenplay for "The Conversation" long before Watergate. However, The paranoid feel of the film did reflect the general feeling of the times.
I doubt anyone could make a film like this today simply because this film is a masterpiece. I have yet to see a film either made before or since that I think is better.
"I doubt anyone could make a film like this today simply because this film is a masterpiece. I have yet to see a film either made before or since that I think is better."
You are right. I also rank this movie as No.1, though influences of Hitchcock are pretty obvious in the murder scene. Nevertheless, I don't see a movie that delivers on all levels like "The Conversation" does (sound, picture, dialog). Indeed a masterpiece.
-----------------------------------
They don't give you the leads, they don't give you the support, they don't give you dick. (Dave Moss)
I always assumed the conversation had been staged. If the conversation wasn't staged, with the intention of the director finding out when and where they would have their "tryst", how else would they know for sure he would be coming to that room, on that day, at that time?
Just because I'm distractable doesn't mean I
not to mention that it is impossible to turn a telephone into a room microphone just by ringing and using a gadget on the caller's side
I don't know if it was true back then, but it seems like it's possible now. See: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061204/005914.shtml
Nice work!!
Although Harry caul is probably even today using pubic phone boxes for security reasons.
I don't know if it was true back then, but it seems like it's possible now. See: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061204/005914.shtml
Well, there's a huge difference between a digital cell phone and a 1974 analog telephone. I don't remember the latter allowing you to upload firmware that would enable remote controlling the device. 1974 telephones were hardware in the truest sense of the word.
That's true. Moran himself wants to sell this tool to "amateurs" who visit the convention. To make the tool really work you need to prepare the phone of the guy you phone with. Caul knows this and searches for the bug in his phone at first.
--------------------------
They don't give you the leads, they don't give you the support, they don't give you dick. (Dave Moss)
I may be wrong, but I seem to recall the FBI being able to put a tap on a phone line between the target's phone and the pole (usually on the pole)that would make the phone's mic be active whether the handset was on or off the hook. I think it ran a small current through the wires which activated the mouthpiece somehow, thus making an undetectable room and phone tap.
See I don't trust happiness....never did and never will
As stated before, telephones were very basic and very different back then. In order to hear what was going on the receiver had to be lifted because this allowed physical items within the phone to make contact and allow for signals to go back and forth. With this part disconnected when the phone was on the hook, using any part of the phone as a microphone was physically impossible.
Now the connection and disconnection is done with software that can be changed by demand from code. Back then someone had to physically lift the receiver up before an electrical connection to the phone could be made.
I didn't realize all this past common knowledge is becoming unknown to the younger general public.
Life is like Wikipedia: There are no Facts, Just Popular Opinion
"... it is impossible to turn a telephone into a room microphone just by ringing and using a gadget on the caller's side... "
I wouldn't be so sure of this. When I was a kid I accidentally plugged a pair of headphones into a microphone jack. Guess what. The headphones became a microphone. This means objects designed to deliver sound, like speakers, can also be used as devices to capture sound without physically changing the item (headphones in this case) at all... Kind of creepy.
Upon a single viewing I didn't know if there was actually a bug but after reading this thread I'll be sure to look for these clues when I watch it again.
Watching this film today puts our modern technologies into a terrifying perspective. I'm amazed that people were seriously concerned about these themes in the mid 70's and yet we still ended up where we are now.
[deleted]
i am even now more so confused with all the possible assumptions...inside or out? sax or phone? there has to be a reasonable answer.
shareI thought about the sax and the glasses, but I'm pretty sure it was his phone that was tapped. The guy in the convention demonstrates how you can tap a phone with just a harmonica, and in the last scene, Harry Caul answers his phone twice. No one responds when he answers it the first time, and he goes back to playing the sax. The recording that is played back for him when he answers the phone the second time is what he played just after he answered the phone the first time. It could very well be that the tap was in either his sax or his glasses (the woman he slept with could've bugged them while he was asleep), as those are the only things that he didn't destroy in the end, but to me, the phone makes the most sense.
shareI don't think there was a tap or actual phone calls to begin with as I think Caul just lost his mind down a rabbit hole.
However, let's say there were phone calls and there was a tap.
One does have to try to make things fit somewhat. If there was a tap in the phone, Caul would have found it. I'm sure he knew what to find in a telephone. If the tap was in the sax, it would have been impossible to hear anything in the room while he was playing.
And although a small chance, there is not much chance they could have kept the tap hid in the room. If it was planted in the room, they could have only hid it so well, likely not well enough for Caul not to find it.
The tap being the kind Caul used with a scope outside of his apartment makes the most sense. He told the guys in his lab how he tape recorded his conversations. This means if he could do it, so could someone else.
But the above is for those trying to find the tap. If it is to be found, someone needs to look inside the head and mind of Caul, the only place the tap lives.
Life is like Wikipedia: There are no Facts, Just Popular Opinion
I am thinking that the tap is that invention from that Moran where you call someone and blow that harmonics thing in there.
shareNope. Francis Ford Coppola said at the very end of the commentary:
"The truth is that I don't know where it is."
Firstly reading through this entire theard I thought two things not about the movie,
1. I really wish people would, like I did, read the entire theard before posting as they just continue to repeat things already covered and appear stupid, which I strongly suspect they are. Also it's a bit rich to write something on a thread and expect people to read it when you have ignored several other posts.
2. People seem to have an amazing ability to generate grand theories based upon little or nothing in the actual film which are ridiculous and unrealistic. Are you watching the movie on acid, really?
But what I really wanted to say is that as others have said before I believe the location of the mic is clearly not important. I really didn't even question where it could be while watching the movie, it was this theard that made me consider it. But with the fact that it's pointless firmly in mind, I have to say that outside with a zoom mic seems the most probable (yet surprisingly only raised by a few posters here), he is very close to the windows whilst playing the sax.
Going with this theory, and I'll say it's a theory because really there is no true location for the mic because Coppola didn't think about it because it doesn't matter, anyway going with it regardless this I think the relevance of the two phone calls is this, to give Caul a reference of time of the recording. Hear me out, he's sitting playing the sax is interupted by the first phone call, during this time the recording from outside begins the recorder is cued by Caul getting up, so that when the second call comes Caul is 100% sure that this short clip of sound occured at no time other then immeadiately before, the solo could not have been from another session (it should also let the audience know this but some posters seemed to have missed this). I will have to pass of the lack of the ringing phone as a goof or a deliberate choice by Murch and Coppola as it would take away from the scene at that point, the shock of the fact the Caul has just been recorded and then another ring, I think it would have seemed out of place despit it's realism and it was chosen not to include it.
Love LTM.
my own 2 cents:
1. it can't be the telephone-gadget, becaue harry specifically calls it "junk" at the convention so he would find it inside his own phone, which he carefully inspects.
2. the sax at the convention is no mistake.
3. the sax at the convention is being moved on its floor-stand!
4. the sax is seen on the floor (presumably in the same stand) in the apartment before harry break it all.
5. the sax is still in the same position after harry has inflicted a lot of damage to the apartment.
6. the windows are closed.
so .... the mic could be in the sax or ... its stand.
Ok, lets reject the bloody Sax out of hand for the following reason.
You aren't going to get a clear sound of the saxophone from inside it, all you'd get is 'DONGS', you wouldn't be able to hear Caul's music, or anything else, just a muffled sound from inside. You could only get the sound we hear from the outside.
I am convinced the bug is in Harry's glass. There is NO NEED to show the shot of Ann adjusting Mark's glasses within the context of this scene. Its the most obvious clue to the bug's wherabouts. And with Caul thinking that he's had his glasses on the whole time, he's not even considered it, and with Meredith's main aim being to steal the tapes, Caul has also not considered that she also put a bug in his glasses, which she had the opportunity to do after she personally removed them. Harry was outsmarted by the lustrous intent of the woman.
Here's my view of the ultimate plan
1) Strett and Mark, who are friends, discuss things, Strett would be next in line to take over the firm if the Director is killed, and Mark's love rival would be out of the picture. Who suggested the scheme is unknown, but its an obvious assumption that this conversation had to have taken place.
2) Strett tells The Director of a rumour of an affair between Mark and his own lover Ann. Strett probably fuels the directors anger and hints of getting a private investigator to tap them. Strett recommends Caul and The Director arranges it with him
3) Mark and Ann have the staged conversation. Whether Ann is aware of the plan at this point is unclear, but she certainly seems to be playing her part.
4) Harry goes to deliver the tapes, he is intrigued by the content of 'the conversation' but decides its none of his. But with the director legitimatly out of town, Harry faces Street. Strett hopes that Harry will just take the money and run, but professional ethics prevent this from happening. Strett possibly banked on this, because he'd need to wait until the Director was back in town on the Sunday. If he heard it too early then he'd try and get to Mark before the arranged Sunday plan.
5) So Harry takes the tapes back to his place and hears the 'He'd kill us if he had the chance' part, convincing him the young couple are to be killed.
6) At the surveillance convention, most of the stuff we see, I beleive to be a red herring. Moran is just an envious idiot, and knows nothing, he's just jealous of Caul and wants to make a fool of him. Meredith is an employee of Strett, who is also there at the convention. He instructs Meredith to approach Moran and gang, get in there with them, and then provoke the suggestion of a party back at Caul's office (although, given Caul's personality, its a stretch to beleive he'd ever allow this party to happen, but we'll have to suspend our beleif)
7) Back at Caul's office, the get-together goes apace, with Meredith doing her job and seducing Caul. We know Caul has problems with women due to his earlier trip to see the girl in her flat. (Which allows for the possibility that Caul was bugged earlier, before the film even started, but its unlikely) But Meredith is good at her job and gets Caul to sleep, she removes his glasses and definitely bugs them. Then, before he wakes up, she makes off with the tapes..and with it being Sunday...its the right time for the Director to hear it.
8)Caul gets a call from Strett, telling him that he couldn't be sure he'd destroy the tape (This is a lie, Strett knew that he wouldn't destroy the tape as Caul would always want to be paid) Caul then comes by just as Martin is letting the Director hear 'the conversation' at the appropriate time.
9)Caul bugs the hotel room and hears arguments, with 3 voices. Strett really wouldn't have wanted this, but allows it to happen, because ultimatly, with the bug now on Caul, they'll always have the power over him, even if he did talk.
10) So, Mark and Ann kill the Director, who was the obvious victim of a set-up, and Caul is told by Strett that he is bugged and not to interfere in their business. Caul rips his flat apart, but can't find anything. He doesn't check the glasses, and there is clear clue, as I said, that thats exactly where it is
How I see it.