The "I Didn't Comment in Another Thread" Thread

[overgeeked]

It's what I took from it when I saw it when it first came out in the cinema. The guy was an a-hole without an ounce of self-awareness.

Same. And exactly. He's the poster boy for white privilege and white rage. He's a male Karen with a bat then a bag of guns.

 

[overgeeked]

In that case, yours is certainly a different take, well more recent take than others on it.

No. I saw it when it was new and had that take back then. The linked article just encapsulates it better than I could.

But a remake done with anyone in the lead role snapping like that would totally fall under the "not getting the respect they think they deserve" umbrella

The original does it well enough.

I see it as joker's "one bad day away" from snapping. I mean from what his Ex said to Robert Duvall's character it was only a matter of time before he got physical.

You know the Joker's the villain in that movie, too...right?

It's a story of a dude suffering road rage and he keeps escalating every single time someone doesn't give him what he thinks he deserves or is owed. The Korean store owner won't give him the change he wants to make a phone call, so he gets pissy, refuses to leave, is justifiably threatened with a bat, steals the owners bat, then smashes up the place...over a quarter to make a phone call. The only time in the film where he's justified is when he's almost mugged by the gangbangers. That's it. The rest of the film is him being a privileged jackhole with a bag of guns.

 

[Ryujin]

I saw it in a theatre, when it first came out. My take on it now is far different from then, as I've developed far more self awareness. There's a reason why the vast majority of mass shooters are White males.

 

[Ryujin]

No. I saw it when it was new and had that take back then. The linked article just encapsulates it better than I could.

The original does it well enough.

You know the Joker's the villain in that movie, too...right?

It's a story of a dude suffering road rage and he keeps escalating every single time someone doesn't give him what he thinks he deserves or is owed. The Korean store owner won't give him the change he wants to make a phone call, so he gets pissy, refuses to leave, is justifiably threatened with a bat, steals the owners bat, then smashes up the place...over a quarter to make a phone call. The only time in the film where he's justified is when he's almost mugged by the gangbangers. That's it. The rest of the film is him being a privileged jackhole with a bag of guns.

The whole thing starts with him being laid-off. It's an escalation.

 

[overgeeked]

The whole thing starts with him being laid-off. It's an escalation.

Yes. I was referring to the violence. He gets violent over a quarter. Getting laid off isn't an excuse to freak out and start breaking other people's stuff and/or hurting people. He's not the victim in the film, he's the villain.

 

[Ryujin]

Yes. I was referring to the violence. He gets violent over a quarter. Getting laid off isn't an excuse to freak out and start breaking other people's stuff and/or hurting people. He's not the victim in the film, he's the villain.

Absolutely. Just as, as previously stated, Phoenix's Joker is the villain of that movie. They're both essentially origin stories, not written to make you empathize with the main character. The lay-off is a "trigger event."

 

[trappedslider]

The whole thing starts with him being laid-off. It's an escalation.

Well, he was emotionally abusive to his ex-wife and kid before the movie starts. Then he attempts to kill that fly in his car showing his actual anger.

Yes. I was referring to the violence. He gets violent over a quarter. Getting laid off isn't an excuse to freak out and start breaking other people's stuff and/or hurting people. He's not the victim in the film, he's the villain.

Technically, he got violent when the shopkeeper thought he was robbing him since the shopkeeper refused to be a decent human and just give him change for the dollar despite having his till open, and his prices were over the top in D-fense's eyes.


It also feels like a more violent evolution of

 

[overgeeked]

Well, he was emotionally abusive to his ex-wife and kid before the movie starts.

So he's clearly absolute trash as a human. Got it.

Technically, he got violent when the shopkeeper thought he was robbing him since the shopkeeper refused to be a decent human and just give him change for the dollar despite having his till open, and his prices were over the top in D-fense's eyes.

So blaming the victim. Got it.

I'm out. Good luck.

 

[trappedslider]

another white privilege movie this time from the 70s

 

[Gradine]

The thing about the whole "Films People Miss the Point Of By Rooting for the Villain Protagonist" thing is that I think it often critically leaves out the actual intentions of the filmmaker. I'm not convinced that we weren't supposed to be rooting for Michael Douglas, or the Joker, or Tyler Durden*... I sure as hell don't trust Todd freaking Phillips with that kind of nuance, at a minimum. "Sociopathic White Man" was basically the action hero of the 70's (in case you thought Dirty Harry supposed to be sensible and mild-mannered).

Like, viewed through today's lens, yes, absolutely, all of these men and horrible, privileged, murderous sociopaths, but for some of these films I don't think the problem is "You got the wrong lesson from this movie"; it's more "this movie is just terrible."


*film version only, the book is pretty clear about how it feels