Questions for those who have seen David Mamet's Redbelt

[great_badir]

I don't normally struggle with Mamet's plotting, and can even usually reason out the more outlandish twists, but Redbelt left me with several questions:

1 - What exactly was the con?
2 - What was the benefit of the con, and to whom?
3 - Why was a famous and still working actor involved in a con and giving away stolen watches?

Admittedly I glazed over a few times, as I didn't find it as engaging as a lot of his other films, so it could just be that I missed pertinent plot points that would have explained these away.

Equeally, they could be genuine holes...

[phantom_power]

I have seen the film but can't remember the plot that much. Looking at the wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redbelt) doesn't really clear things up for me. Is the con to get Mike to fight?

[great_badir]

I have seen the film but can't remember the plot that much. Looking at the wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redbelt) doesn't really clear things up for me. Is the con to get Mike to fight?

That's the thing, it's never really explained (unless I did miss it) and the synopsis on Wiki doesn't make it clear, as you say.  If that IS the intention of the con, then you have to make some enormous logic leaps, even in Mamet terms, to accept that.  Otherwise, on the face of it, the con does nothing more than financially break Mike and his wife and have the cop top himself.

I got to the end of it thinking "well what the fuck was the point in all of that?!?!?!".

[phantom_power]

I enjoyed watching it but think I had the same feeling at the end. I kept waiting for it to all come out in the wash