@HikariWS said:

I see it's meant to show he got away with it and is applauded as a great person by a ton of ppl.

But what exactly happened?

** SPOILERS **

Here's a summary of the ending: Arbitrage Ending

Did he give the remaining money to his wife?

It's an open ending. The audience has to decide.

If he signs the separation agreement, 'all ownership and voting rights transfer to the Miller Charitable Foundation to be administered by his daughter Brooke Miller'. That includes the money.

If he doesn't sign, his wife won't give him an alibi and she will tell the police all about that night. There will be a new trial and he might be found guilty and go to prison.

tnx!

If I didn't understand it wrong, it's his wife and not daughter who'd own everything. It'd go to Miller Charitable Foundation, which is administered by his wife, who loves to be well seen by society. So, for open society everything would look fine, because he'd be donating everything to the foundation, while behind the scenes he was giving it to his wife.

Thinking about it now, maybe he was being applauded on the party because he had made that donation. If so, he and his family is still loved by society, but he lost his remaining money and his family hates him.

@HikariWS said:

tnx!

If I didn't understand it wrong, it's his wife and not daughter who'd own everything. It'd go to Miller Charitable Foundation, which is administered by his wife, who loves to be well seen by society. So, for open society everything would look fine, because he'd be donating everything to the foundation, while behind the scenes he was giving it to his wife.

Ellen, the wife, said that it would be administered by Brooke. She doesn't handle any of the business, but she might be the one who controls her daughter.

The movie is called "Arbitrage." It's all about making deals.

When he makes the deal with Mayfield, he comes back to ask, "what would you have paid?" After Mayfield answers, he in turns asks "what would you have taken?" They chuckle, and agree, "so, this is a good deal for both of us." As he walks out of the restaurant, he smiles that "I am a winner" smile, but it's cut short by a phone call. He's got another fire to put out.

He figures out how to protect Jimmy. Another win.

Then, his wife drops her bombshell. She's out, this is THE DEAL. Take it and, while you lose control of your business, you stay out of prison, and keep your reputation intact. The Foundation will flourish under your daughter's able management, you set her up, not destroy her. And you can still live a life in society. Don't take it, and you'll go to prison and lose control of everything anyway, your life's work goes down the toilet, and our name is destroyed.

His "little trophy" wife learned a thing or two over the years while putting up with his ego and his bullshit.

There is no winning to not taking it, just blowing all their lives to hell. Selling the company was the only way to save it to begin with, so he was already looking for a way out.

There's no question, no doubt, he took the deal.

Did the "rich white guy" get away with it? Kinda. He killed someone. Sure, it was an accident, but he fled the scene and ubstructed justice covering it up. While he may not do time for it, he did pay for this in a way, as he lost face with his family. His daughter and wife no longer worship him, and the wife sees completely through his facade, there's no image he can project that fools her. In that way, he did not, quite, get away with it.

Why do u call him white guy? Would it be fine to get away if he was black and rich?

@HikariWS said:

Why do u call him white guy?

I didn't call him a white guy. I described the character, who was a white guy. I put "rich white guy" in quotes to describe a "type" of person; on the outside, he's a hero, he's clean, he's good, he's celebrated and admired...but, in truth, he's NOT all the things he projects. In truth, he's dishonest, he's selfish, he's egotistical. Have you seen Mr. Brooks with Kevin Costner? Same basic premise - rich, successful, admired, white guy with a dark secret - but with gruesome twists. It's a type that Hollywood revisits often, in part because society produces and supports that type all too often.

I did not write the script, I'm simply observing the mechanics that make the story compelling.

Would it be fine to get away if he was black and rich?

It's not fine if anyone "gets away with it" but I'm willing to bet the movie wouldn't work the same way if the protagonist was Black and rich. For one thing, if audiences are primarily white men, they'd sooner identify with the main character and have more emotional reaction to his downfall; if the protagonist was Black, there'd likely be much less empathy for his dilemma and a hastier rush to judgment that he's a bad guy. Evidence of this double standard abounds (check out this discussion on how war movies are rated).

You asked, I answered. Hope it helps. Cheers.

Thanks for clarifying :)

I don't think character skin color has relevance or would affect anything. It's never mentioned on the movie, that's why it felt odd u mentioned it, from all characteristics he has. An actor was hired to do the character and the actor comes to be white.

On USA it's reasonably common to have billionaires doing charity. Many ppl might see them as good ppl for that, but in fact they become billionaires by charging unreasonably high prices from company's services and they earn high profits, instead of providing more fair salary to employees or charge more fair prices to customers. Then they get more money than they could ever spend, and spend it on whatever charity they wish, buying praises and applause over ppl in despair.

I believe that's the base used on the movie, portraying a bad behavior on him while he's praised by society, to then he lose all his remaining money and become under control of his wife and daughter while he keeps his good society reputation.

@HikariWS said:

Thanks for clarifying :)

I don't think character skin color has relevance or would affect anything. It's never mentioned on the movie, that's why it felt odd u mentioned it, from all characteristics he has. An actor was hired to do the character and the actor comes to be white.

On USA it's reasonably common to have billionaires doing charity. Many ppl might see them as good ppl for that, but in fact they become billionaires by charging unreasonably high prices from company's services and they earn high profits, instead of providing more fair salary to employees or charge more fair prices to customers. Then they get more money than they could ever spend, and spend it on whatever charity they wish, buying praises and applause over ppl in despair.

I believe that's the base used on the movie, portraying a bad behavior on him while he's praised by society, to then he lose all his remaining money and become under control of his wife and daughter while he keeps his good society reputation.

Fair enough. :-)

Different backgrounds and experiences colour and shape the lenses through which people see a work of art and/or the world differently. Through civil discourse such as this, we get to learn how others see the world, and that can add to our experiences, refining and reshaping our lenses continuously through life.

I shared how I see it; you've done the same. All good!

PS. If you might be so inclined, I'd love your assessment of the data in that war movie thread.

Cheers!

DRDMovieMusings--

Your ratings analysis of war movies is fascinating.

Just to test it out, I revisited the Bataan (1943) page here on TMDB. Bataan is one of my favorite films (not just in the war genre); personally I had already rated it an 8 long before even seeing your list in this discussion of Arbitrage.

If you don't already know, Bataan features a multiracial combat unit-- White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian. At the time of its release in the 1940s, it had a very hard time gaining traction in the American South. Although nationwide in the U.S., I understand it did quite well, although hard data for this film is hard to come by.

Aaaanyway, I went to its page here on TMDB, all ready to prove you wrong.

And the rating stands at around 64% as of this writing. Thus proving your point.

(I bow in respect to you, once again).

You know, oftentimes I come here to TMDB just for candy, and you and rooprect and a few others end up giving me broccoli. Which is okay, I happen to like broccoli.

But gosh darn it, if you and those others don't give me something to think about, when all I'm trying to do is relax!

:)

Ah @northcoast my friend,

I appreciate your encouragement!

The math certainly paints a picture doesn't it? I saw your comment on the board for Bataan and your observations/suspicions appear to align with what I found in the data.

There is meat on this bone worth chewing on.