MovieChat Forums > Midnight Run (1988) Discussion > The ending doesn't fit with Walsh's esta...

The ending doesn't fit with Walsh's established character


We're told he won't take a penny in bribery from Jimmie Serrano's mob, but now he's going to hand over to Serrano critical evidence, evidence that could lock him up for years, so that Walsh can get $100K? Sidney even tells Serrano to make a cash offer but Serrano says it'll never work. So Walsh won't let Serrano get off scot-free for a direct bribe, but he will as long as the money comes from elsewhere? That doesn't comport with what we're supposed to believe about the straight-laced nature of Walsh. That should have set off big-time alarm bells with the Serrano crew.

reply

I'd argue it does make sense.

Walsh is fighting to get the money he would have received for the work he put in if he is allowed to return his captive to the bail bond service. Serrano is interfering with that process. Walsh wants his money, money he gets for doing a job, but he wants it the "right way." Serrano even explains as much. So I don't see a problem or contradiction here.

reply

Respectfully disagreeing here. The premise of the movie is Jack's moral code. And, The Duke even tells him, "It's not a payoff - it's a gift." He doesn't challenge Jack's morality - also, considering that Jack "looks like a guy with a fucking cup in his hand", maybe Jack feels like he deserves the break. I think it's a very satisfying end to modern classic.

reply

I agree it's a satisfying ending. But I'm not sure it makes sense for Walsh to turn over indictable evidence to a mobster in order to pocket $100K. The viewer knows that it's all a ruse and that Walsh will actually be helping put Serrano behind bars, but why would Serrano believe it? Walsh threw away his career and family -- everything that mattered to him in life -- because he wouldn't take a bribe from Serrano. But now, when he has a chance to avenge all that misery, he's willing to let Serrano get off scot-free in exchange for a modest amount of money?

reply

From the script, I guess this is as good an explanation as we're going to get:

LYMAN
I don't think you should do this.

SERRANO
Oh, you don't? What do you propose I
do?

LYMAN
Send somebody with a cash offer.
Give this guy whatever the hell he
wants but don't do this.

SERRANO
Walsh won't take any money from me.
He knows I'd come and get it an hour
later. In his mind this is clean. He
gets what he wants. I get what I
want. The guy's a fuckin' burnout.
He just wants his money.

So this tells us why "Serrano would believe it." The character explains himself. Is it incongruent with the narrative previously presented in the film? I don't think it is. But it's in the eye of the beholder I suppose.

reply


Agreed here, too (posting this after agreeing w/ Seperatrix on another thread for this movie)

This isn't exactly what wound up in the film, but it's close enough

It's actually kind of brilliant on Walsh's part.

Walsh knows he can't demand a bribe from Serrano. Serrano would smell a rat immediately, because he knows Walsh willingly sacrificed everything just to refuse a bribe.

Walsh wants Serrano to accept the phony evidence in person, and Walsh wants to rescue Mardukas while he's at it.

So he cooks up the disks as the motive to bring Serrano down. Serrano knows about Walsh's "honor," so he knows he's got to come in person or Walsh won't hand over the disks.

And because Serrano knows Walsh won't take a bribe, Walsh couches the trade-off as a rescue, albeit a rescue just to take Mardukas to jail. Because if Walsh just wanted to rescue Mardukas out of sheer nobility, Serrano would again smell a rat.

Walsh's solution, "give me Mardukas so I can earn my bounty," is just barely noble enough to NOT be a bribe while also NOT being suspiciously altruistic.

It shows us Walsh really was a superior cop, consistent with his ability to find Mardukas and continually evade the mob and FBI throughout the film.

reply

Maybe watch it again and notice what you missed!

reply