"Your life is as valuable as a three button SEGA Genesis controler. I'm gonna spindash, you're gonna keep game overing. Imma collect all the extra lives, you're gonna keep game overing. Why, cause you keep slipping under the spikes, you worthless bitch-ass frick. You're gonna stay in my fanbase until you die. You serve no purpose in life, your purpose in life is to be in my fanbase playing my games daily. Your purpose in life is to be in that fandom playing games daily. Your skill is NOTHING. You play ZERO LEVELS. You should go to the level select screen NOW." - LowTierHedgehog
Jebus what a sad take on the film. Should have known when early on you went with "white privilege". Then you went with, he was wrong to expect that other humans living in the US speak English. Perhaps you might have went with, given the scene, gang tagging is itself bad and perhaps even worse when not even in your language. Related to that, somehow, standing there, making that remark, while holding his briefcase is "weaponizing". And you went with trespassed on gang turf and never mind that he was in a public park. You know, the park that when he was employed his tax dollars helped pay for. Perhaps take out a Stafford loan and learn what the word, "discriminating", means in context. Since it doesn't mean how you played it, which is neither amusing nor intelligent, by the way. Some call out some others for being "woke". Often enough is a mistaken complaint. Not with you, lad. And can you not imagine things that are not even implied. Take the black soul. First, compare their clothes. And, yes, he speaks perfectly fine English. MD simply looked at him and saw himself (even borrowed his phrase to describe himself, not economically viable). You know, someone who gave his life for his employer only to be feces canned when he's older, you know, when not the best age to get another job, even in your field, and when his age doesn't help when it comes to training for new career. Where you get racism out of that, well, that's all in your warped mind. Next, what does James Huberty have to with the film? JH was a straight out nutter, who in addition to everything else, believed that both Carter and Reagan were personally out to get him. Sure, he lost his job, but after his job loss moved to Cali with his wife and child. Tried to get help for his mental health, got none (Cali's great and glorious public servant misspelled his name), then had an argument with his wife, which ended with him telling her that he was going out to hunt humans. Other than the job loss, none of the rest is this movie. He was also in a worse circumstance than MD. JH contracted polio as a child, age 3, and had difficultly walking thereafter. Lost his job as welder owing to tremors in his right arm following a motor vehicle accident. No excuse for murdering those humans, but when you can't walk and have tremors in your right arm, what do you for a job? He was a security guard, lost that job a few days before, have never been able to learn why, though I suspect that owing to many guard jobs providing ample, or most of the time, sitting down, did that, but perhaps came the time when he did have to do some moving about the landscape and couldn't owing to the not walking well, goodbye to that job. I myself tried out for a guard job, for sport, I had a left ACA stroke which means that I won't ever run again, no physical test to get a job, many where it is mostly sitting, but if one ever needs to run, would probably be when I'd get canned too. Now well and truly lastly, if you weren't around in the '90s can you have the doubtful grace to not opine on what the '90s were. Thanks. Oh, and since you're as dumb as a post, perhaps spare us your commentary on the media literacy of the audience as well. Thanks again. For the bonus freebie, someone wrote a reply even longer than mine and while I do not agree with all of it, that human is correct. Some see MD as anti-hero based on their presuppositions while you and yours are their photo negative. I saw the film during its original run. Suffice to say, well, I grew up in LA. In the film, MD is not in a gang. He's supposed to be out of bounds, as it were. That ought to have informed your view and spared us your insane notion that MD, in a public park, trespassed on gang turf. Not how it works, lad. Sure, no guarantees, but 9x out of 10 they leave him alone. Even with his briefcase, which is what they wanted (why, by the way, it doesn't matter what he says).
I am biased towards O, because I was in it. Not much, but our high school arranged for some of us to be extras so we could see the filmmaking process from the inside. The outside of the school is the administrative building of the College of Charleston, but the inside was a high school gym a couple blocks away. If you pause during the pep rally at the beginning, I think I'm in the front row. I can tell you that they had to do maybe a dozen takes of that scene because Josh Hartnett kept missing his cue to say "except when one of us is late for practice!" Also there was a school dance scene where I thought it would look cool if I leaned against a corner, so I had to stay in that pose for hours pretending to talk to a girl I'd never met and the corner started digging into my back. And I think they ended up cutting that scene anyway. My biggest regret is that I didn't talk to Martin Sheen when I had the chance; I didn't know who he was at the time, but now I'm a big fan. That said, I haven't actually watched the movie in ages, so I'm not going to defend it as a movie. I had honestly forgotten most of the plot changes you mention, and if I watched it again, they would probably strike me differently. I do remember the director discussing, maybe in a commentary, that they debated whether to have Odin use drugs. On the one hand, drugs made his violence more believable, but OTOH it took away from the power of violence itself. So they did think about these things, even if they made the wrong decisions. And you mentioned trends from the 90's that carried into the 2000's; that's more accurate than you realize, since the movie was filmed in 1999. But then the Columbine massacre happened, and the producers thought it would be inappropriate to release a movie about murder in a high school, so they delayed it a couple years. Sigh, remember when school shootings were newsworthy enough to affect people's behavior?
I couldn't have predicted in a million years that I would speak with someone who was in a movie I've watched, much less talked about for a RU-vid video. Thank you very much for your story and for that insight into the filmmaking process. This was initially created as a project for one of my college courses, so I decided to drop any in depth discussion about the murders involving students because it seemed in bad taste to linger on it for so long, especially when I already needed to discuss the SA in depth. Considering that insight you gave about the director's commentary, it sounds a lot like their decision to set it in a high school led to a lot of trouble regarding the plot. Obviously Columbine added to that (which, good lord, talk about a coincidence from hell), but the extent and amount of violence that happens in the film makes far less sense coming from high schoolers, doubly so considering it's a boarding school. Makes me wonder why they'd stick so hard to this specific adaptation of the story, rather than adjust it to be adults in a modern setting. Either way, thank you again for providing this insight, and thank you very much for watching!
@@maxwellpaynewell5305 I'm pretty sure they were trying to go for some sort of social commentary on violence in high schools, which existed long before Columbine but that made it too intense (though a mass shooting was actually quite different than what happens in the movie). I think in the same commentary they said something like "the very idea of doing Othello in high school seems shocking, and the fact that it's at all possible should be shocking." Again, these are very fuzzy memories, I had the DVD at one point but I'm not sure what happened to it.
@Jurgan6 interesting. I own the DVD, so I'll see about having a look at the director's commentary, if it's on my copy. If it is, this film might be open for a second opinion. I definitely want to look at some other modernized Shakespeare adaptations from around that time, so that might be a good opportunity for it
Ya but he has to be just a little bit bad to show the fine line tread by someone with absolute integrity. Just like Vaniishing Point, when he no longer compromised, he became a folk hero. A doomed one.
@jnieves77 Good spot, and thank you for saying they fit. The last thing I wanted was to use the boring, standard BGM picks for videos like this. Plus, I want to bring some attention to some criminally underrated OSTs
I'm so fucking sick at people trying to spin D-Fen's actions as "Oh it's all the wifes fault she divorced him for no reason!" WHEN IT IS SHOWN THE HE WAS ABUSIVE AND SHOWN THE HE HAS ANGER ISSUES
It sometimes feels like people need to be shown something as horrible as an SA scene to accept that a character in fiction is abusive. I get wanting more evidence, but come on. It's fiction. Subtext is a direct lead to an inferential conclusion, it's not like the story would purposefully give hints toward his past abuse just to say they were all misunderstandings
Solid analysis. But I completely disagree with Prendergast turning into a "misogynist".... He was standing up for himself. His wife was psychotically chastising and berating him the entire movie. Yes, she obviously had mental health issues, but that does not everything A-Ok. Clearly being the kind, docile, and loving husband was not helping the situation, so Prendergast needed to be more firm and assertive with her. It happens. It's life. Relationships are tough and sometimes being warm & bubbly doesn't always work. What was he supposed to do? Just sit there and tolerate constant verbal abuse while he's trying to do his extremely dangerous and stressful job?
@dante340 I can definitely see that being the intended takeaway from his arc. I had more I wanted to say about Prendergast in the script, but I realized during editing that it would've taken too much time to add that on top of my main goal, which was analyzing D-FENS and his wrongdoings. The way it's shown just really rubs me the wrong way, the entire thing would've been fine if they'd stopped at him telling her to shut up, but the extra bit about telling her to make dinner seems like a weird addendum to what should be a triumphant moment for him. That, and his job isn't stressful and dangerous anymore. As far as she knows, he's sitting behind his desk all day investigating a particularly complex robbery that keeps pulling him away from the phone. And that's not to even mention their deceased daughter. Their whole situation is very complicated, it honestly would've made for a captivating film all on its own
@@maxwellpaynewell5305 That's a valid take. I personally interpreted Prendergast's dinner line as him giving her clear and concise tasks to complete in order to keep herself occupied and not waiting around stressed out. It didn't seem like he was trying to subjugate or dominate her, at least not to me. Plus, having her prepare dinner also reassures her that he'll be home safe and sound soon, and that there's nothing to worry about. That's just how I saw it. Like you said, that relationship dynamic is complicated and is indeed worthy of its own analysis.
Wow, only two videos in and we are already giving up and doing let's plays. And here I was hoping that this channel would be nothing but 7 hour retrospectives on Yakuza characters' opinions on minorities. smh.
I agree with a lot of your points and we gotta remember we are looking at the movie from a modern lens. Some of the horrible things he did weren’t seen as that bad in the 90s. So I think the 90s lens is painting defense as more good guy. But 30 years later there are so many more layers and you’re right he is so much more racist and xenophobic by today’s lens. By today’s standards he is the bad guy 100%. When I first saw the movie in 2012 he was 70-80% bad guy … I can say what % bad guy he was in the 90s l was 8 lol
@neverthere5689 the time difference does factor in with the severity of his actions, even that interview I cited came out over twenty years later. So one could definitely say he wasn't originally intended to come off as the most evil man alive at the time of release. However,, I will also say that I think the core idea of D-FENS is ultimately that of a man who, however reasonable his complaints with society, was unjust in the way he chose to combat them. When the most level headed and morally aware character in the film says, in no uncertain terms, that D-FENS was in the wrong, I'm inclined to believe he's speaking for both himself and the movie. So no, he may not be the literal antichrist, but I wouldn't put him as anywhere near good guy status
My interpretation of Fens was the idea of "even a broken clock is right twice a day". D-Fens isn't a hero and is unhinged as fuck, but there is some truth to he notion that the world is getting worse and worse as time goes on. The issue however is that you don't address that by by going on a violent rampage and waging war on everyone and everything. Also the movie is set in early 90's LA around the same time as the LA riots, and I think the vibe of that era is really apparent. Also I'm really fascinated by true crime and had actually heard of the James Huberty story before. I'd never made the connection to D-Fens before but damn you're right, it's spot on.
There's definitely some legitimacy behind his actions. As many have pointed out, he has real reasons to be as angry as he is. I mostly wanted to focus on the immoral parts of his character because I've seen a lot of people make the leap from "tragic antihero" to "tragic hero," which I just don't think he's a good enough person to qualify as. As for the LA riots the previous year, I hadn't factored that into my reading of the film because D-FENS would be the last person I expect to care about Rodney King. But it absolutely does lend to the vibe of the setting as teetering on the edge of something violent, and it's further reinforced by the extreme temperature of the day he snapped. As with James Huberty, it's something that audiences of the time would have been unable to ignore if they went into the film with any sense of worldliness, but I understand if current audiences are too removed from the time period to make that connection
There is no good guy in this film, save maybe the relative innocence of children: the daughter, the boy who asks DEFEN's if he making a movie, the maintenance man's children sneaking a swim on golf resort property. Almost every adult has issues or behavior less than ideal to get along with others. Iron sharpens iron. DEFEN's mental breakdown, selfishness, and evil actions are a response to the mental disorders, selfishness, and evil actions of others. Almost everyone that he is actually violent towards, exhibited aggressive, unsympathetic, non-empathetic, non-apologetic behavior towards him and he returns the favor in spades. You cannot lecture on his evil like it materialized ex-nihilo. Akin to abandoning a temperamental dog at the pound was his divorce, restraining order, and legally compelled non-visitation of his daughter. "Put her on the damn horse" sure, what an angry arse, that is when a spouse communicates let's get some help, not petition for divorce, get a restraining order and non-visitation. Like that will fix things, no, on the contrary more sharpening for worse response and behavior. The most disordered and selfish people in this film is the wife of Pendergast and the ex wife of DEFEN's. I have seen it a thousand times in war veteran counseling, wives throwing their beaten and wounded dog away for lack of a better term. The usual: he came home from deployments, irritable, drinking, short tempered, never physically harmed kids or wife as in the film, but now has a divorce, restraining order, and lawyers and "experts" telling a judge he should see his kids.) Then society and the man in question will either work together to rehabilitate or react off each other till the man in question, in analogy a beaten and wounded dog, is put down. That is what the film is about: do we rehabilitate our analogous wounded dogs or exacerbate the issues and force the execution.
The point of the movie was to create a character that some people would relate to and others would hate, and that was accomplished. People used to be able to make media looking at different POVs without taking a side. It created opportunities for discussion that didn't devolve into arguing and allowed us to learn from each other. Today people are locked into their bubbles and are unwilling to listen to people who don't share the same opinions. That's why the US is falling apart. Douglas' character was the bad guy, no doubt, but there was a lot of truth in the character as well.
Essay, Pt.1/2 2:47 Only a left-wing nihilist would take the side of those parasitic criminals. D-FENS does plenty wrong elsewhere, but he did nothing wrong in that scene. 2:57 That's right. He does have gall. Americans should express gall in situations like that. Why should we hand civilization over to barbarians? Let's not forget that the legendary Paul Kersey was a liberal until his family was violated. After he became a vigilante, he focused his wrath entirely on violent thugs. He never picked on people just for being different. When he wasn't slaughtering thugs, he was a warm, generous, empathic, gregarious man. 3:04 They provoked him first. He responded with snark and sass, showing that he wasn't intimidated. Angel Stride Hill is supposed to be a public park. The thugs only think it's their territory. It's not. Again, D-FENS is in the right in that scene. Right makes might. 3:41 Does he, though?! He's a victim of the system. Michael Douglas's dad, Kirk, described Bill as "both the victim and the villain." That's kinda similar to Magneto, philosophically (and/or psychologically) speaking. 3:44 Aren't his platitudes taking the side of people at the bottom of the socioeconomic pyramid? He says he's "rolling back prices to 1965." Doesn't that go against the system? The system wants the cost of living to be unbearable for the average person. That's how it maintains social control. Socialism does the same thing. The only difference is who administers the poison (the state or some other institution like a corporation). 3:53 Yeah, he went full Karen in that scene. But at least he only picked on the manager. He didn't really get in the faces of the lowly miserable workers. And his point about false advertising was spot-on. He made that point terribly, of course. There are much more creative (and more subversive) ways to make that same point. Problem is, those techniques take a lot more time to achieve results. 5:15 He's not wrong. But that's life in the big city. He would have done fine if he'd moved to the Midwest. 5:29 That's a legit crit against him, and it illustrates his Magneto-like hypocrisy. See also Dawn Bellwether from Zootopia. Bill, himself, was most likely psycho-emotively abused by at least one of his parents. These things tend to be cyclical. They never develop in a vacuum. 6:20 Bill is also guilty of blaming others for his problems when he's the one at fault. Other times, there really is an unfairness going on that only makes his wrath seeth even more. So Kirk's assessment was right. He's both a victim and a villain. Later on, it seems like he starts to realize how he's victimized others. But those thugs and that not-see can't be considered "victims." They got what they deserved. 6:28 Normal people stop recording when something like that starts to happen. That was done entirely for the audience. His expression seems to imply that he realizes that he's guilty of hypocrisy. 7:33 Again, you sound like a leftist taking the side of criminals because they happen to be of a racial minority. What if a Mexican-American, who was a law-abiding citizen, was thrown into the same situation? And what if they dealt with it the same way? Pick any race for the criminal thugs in that scenario. Do you think the person being accosted is going to care about that? 8:02 You're not going to address his wife's maniacal neuroticism? What, does she just get a pass on that? 9:16 He was in the right when it came to the street thugs and the not-see, though. Predators and parasites ought not be appeased. The Neville Chamberlain approach only hastens the collapse of civilization. 10:12 Surely, you're not defending the not-see! Bill should get a civic citation of merit for cacking that bastard! 10:15 Vigilantism is meant to be a People's response against violent crime. Vigilantism is an expression of The People's Will. 10:18 This is another legit crit against Bill. Also notice the contrast between Jack and Frank. Jack is the voice of the reason in that scene. Frank obviously has a poor attitude. He's sort of a reflection of Bill. Also, why do so many movies have pairs of characters named "Jack" and "Frank?" 10:29 Another situation where he was in the right. He invoked what I call "Tyson's Law." Not too many years ago, Mike Tyson made the legit point that too many people nowadays get away with being rude because they no longer fear The People's wrath. 10:49 [cue reference to Megamind's didactic diatribe of demented do0m regarding ordinary villains versus supervillains] 13:40 "I am not a vigilante." ~Bill "D-FENS" Foster 14:22 Putin-lovers should be treated the same way Bill treats predators and parasites. Change my mind. // God hates Putin (Ezekiel 38,2). 14:33 Sir Mix-a-lot is a great philosopher. u///w///u 15:40 "Individual, good. System, bad." <-(I agree with that message.)
Essay, Pt.2/2 15:48 Who do you believe are "the most privileged?" Are you basing that assessment on race? I can tell you from more than 20 years worth of workplace experience that those of us at the bottom of the social pyramid are all equally wallowing in misery regardless of race. 15:53 Left-wing nihilist viewpoint confirmed. 16:07 He isn't "right-wing," though. He's pro-individual, anti-system. That puts him at odds with both the left AND the right, who both advocate different styles of collectivism. Secular left versus esoteric right. 16:27 Are you actually taking the side of the greedy Scrooge-like swindler?! Look past his race. 16:35 You're actually trying to justify 85 cents for a 12-oz. can of cola?! Would you also attempt to justify studio apartments costing over $900 a month nowadays when one-bedroom apartments (at the same apartment complex) cost $350 a month 25 years ago?! It's the same principle. Or should I say "principality" (Mammon). 17:19 Let's just take a moment to appreciate how incredibly detailed that artwork is. 17:32 He's being a Karen. He could have just gotten a burger and called it "brunch." There's a legit reason why fast food joints switch their menu from breakfast to lunch. It's because of their equipment and the products associated with that equipment. Just like an industrial facility. Think of it has the food having its own "shift." That's not the fault of the workers or the management. It's just the reality of the fast food world. I understand it from both angles. 17:44 No surprise that that happened seeing as how the TEC-9 is absolutely trash. Plus, it was modified with a shoelace, so it probably has a deactivated safety and a bad trigger. Wouldn't be surprised if the seer had been modified to make it full-auto. And he has an Uzi in the same bag! Of all the submachine guns and machine pistols in that bag, if you have an Uzi, you can just ditch the rest because they're all junk by comparison. Get yer mitts on an MP5, then you can ditch the Uzi. John McClane would back me up on that. Note: TEC-9 < MAC-10 < Uzi < MP5 18:32 I'm white (mostly) and I've experienced the same thing. 19:00 Was it because he's black? Again, I'm white and I've experienced the same thing. Race is not the dividing like anymore. Race and so-called "class" both distract us from the reality of the true conflict which is "the individual versus the system" ("the state" is only part of that system). That system could also be called "the Leviathan." 20:18 You're not gonna talk about what London Bridge symbolizes in this context? 21:34 Six figures a year as a welder?! Shucks! I've never made more than $11.35 an hour even when I was working in the sterile lab of an orthopedics plant! 21:37 Can conform, having been the victim of one of those. The old landlord was good, but it was only something he did on the side. He quit that biz to move on, then this new guy comes in and immediately hikes up the cost of rent and utilities 40%. This was before Biden. It's only gotten worse since then. 22:39 What does it say about our society (and its guiding mythos) that people go elsewhere for "better job prospects?" 22:54 See, there's part of the problem. Why California?! Why not the Midwest? 23:44 Was it a genuine-article Uzi or some other submachine gun? Some people ignorantly use the term "Uzi" as a generic moniker for all SMGs. And btw, it wasn't the first SMG to use a telescoped bolt to reduce its overall length. The Czechs came up with that in the 1920s. 24:40 A good guy with a gun could have resolved that issue early on. 25:29 Let me guess. The goal of that project was to convince young people to believe that more gun control is the answer (rather than liberating The People's Will by making vigilantism the law of the land in accordance with the Second Amendment). I had to endure that indoctrination when I was in middle school and high school all throughout the '90s. Btw, it was in high school in the mid '90s that I first saw Falling Down. 26:13 Street Trash is a movie you could have fun with. It doesn't glorify moral nihilism, as some assume, but rather warns against it. The moviemakers' stated goal was "to democratically offend everyone." It's a gonzo absurdist masterpiece! 26:47 Now you're really sounding like a minion of "The Message." 27:21 Killing not-sees is a good thing. We can all agree on that, right? 27:47 "Think for yourself" means that you must side with the individual against "the system."
I think its much more complicated than that. Am I the only one who felt like Duvals characters wife killed there young daughter why suffering from depression. And maybe because he was a police officer it was handled quietly?
That's definitely a possibility. My interpretation of events is that she's traumatized by a death she didn't see coming and couldn't prevent, and that's why she's so distressed about her husband being a cop. The circumstances are definitely bizarre, and it's absolutely possible that that is what happened and I'm just not seeing the details that you and others are picking up on, but for the moment, I don't believe that's what happened. Either way, the whole dichotomy between D-FENS and Prendergast is absolutely more complicated than I was able to go into in the video. I actually cut a decent chunk out of the script that was about Prendergast's changing nature during the film because it was just getting too long and unfocused. I mostly just wanted to counter arguments I've seen about D-FENS being a tragic hero, rather than a deeply damaged and dangerous person.
Glad someone finally made a video like this. I have seen too many videos that are basically "In Defense of D-Fens." You've really nailed the flaws of the character in a way that's informative and even picked up on damning dialogue I missed. 9:30 Yeah that's how I feel sometimes with this film. That shooting was really just wow, I am beyond shocked. Now on Prenderghast, he is pushing back in a more acceptable manner. The Drinker and I have referred to it as reasserting himself to face his issues. People are regularly dismissing and disrespecting him throughout the film. Prenderghast just takes it and eventually has to assert himself to be heard. When he yells at his wife on the phone, he is making it clear that there must be boundaries in their relationship. He is somewhat at fault for this behavior, but he's decided that he has to make clear his gripes. + You slaughtered the parts of the Drinker's second video, which went way too far to defend a domestic terrorist. You've offered stellar analysis for this film, thank you.
Thank you very much! I ended up cutting a whole section of this video out that discussed Prendergast's transformation in much more detail, for the sake of not making the video too long for its own good. In short, while I agree it's good that he gained some confidence after being pushed around by everyone in his life for so long, I think the ways he goes about it are too far in the opposite direction. Mainly with his wife, I just don't think she's got enough screen time to justify her or Prendergast's actions. I believe she's traumatized after the untimely death of a child she didn't even want, but even if she is just a manic-depressive bully, the solution isn't to forcibly regress her to a more dormant housewife. I get that by that point in the film, his changes need to be addressed by shorthand, or else risk breaking the pace of action. I just really wish we got to see more of the process of that change happening, rather than Prendergast seemingly snapping like D-FENS did, only now it's to good results. Either way, I don't think he's anything close to a bad person. Just standing on the same precipice that D-FENS has already fallen from
@@maxwellpaynewell5305 You are very welcome. It’s both apparent that you and your very are very insightful. I still think Prenderghast wants her to be independent and for him to be helpful. What he wants changed is more respect from her end and more care for him rather than control. Unlike Bill, Prenderghast won’t fall on becoming a bad guy because he has introspection and realizes when he has failed. He also doesn’t blame people for his faults. I have possibly two more videos on the film where I am going to really leap into the concept of perspective and refute some of the wrongs of RU-vid videos. If you’re interested and okay with it, I will reference your work there as useful to understand why Bill is wrong. I hope the tide turns where people at least realize he’s bad and empathetic but we’ll see.
@@Adam1Gee I am absolutely interested and okay with that. Anything I can do to contribute to a more widespread understanding of this film. I hope you can maintain the momentum those other videos on this film managed to gain for themselves, and I very much hope that I've provided some good points that you can iterate on and further apply to lacking interpretations of D-FENS and his actions
@@maxwellpaynewell5305 Many thanks. You have made it crystal clear and left no room for people to defend D-Fens if they see this video. You have demonstrated perfectly that D-Fens shouldn’t be defended, I really cannot compliment this video enough. I’ll keep that in mind I have few video projects I need to finish before I start that one. When I get closer to making it I might reach out in a future video of yours or just add another reply here for any aid. When I get the last one on Falling Down, it will most definitely strike a nerve; especially if it gets a decent number of views. Keep making bulletproof points (as I put it) in your videos!
see what happens when society makes up vague and illusory buzz phrases like "white privilege"? You get crap movie takes masquerading as "analysis"... dude, have you watched this movie? He NEVER hit his wife or child....just like that "racism" you see is something else entirely I guess they just don't teach tbis stuff anymore, it's easy to use catchy phrases that kinda sound right. "Violent misogyny" LOLOL wtf, careful who you call stupid LOL since you obviously see words as violence LOL
When I first watched Falling Down I at first sympathised with D-FENS but I thought it had become pretty clear towards the end that the guy was mentally unstable and not a good person, this video goes way deeper into just how bad he is and made me think. Nice video bro
I think you brought up some good poins I hadn't thought of before, while others I think might be character misreads and reaches. Just because I don't fully agree doesn't mean that I hate what you do though, You're entitled to your takeaway. Keep it up
Is anyone really surprised that Critical Drinker looks at D-FENS and goes "Yeah, he's not that bad"? This was a really well done video and it honestly deserves the views that The Drinker's videos get.
Thank you very much! For the moment, I'm more than happy getting this many views with basically my second serious video on the channel. But I do hope this gets spread wide enough to make people that watch him think twice about his points
@@maxwellpaynewell5305 Granted, while I've never seen a full one of Drinker's vids, I've heard snippets of him on stuff like this and videos from HelloFutureMe and that's enough to make me not want to bother. I'm hoping that more videos like this about movies and the like come through on the channel.
@@maxwellpaynewell5305 I hope that this leads to you getting more exposure, this is the first video of yours that I've seen but I'd love to see more content like this from you.
Don't worry, there's a lot that happens that I didn't talk about much in the video, mainly Prendergast's character and the whole situation at the police station as the events unfold. So hopefully I won't have tainted your first watch by too much
That makes sense. I might have missed it, but one thing I was wondering about in the film was how long ago he had been divorced compared (his ex might have mentioned that to the police officer, now that I think about it), because that might have meant he was living at his mother's house while saving up to buy a new house before he got laid off, which happened a month before the movie begins. Depending on how those things line up, I could absolutely see him as not being quite as wealthy I had imagined him being. Part of it was me assuming that, as a defense contractor, he was already making a decent amount of money before things went bad, but that may have been an incorrect assumption too
Thought that the interplay between the home-videos/tapes scenes almost shows the side of himself that could have been better, and the side of himself that chose to be worse. That in some way it was showing us that both sides had a chance, but he made his choices in the end.
That would very much feed into the tragic nature of his story. Even if it would've complicated things more, it would definitely have tugged my heartstrings if he had shown even a little regret or remorse toward his family on the dock, especially if he had brought up the tapes. Unfortunately, as you said, he made his choices and seems intent on living with them
ok a reasonable take nothing new and nothing that people that have actually watched the film didn;t already know. One big issue though is the change to make the video an opinion piece on a content creator that you appear to have a personal grievance with. You claim it's not a hit piece on the critical drinker however that is not how you present the video and does comes across more as a thinly veiled attack on his work rather than a fresh perspective on a 40 year old film I think your original idea where you intended to inspire people to look deeper and critically into film would have been far better than this edit were you spend almost half of it complaining about the opinion of someone else, It's clear that you are not a fan of critical drinker and that's fine everyone is entitled to their own opinion but when you ask others not to listen to other creators and accusing them of (and I quote) "mis-interpreting art for the purpose of suiting their own faulty worldview" but in order to do so you have to lie and mis-interpret and change/ingnore the context of their work in order to make your point it sort of comes across as hypocritical at best.
It may be that I ended up spending more time than I should have talking about him rather than the film, but even if you would call this a hit piece (which is up to you, if it came off that way then that's not something I can change after the fact), how have I misrepresented or ignored the context of the Critical Drinker's video? I did my best to limit my criticisms of his work to moments where he was factually incorrect about something, rather than simply interpreting it differently. If you mean the little addendums after each rebuttal to his points where I mentioned other points in each scene that I didn't think he would want to consider, I guess I can understand taking issue with those. However, I don't think I misrepresented him by saying those things. Again, though, if that's how it came off, then I can't change that. What I can assure you is that I don't plan on running a drama channel in disguise. I don't want to make negative videos about other youtubers if I can help it. In this case, I just didn't feel I could help it. So unless something crazy ends up happening in the future, this is the only video I plan on and want to make like this
@@maxwellpaynewell5305 ok let's break this down for you bear in mind this is my opinion only from being a fan of the film, watching both of his videos and your breakdown of it. The dinner scene you interpreted what drinker said that D-fens entered the dinner to make the argument and hold the place hostage until he got what he wanted but you know full well that is was not the case you blatantly lied about it in order to call drinkers comment "asinine", the same with the issue with the child speaking up and asking questions yes this may have had to do with his skin tone and maybe this young child already had fully understanding the cultural oppresion of people of his skin tone just as it could also easilly be the innocence of youth that has not been beaten into complacency by societal norms your wish to push your interpretation of that scene over the equily valid argument made by the drinker the two points of view are both equily valid and are not mutually exclusive this was mis-representation on your part in order to focus more on the racal aspects of the film rather than the social commentary of it, you then follow the race issue up with his comments about the bank scene and critisised drinker purely because he didn't expressly use the word 'black' while at the same time you totally ignore the fact that he was pointing out the the system makes promises the it never keeps to people that it can exploit ( hysterically darker skinned people) AND those the are "not economicaly viable" (hysterically a phrase used to describe non-white minorites) the destinction that you ignore in your hast to brand drinker an idiot is that in the context of the film anyone who watched it understood the phrase "not economically viable" was used explicitly to mean 'black' and don't need it to be blatently stated, as someone that loves film media you should be familier with the concept of show not tell, this is what good writers try to achieve something you also ignore when he mentions the use of london bridge and refrence to the film title ignoring that he was talking about the placment and the use of it not just that it was in the film instead you took time out to try to riducle him rather than notice or even try to understand the contex of his statment. When referencing how intelligent the writing was in the past he is usually referencing that more recent films are commonly written where they treat the audience as fools and seem to have the constant need to point out the obvious, audience aren't stupid they didn't need to be told the different causes of the injustices in the film they were shown it, the writers wrote with the expectation that the audience were intelligent enough to understand it and didn't need to be told it you also claim that drinker said that d-fens was a good man who did good things no he didn't what he did do was point out that on some level almost everyone can relate to why he did the bad things I think you need to re-watch the video again this time listen to it without your presonal bias. To be clear I'm not a fan of the critical drinker and disagree with a lot of his opinions however you telling people not to watch his (or anyone else's) channel just because you personally disagree with their opinions is hardly what you could call being an honest critic of their work it's clear that you didn't watch it 'better' than him what you did was watch it with a different perspective and form a different opinion. You own work speaks for itself, trust people to form and have their own opinions without you claiming to be 'better' at it than them
@simonfreeman8233 I see what you're saying. I'll absolutely admit I went into his video biased, I've only ever heard and seen negative things from and about him. And it may be that the way I talked about him and his points during the video was painted by that to such a degree that my own arguments were more against him than in favor of my own viewpoints. I still don't think I would say my central points of the video were compromised by how I framed most of his quotes, but I will admit that I shouldn't have made such a big deal out of acting like I watched the movie better, or anything like that. As much as I don't like admitting it with people like him, opinions and interpretations are ultimately personal matters, and it's very difficult to brand them as outright incorrect. I understand if that doesn't make up for how I presented myself in the video, and if that's put you off too much to stick around, I understand. I will say again that I don't plan on making any more videos about other people's opinions on art, so if nothing else, rest assured that I will do my best to avoid painting myself as such an ass in the future. Thank you for being willing to have a conversation about this instead of just insulting me and telling me to go screw myself
@@maxwellpaynewell5305 oh I intend to stick around the first half of your video was well constructed and pointed at a view point that many critics have not which is what made the second half stand out. The thing about Falling down is that it was amazingly written the charactor of D-fens was just a normal man faults and all that did some very bad things for reasons that many people could relate to, road works holding up trafic for hours while semingly doing no work, the grocery store owner hiking the prices, the 'gang' members trying to rob him, the dinner not offering what they advertised, the bank refusing service to honest hard workers and lets face it who hasn't wanted to do bad things to a nazi these are all thing that people want to fight back agianst however he was also a violent bigot with anger and violence issues the question posed to the audiance is when does doing a bad thing for a good reason become acceptable and when you look at Pentergast what does it take for a good man to do bad things. A thing to remember is that CD is not american and would not have viewed it with american mindset, I'm of the older generation Brit that saw this movie in the theater when it was relised so I viewed it with yet another mind set I watched it with my daughters who both got something else out of it, that is the beauty of well written, well cast and well acted movies which something I already know that you apreciate and as such if you have not already seen it I would highly recomend that you watch the Cube (1997) the charactor interactions and development in that film are amazing. I do honestly wish you well with your passion to create content filled with fresh and new insights into the world of film if your other videos are anything to go by you deserve a great success keep it up and keep it fresh. 📽🏆
@simonfreeman8233 I'm glad to hear that the rest of the video wasn't tainted by the shift in direction, I very much look forward to making more focused projects in the coming months. Talking of, I will absolutely take that recommendation into account! I've been gathering some from other comments and replies, so expect to see that movie as well as a couple others mentioned by other folks. Cube, specifically, I've heard amazing things about from several people, but I haven't been able to watch it myself yet. I'm happy to have a reason to change that
What is purpose of this video? The guy is insane - it is clear to everyone. There are basically no questions about main char being mentally ill, very few people say "he is like me for real!", he is not like the "Taxi Driver" or "Drive" main character or whatever. We can empathize with him though - a man was already nuts, and the system kind of just... spat him out. He WAS a father and husband, he was still a human - just insane, and without any support. Maybe I missed it in your video, but you didn't mention the fact that he was pretending to go to job every day, lol - putting a suit and driving to work and all that. Not exactly something a man in a sound mind would do. Also, I LOL'd at you calling the stuff happening today "minor annoyances" for white collar workers. Yeah, I personally feel really angry about prices rising, housing being unaffordable, and crime level rising in where I live - I am not going to kill people because of it though. However, someone who is not well, can very much "snap", yeah. In conclusion, you're just another generic smug youtube essayist, I'd recommend you to humble yourself and make something more unique and less pretentious.
It very much doesn't seem clear to everyone, from what I've seen of other people's responses to this film. The other youtuber I was talking about in the video very much sounded like he was trying to frame D-FENS' actions as born of rationality in a world that had gone insane. Given the amount of support his video got, I'm inclined to believe others feel the same as him. Especially when I have also seen so few people talk about how explicitly the film frames him as abusive toward his family (which the other person also glossed over and outright denied in his video) in favor of talking about him as a tragic hero figure. As for the minor annoyances, I was referring to the actual small things that he reacts violently to during the day, mainly not being able to make the exact change he needs, people making a ruckus while he's trying to shop, being too late to grab breakfast, and road construction/traffic. These things are born of larger circumstances, yes, but he isn't fighting back against the system by terrorizing individual, often innocent people because of momentary grievances they cause him. He's getting out misdirected aggression by causing harm to people who, at best, represent the things he should be upset about. The guy complaining about how long he was on the phone comes to mind, to whom D-FENS responds by destroying the phone booth. Obviously a sane person wouldn't do that, as you said, but again, many people view D-FENS as the only conscious man among drones. TL;DR: It's only because I've seen so many people, especially people that many others listen to, talk favorably of him that I specifically made this video about how he isn't a good person. If I felt it were more obvious, I wouldn't have acted like it wasn't. The last thing I want to do is present a lukewarm take as if I'm stopping the earth spinning by saying it.
There's a few other characters and extras in the film who are specifically dressed like him. The manager at the Whammyburger, for example. I didn't have time to talk about it in the video, but I was wondering what sort of things the film was implying by throwing in those other characters who should supposedly be on his level, in some way, since it's such an important part of the not economically viable man
@@maxwellpaynewell5305 How did we allow ourselves to become such a repressive tie-wearing society?! The necktie, itself, is functionless. Purely symbolic. And what it symbolizes is slavery. Bow ties don't have the same symbolic meaning, but they're even more functionless (unless the wearer is a clown).
The black man was protesting the “system” and how unfair. He was peaceful in his approach yet he was arrested. However, William Foster chooses violence and slides under the radar for the most part of the movie.
It's a shame no one can talk about the critical drinker on this platform without his fans descending on the comment section like locusts descending upon Egypt. Maybe if they actually watched the video before commenting they'd see how you directly critique his arguments. Will leave a like.
Thank you very much! Honestly, my biggest question is what there even is to be a fan of. He doesn't seem particularly charismatic, from what I've watched of him. If anything, it seems like his "fans" are just people who share his opinions. Either way, I'm happy to have them leave any comments they like. Engagement is engagement, after all
