"Scarface" with Al Pacino as Tony Montana features a scene where Bolivian kingpin Sosa kills Tony's colleague Omar, saying Omar was an informant.
Later, back in Miami, an angry Frank Lopez tells Tony that Sosa was lying.
What was the truth?
I think on balance Omar was a chivato.
Firstly, look at the manner in which he was executed. Sosa could have chosen any myriad of other ways to have killed him including making it look like an accident or a hit from a rival -both of which would have been less likely to aggravate Frank. Omar was clearly beaten and/or tortured prior to his being hanged.
Secondly, look at the conversation Sosa has with his associate. It seems that his associate was informing his boss of something. We find out later from Sosa that Omar "...was recognised" by Sosa's associate -that seems like a sounder explanation than the alternatives. If the call was to eavesdrop or for Sosa to give the order to kill Omar the associate wouldn't have been speaking as much. Additionally, as has been stated by another poster Sosa realising that Tony was more favourable to a deal would have excused himself rather than the other way around.
Thirdly, and no one seems to have mentioned this, Sosa actually discloses to Tony the names of the persons that Omar testified against. This is information which Frank (or Tony) could verify. It would've been overly elaborate and very sloppy of Sosa to lie in a situation were the information could have been verified.
This last point differentiates the Scarface scene from the Godfather scene, because Sosa gives an overt reason which whether true or false could be verified. In Godfather no reason was given for the hit so it was clearly to put Sonny into the position of Godfather.
The answer is No! Omar was not an informant. Sosa killed Omar because he knew if he let Omar go back to Miami that him and Frank would never make the deal. He could tell that Omar knew Frank wouldn't be interested in a deal that big. But he knew Tony would be and that if he sent Tony back alone that the deal would most likely get done. If not, he would kill them just like he did Omar and as we all know later on Tony as well. Frank was just surprised and disgusted that Tony tried to make the deal himself and suddenly was so enamoured with Sosa who he already didn't care for. As you saw throughout the movie Sosa did away with pretty much anyone who stood in his way with making $ .
I do not think that Omar was an informant. I think that Sosa sensed that Omar was not behind the plan for a big deal where Tony was. Therefore, he killed the source of resistance and sent Tony, who was all for the deal, back to Frank to try to make it happen.
It was similar to the scene in The Godfather where Sollotzo pitched the idea of the Corleone's getting into the drug business to Vito Corleone. During the meeting, Sonny Corleone showed his hand that he was excited by the idea, whereas Vito Corleone was not and refused to do business with Sollotzo. Sollotzo then tried to kill Vito Corleone, so that Sonny, who would become the Don, would agree to get into the drug business.
In both cases, it was just a way to eliminate resistance to the deal.
It is not shown, nor implied in the movie whether Omar really was an informant. However, given the situation, the logical answer to the question seems to me to be yes.
If Omar really was an informant, would Frank really have known about it? Of course not! Frank's denial or reply that Sosa was lying had more to do with his anger at that moment. Tony had just come back with an unauthorized deal with Sosa without Frank's nod and claimed that they killed Omar(who was Frank's man) because he was an informant. Obviously, Frank went in denial. So as a personal opinion, yes it looked that way. Omar was an informant.
I think Omar was not an informant. Tony was played. He even says, "That piece of shit up there, I never liked him, I never trusted him. For all I know he had me set up and had my friend Angel Fernandez killed." But Omar was the one who provided automatic weapons and suggested a four man crew. If he was trying to set Tony up, why go through all the trouble? He could have simply sent Tony and Manny over to the chainsaw bathtub unarmed and been done with them.
Evil druglords are not known for playing fair. If killing an innocent guy in an excessively brutal way would help sell the deal to Tony, then Sosa would probably have done exactly that.
On the other hand I think the process of Sosa being called aside & told about Omar was too realistic for Omar to have been innocent. Sosa & associates acted like they were indeed figuring out that Omar was an informant. Much of it was happening behind Tony's back. The process appeared to have started with Sosa's guys calling his attention to something. If Sosa had been getting rid of Omar for dealing purposes the signal would have been going the other way.
Furthermore, Sosa couldn't have taken it for granted that killing Omar would get him the deal he wanted. The original idea of the meeting was to get a deal with Lopez (Tony & Omar's boss back in the USA). Lopez could just as easily have said "F--k you Sosa, Omar was like family to me! Tony cutting a deal with you doesn't mean squat! Now send Tony back here so I can kill him myself. He should have been trying to protect Omar, not making his own unauthorized deals with you."
My guess is that Omar really had been an informant.
I don't think he was, Frank would've done a background check as Mel was on the payroll. Sosa done his homework on Tony, Omar and Frank, the phone call was just a diversary tactic to play Tony and strike up a bigger deal long term. Omar's death was purely down to business and anybody who got in his way went down.
Very interesting and fascinating arguments as to the role of Omar as an informant or the genuine underboss of the cocaine drug kingpin Frank Lopez. In many ways, there seems to be some valid points made on both sides of the arguments.
But I find it hard to believe that Sosa would use a ploy to murder Omar just to have the deal with Lopez. Sosa is an extremely wealthy, educated, sophisticated criminal would not have gone to that length if he didn't feel that his massive cocaine empire wasn't threatened by an informer in their midst.
For that reason I think Omar was a Chivato. My opinion of course!!
If you re-watch the movie, remember when Omar meets Tony for the first time? He setup the original deal of working on a boat, then the deal at the motel. Remember, he was the one responsible for the whole fiasco. Another piece of evidence is when Sosa comes back to the table, and Omar says he wouldn't want to talk to Frank on an overseas phone. All of his mannerisms in the movie point to an incompetent drug dealer. While he COULD have been an informant, the scene plays much more like The Godfather-the scene of 1 member speaking favorably to a deal can get the current leaders killed. "Sonny was hot for my deal", so I'll kill the Godfather. Omar would have lived a little longer had he chilled out, but he had to throw a fit, and now he's riding a little taller
I don't think Frank Lopez understood Omar's background and such. And you can't trust Mel Bernstein to check Omar's background because he was a corrupt cop.
Omar definitely was an informant, why would Alex kill someone just because they object to make a deal? Plus you saw the way he was killed, Omar being hanged off the edge of a helicopter. Who beats up somebody that bad when Omar didn't do anything to them? Being an informer on the other hand, is a reasonable excuse for his death.
No Omar was not an informant. I read all the answers then watched that scene numerous times. My conclusion is that there's no way that Omar was an informant. It's just too damn obvious that he wasn't.
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?