The plot involves Nate (Jon Voight) managing a heist crew who steals a bunch of bearer bonds from an armored truck. Nate wants to sell the bearer bonds back to the client (Van Zant) they stole them from because it'd be mutually profitable to orchestrate the insurance fraud. Van Zant is deep into laundering drug cartel money so they think he'll go for it. Now no OG worth his salt would think this could work. So much so, it's as if Nate is intentionally trying to get his crew killed. If Van Zant is in the game, then the reputational cost of doing business with the guys who ripped him off is far, far higher than whatever piddly half a million he can make with the insurance fraud. This guy is a banker for the cartel. The whole premise of this movie flawed. >>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS-p4qXNX6Y
its a free country brother
It was worth a try even if there are risk. Hence why n they are prepared for his double cross.
Is it confirmed whether or not he's also the one who set them up with Waingro?
>>221403398No, Cheritto just hired a cowboy.
>>221403389It's not really a doublecross if they stole the bonds in the first place. More like a citizen's arrest.
>>221403320>Now no OG worth his salt would think this could workYou know this from experience, I assume.
>>221403320>reputational costThere is no cost, the bonds are insured, he gets his money and the bonds back at a discount and if he hadn't flipped out nobody would even know they got stolen in the first place.
>I'ma just meet up with the detective who knows everything about my heist at a diner and tell him I'm going to do it anywayThe movie is fun but fucking what?
>>221404790Except Van Zant says "the word out in the street is you can steal my money". People talk so it definitely would've ruined his rep.
