Now, let me preface this by saying I don't mean twists in films that reveal a character you've thought was the bad guy suddenly to be the good guy. Nor am I talking about anti-heroes, or the like. Also, Watchmen isn't really an example of what I'm talking about.
What I'm talking about is films where, objectively, the actions of the antagonist compared to those of the protagonist(s) paint them as more in the right, morally speaking, although the film doesn't specifically state this.
The example that got me thinking this over is Escape From New York. I'd seen that movie countless times since I was knee high to piss, but it wasn't until my last viewing (Cinemapocolypse baby!) that I realized that Isaac Hayes's The Duke is really, objectively, the hero of the film. Granted, Snake Plisken has always been painted as an anti-hero, but I'd never considered just how on the side of right The Duke is. Think about it, what does he do to make him a villain? It's never stated what crime he committed to land himself in New York, nor is he ever shown acting cruel or malicious. His entire goal is to get THE ENTIRE prison populace, his people, back to freedom. One may look at this as his crime, but it's clear that their situation is one of a corrupt justice system. Their punishment and subsequent living conditions are inhumane, and The Duke comes off as much more of a freedom fighter than a villain. It's said at one point that he's a guy you wouldn't cross, but he's shown as somewhat more forgiving. He certainly forgives Brain for his first betrayal and he doesn't outright kill Pliskin when he has the chance (rather letting him fight it out in a fair, if brutal, match). The worst thing he's shown doing is taking those shots at Pleasonton's president, but its heavily alluded to at the start that Pleasonton runs a government with some fascistic leanings, and by the end he's outright shown to be a prick. All I'm saying is if I had Bush strapped to a wall...well, let's not get into that.
What think you all of my reading of this film? What other films do you bring a similar reading to?
What I'm talking about is films where, objectively, the actions of the antagonist compared to those of the protagonist(s) paint them as more in the right, morally speaking, although the film doesn't specifically state this.
The example that got me thinking this over is Escape From New York. I'd seen that movie countless times since I was knee high to piss, but it wasn't until my last viewing (Cinemapocolypse baby!) that I realized that Isaac Hayes's The Duke is really, objectively, the hero of the film. Granted, Snake Plisken has always been painted as an anti-hero, but I'd never considered just how on the side of right The Duke is. Think about it, what does he do to make him a villain? It's never stated what crime he committed to land himself in New York, nor is he ever shown acting cruel or malicious. His entire goal is to get THE ENTIRE prison populace, his people, back to freedom. One may look at this as his crime, but it's clear that their situation is one of a corrupt justice system. Their punishment and subsequent living conditions are inhumane, and The Duke comes off as much more of a freedom fighter than a villain. It's said at one point that he's a guy you wouldn't cross, but he's shown as somewhat more forgiving. He certainly forgives Brain for his first betrayal and he doesn't outright kill Pliskin when he has the chance (rather letting him fight it out in a fair, if brutal, match). The worst thing he's shown doing is taking those shots at Pleasonton's president, but its heavily alluded to at the start that Pleasonton runs a government with some fascistic leanings, and by the end he's outright shown to be a prick. All I'm saying is if I had Bush strapped to a wall...well, let's not get into that.
What think you all of my reading of this film? What other films do you bring a similar reading to?
