I recently saw “Law Abiding Citizen” for the first time and I have to say that I was disappointed. It was obvious from the trailers that they weren’t going to have Gerard Butler’s character win in the end, but even so I felt they chickened out with the ending.
All movie long, they built up Bulter’s character to be the best there is at planning and executing kills. He is flawless and can plan many steps ahead what others are planning or will be doing. At no point did I get the feeling that Jamie Foxx’s character could ever pose a threat or could even come close to understanding what was happening. But because they didn’t have the balls to see their premise through to the end, Foxx wins the day because he is the hero. It was just such a let-down. It wasn’t even that a character flaw of Butler’s did him in, he wasn’t over confident, he wasn’t gloating at the brink of victory, he just suddenly lost because the movie said he did.
After the movie was over I started watching one of the special features of the dvd about the legal aspects of the movie. It seemed to me that that was where the heart of the movie truly lied. The questions of what is right and wrong, how to provide justice for the wronged, but fairness for the accused – those were the key points to the movie, but there were only really mentioned in passing in the movie in order to get to the next “how did he do that” kill.
I guess that was where I went wrong. I knew that Hollywood would chicken out and wouldn’t let the “bad guy” win, but I thought they would at least explore the premise the movie was supposedly based on, at least have the hero turn the bad guy’s tactics against him or something. Instead it was another hollow production focused on the action.
This movie reminded me of “Fractured” with Anthony Hopkins. It is similar with their use of the law and technicalities to drive the story, but at least there I felt the final act revolved around the characters’ personalities and flaws (even if I wasn’t totally satisfied with that Hollywoodish ending either).
What are your guys’ thoughts about either of these movies?
Are there other good movies that are similar in how “bad guys” explore concepts of justice and fairness?
All movie long, they built up Bulter’s character to be the best there is at planning and executing kills. He is flawless and can plan many steps ahead what others are planning or will be doing. At no point did I get the feeling that Jamie Foxx’s character could ever pose a threat or could even come close to understanding what was happening. But because they didn’t have the balls to see their premise through to the end, Foxx wins the day because he is the hero. It was just such a let-down. It wasn’t even that a character flaw of Butler’s did him in, he wasn’t over confident, he wasn’t gloating at the brink of victory, he just suddenly lost because the movie said he did.
After the movie was over I started watching one of the special features of the dvd about the legal aspects of the movie. It seemed to me that that was where the heart of the movie truly lied. The questions of what is right and wrong, how to provide justice for the wronged, but fairness for the accused – those were the key points to the movie, but there were only really mentioned in passing in the movie in order to get to the next “how did he do that” kill.
I guess that was where I went wrong. I knew that Hollywood would chicken out and wouldn’t let the “bad guy” win, but I thought they would at least explore the premise the movie was supposedly based on, at least have the hero turn the bad guy’s tactics against him or something. Instead it was another hollow production focused on the action.
This movie reminded me of “Fractured” with Anthony Hopkins. It is similar with their use of the law and technicalities to drive the story, but at least there I felt the final act revolved around the characters’ personalities and flaws (even if I wasn’t totally satisfied with that Hollywoodish ending either).
What are your guys’ thoughts about either of these movies?
Are there other good movies that are similar in how “bad guys” explore concepts of justice and fairness?
