MovieChat Forums > End of Watch (2012) Discussion > Help me understand correctly.

Help me understand correctly.


gyllenhal and Peña were definitely "thrown under the bus" by their superiors, correct? The reason the ambulance/back up arrived so late to the scene is because the two of them messed up so badly the LAPD let the cholos kill them?
My understanding is that ICE got the video footage of the drug lord putting a hit on both the cops and ICE was tired of them poking around so they let the LAPD big dogs know something was gonna go down with Peña/gyllenhal and to just let it happen... Sad that ICE knew about and yet the only person to warn them was a gang banger that got down with Peña. Thoughts please?

reply

Uhhhh no. They were not thrown under the bus. Nothing in the movie indicates that they were thrown under the bus either so I don't know where you got that from. Cops don't just let other cops die like that, ever heard of the thin blue line? Law Enforcement is not only a job, but a brotherhood.

reply

I got that from their captain explicitly threatening to throw them under the bus if they *beep* up, then again foreshadowed by van hausen telling them they'd get *beep* by the city when they mess up, and then I got it from the ICE guy telling them to mind their own business cause they were gonna pull the tail of snake that would bite back, then I got it from ICE having video footage of an actual drug lord putting a price on their heads and yet ICE never reported it or warned them about (try moving them to paperwork for awhile or something) and lastly I got it from the other cops taking a realllly long time to show up at the apartment complex

reply

What the Captain said was simply a statement that when a cop shoots someone, it is considered a homicide untill an I.A. investigation clears you.
If you shoot someone "by the book", he's got your back. But if you unjustly kill a civilian, they he'll let you out to dry, because then you deserve it.

This was in referance to the shooting during the opening credits and monologue. For which Taylor and Zavala were cleared.

I never got the impression they were thrown under the bus either.

reply

Even still, there was a lot of foreshadowing. It may not have been their department that threw them under the bus. It's unclear in the movie, but it is a possibility. The cartels and government agencies are not strangers to each other and can co-operate.

reply

Are you suggesting the dispatcher and/or their fellow officers were somehow involved in slowing down their response? That they were colluding to let them get hurt?

...then whoa, differences...

reply

I definitely don't think there was any collusion. They seem like a tightnit group but anyone could change sides when being threatened by the cartel... But I'm mainly thinking it was ICE who hung them out to dry and the rest of the dept was being held up unknowingly. I watched Training Day recently and I'm even more convinced now since it seems like David Ayer like the "trust no man" concept and he poisons the well of the brotherhood

reply

I got that from their captain explicitly threatening to throw them under the bus if they *beep* up
You can't seriously have taken that to mean he would wilfully abandon them, neglect their safety or let them get hurt can you?

...then whoa, differences...

reply

Not exactly. I took it as foreshadowing that something like that would happen later. The late response just can't be a coincidence to me. I don't think it was their dept though, I think it was ICE who somehow got involved and let the cartel get rid of the "two city cops"

reply

I'm reluctant to read anything into the response time. I'm inclined to think it was simply a cartel hit, no LAPD or ICE involvement whatsoever. It's not worth speculation for me when it was not addressed in the slightest in the movie.

And was the response time quite reasonable, and our guys were just panicked so it seemed like too long? I've just given that scene a re-watch, and it could well be as simple as that.

...then whoa, differences...

reply

But what about the ICE video footage? How can that not mean anything?

reply

Remind me?

...then whoa, differences...

reply

There's night vision ICE footage of a Mexican drug lord calling for the murder of the two city cops poking around in LA

reply

Ah right I remember. I assumed that was just to keep us the audience up to date. In keeping with the 'found footage' theme of the movie, it had to come from somewhere so why not ICE surveillance footage?

It's possible that ICE may have neglected to warn them on purpose (pretty cold though, and would it really have been necessary?), but I still don't think the LAPD was involved at any level.

How would you purposely slow down their response time, realistically? Every link in the response chain is going to be asked some pretty serious questions after two cops are gunned down, it just seems like a very unreliable and sloppy way to ensure their deaths.





...then whoa, differences...

reply

What he meant by "throw you under the bus..." was that he wouldn't cover for them if they were in a position to lose their jobs. As in, he would t go to bat for them if they were in the wrong. Not that he'd allow them to be *beep* ing killed lol.

reply

Absolutely not, 'hernandez-t-elisa' - No, "IF there is ever a doubt, then there is no doubt."

Note that whenever any movie portrays what you describe, there is never any doubt whatsoever. They hit us over the head to make sure we know exactly what is going wrong when it is such a crucial point as this would have been. Movie-makers always, always hit us over the head with important points - they craft them to be obvious to the most obtuse, clue-less of viewers.

It simply seemed that the normal problems with coordination and communication was responsible for that ICE Video not being adequate warning - it took too long. There is no possible way that these two were "allowed to be killed" by their superiors or ICE.

After all, the murder of two police officers like this is bad, bad, bad for all police and all departments - it would represent are far worse result for them than 'saving them because they had adequate time and warning'.

And the response time was actually pretty fast - they were on the run and their location changed as fast as they informed dispatch.

Mainly, though, with a movie like this that so obviously pushes 'plausibility' (even in the worst South Central patrols, no officers have that many major events and cases, etc., in an 8-month period - does not happen) - and so definitely could have tried to push in the implausible 'allowed to be killed' - whenever something that important is part of the plot, the audience is definitely made aware of it with zero doubts.

reply

No, that response time was very slow. How can watch this and say it was fast? Even the characters in the movie was wondering why they weren't there yet

reply

Right after Taylor and Zavala called in to Dispatch on the landline, they left the apartment building. Sending officers from other patrol areas takes time, even when they're responding Code 3 (Lights and siren). The officers were also on the move at the time, with no way to keep Dispatch updated on their location. That means responding officers had to search the area for them, which also takes time. It's hard to pinpoint where small arms fire is coming from in an urban environment since the sound reflects off of buildings, especially when the fire is sporadic, as it mostly was after Taylor and Zavala left the apartment building.

As far as ICE having the phone intercept and surveillance video, same answer: Time. Intelligence data has to be sent back to the parent agency by the officer that collected it. Methods vary, and some take a lot longer than others, especially when the officer in the field is under cover. Dead drops may have to be used, among other things. Once the data gets back to the parent agency, it has to be reviewed by an analyst. The cell phone intercept would also have to go to a Spanish translator to be translated and transcribed, then sent back to the analyst. It's entirely plausible that ICE either did not have the data back from the officer in the field when Taylor and Zavala were ambushed, or that it had not been reviewed and recognized for what it was by that time, or both.

Bottom line, I never got the impression that Taylor and Zavala were hung out to dry. They were caught in a very bad situation, and under the circumstances, it was very fortunate they weren't both killed.

reply

If ICE had the video footage and they had basically already taken the case away from the LAPD, why didn't they at least warn the LAPD to give the cops a leave of absence or office work until the case was resolved?

reply

I agree with you, and was equally skeptical. The ICE info re: serious cartel business was definite foreshadow, and the footage was no mistake. USA Gov't could have easily forewarned them, as the Blood did.

Perhaps it might've compromised their investigation, making the cartels too aware of their surveillance. I do think USA was inclined to let the cops become casualties, especially as they had already compromised their "POI". Furthermore, they could use that as further evidence to build cases of not just trafficking, but organized homicide, against officials, no less. Personally, I think it's a combination.

Regardless, we must remember two things:

a) People are highly uninformed if they think "The Brotherhood" has a true code of honor that will outweigh personal safety, and often personal gain. This is particularly true if the opposition is more powerful, a la "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em." Furthermore, each branch views each other differently...and each department within...and each level/rank within those... It continues.
This happens with all structures (ingroups vs outgroups), and can also be easily noticed in politics, military, geographical territory, etc. That said, ICE gives few *beep* about "lowly cops". Detectives barely do.

b) This movie is essentially meant to show us a multi-faceted view of the days and lives of Southland street cops. We are not meant to understand everything, nor fully agree (or even sympathize) with everything. There are meant to be questions left unanswered, as is true Art; not meant to be "tied up nicely." It is to show possibilities, choices, different perspectives, and truly how to coexist [in Southland] for survival's sake. We, the viewers, are meant to be privy to a bit of an insider's view, in order to gain understanding, EMpathy, thus some appreciation (and they hope, respect) for the whole operation.

A final note to further validate your/our pov: Recall the "Officer[s] in trouble" scene, where the big assailant (resembling Big Ego) stabbed Van-whoever in the eye, and gouged/destroyed the face [and career] of "Boot" (the rook)... Jake's character had to signal off the air unit, WHILE the guy was being arrested. For comparison's sake, in the tragic shootout scene, he also requested an air unit... which did not show. Not only do those choppers STAY hovering in Southland, but one can also assume that AIR traffic was not worse at that time.
NONE of our observations are accidental.

reply

Apologies, apparently it was "Big Evil", which I'd refused to believe.
Not only bc it is a ridiculous name (though only slightly less so than "Big Ego" LOL), but also bc I [clearly] misunderstood when the cop asked him the origin of his name, and he replied, 'I guess because it's big', or 'because I have a big one', or something to that effect.

reply

It's a gang initiation name, given to them by their "sponsor". It probably described his preferred method of killing, in that, it was something his sponsor saw as big and evil, even by his standard, or may describe his behavior while in prison. Similar applies to the other members, such as "La La". She was pretty far out there, like in "La-La land". Murder is the mature gang initiation, and many of them require multiples, and often a cop has to be one of them, or murdering a cop gets a higher "score". When "Big Evil" says "it's big", he was playing it off, not being candid.




Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.

reply