At the end what happened was sean connery doing all that just to capture her or was that whole last scene create by him because he got caught ?
shareI found that scene unintentionally funny - when Mac passed him the chips and he looked around before taking it. XD
shareIMO, Ving Rhames was NOT an FBI agent, but simply pretending to be one to deceive Will Patton's character. I believe this is why Rhames' last words are, "but you still owe me for TODAY," (instead of "you still owe me for the car"). I see it as a last favor done for Connery before they part ways: The two unnamed FBI lackeys are working with Rhames, and Rhames makes it possible for both of them to escape.
I could be way off, but that's my interpretation...
Very possible, I wonder what the book (is there one?) reveals along these lines? Actually though, I feel that Ving is in fact an FBI agent, but a corrupt one who had probably cut deals with Connery on other "projects". This was the last one.
That's also possible... my gut feeling is that, if that were inded true, the film would have presented his FBI connection earlier rather than "springing" it on the audience in a rather inexplicable fashion at the end. It just doesn't seem to make sense to "hide" that until the end--the "twist" or "shock" value of that revelation seems both superflous and dull... just my two cents!
shareBut they did hint an FBI connection when Ving Rhames gave Will Patton's character the photos of Sean and Catherine's characters together.
shareOR perhaps Ving Rhames was playing both sides. ACTING as an FBI agent at that point to make his role aat the end more plausible to both us and Patton's character. It's not quite explained either way, that's the point.
shareMy feeling on the whole thing is that Ving Rhames was FBI. The FBI knew about what Sean Connery's character was up to, so they probably cut a deal. In exchange for getting the microchips, the FBI would let Sean Connery slip away with a small amount of cash from the heist. Everything would be done under the table, and thus the FBI could disavow all accusations that they were involved in dealings with Sean Connery's character. At least that is how I see it.
shareWell I definitely respect your opinion... I think I have to stick with my gut, though. I really see Rhames as a rogue criminal with all kinds of connections and the ability to orchestrate the finale. Former agent? Perhaps... hey, that's my two cents. The great thing is that the film actually creates such arguments, which many people probably don't give it credit for. :)
shareWell I definitely respect your opinion... I think I have to stick with my gut, though. I really see Rhames as a criminal with extensive connections and the ability to orchestrate the finale. I just can't see Connery's character (as written) NOT knowing Rhames was an agent. And if he DID know Rhames was an agent all along, why not introduce it earlier in the movie? "Hiding" it from the audience until the end would be a mistake OR a cheap twist.
Former agent, perhaps... hey, that's my two cents. The great thing is that the film actually creates such arguments, which many people probably don't give it credit for. :) Hopefully they were intentional! lol.
I think he was an FBI agent and a corrupt one. Remember Virginia said, "Cruz knew?" and Mac responded with, "He's just found out." If Cruz never knew about Virginia, who would Mac be delivering her to?
shareThat's a possibility as well, but I'll stick with my gut until I see this again--which might not be long since they play it quite often on cable. lol
share[deleted]