He was proto-MAGA in the film. We just didn’t have a name for it then. He was a engineer working for a defense contractor whose life fell apart because he was an asshole, and there was a peace dividend. Instead of embracing change, or reflecting on macro-level impacts, he goes apeshit and takes it out on fellow citizens who he views as being out of step with his vision of the world.
chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
It’s telling because my maga stepfather sees him as a hero. And I just have to wonder if he’s ever seen the end of the film.
Godort@lemmy.ca 5 hours ago
This is a shockingly common view of this movie. In fact, most media that features a villain protagonist tends to have this problem. Look at Breaking Bad, Fight Club, or American Psycho.
They present the reasons why the villain makes the decisions they do, in a way that is sympathetic to the audience, then it turns into a bit of a power fantasy before their fall at the end. A lot of people seem to look at the power fantasy portion as fighting against an unjust world, rather than an abuse of normal people.
tmyakal@infosec.pub 3 hours ago
This is why Friendship is my favorite portrayal of toxic masculinity in cinema. It’s making the same points as a Fight Club, but the people who would normally identify with the protagonist craving a “macho” world are made to feel deeply uncomfortable instead.
pmk@piefed.ca 4 hours ago
I believe this was the point of Daenerys Targaryen, I think GRRM wanted to see at what point we would have to change our minds about her being good and righteous. There are many examples of redemption arcs, but she was the opposite.
HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 3 hours ago
The problem with Daenerys is that her turn wasn’t well written, so it didn’t feel earned.