Am I the only one who thinks that if his role were completely eliminated, the movie would have been exactly the same? Useless role, forgettable performance.
shareYeah he is useless but more as a person than a role IMO.
I mean, he brings absolutely nothing to what the other 4 are doing, but this kind of people does exist, so in a way it's kinda realistic.
I wouldn't want him eliminated from the plot, I just agree he is ludicrously useless.
He was the control group in the experiment.
shareHe also brings the comedy. He's naturally funny and brings much-needed levity to the movie. Calling Billy Baldwin a "pervert" is hilarious.
His constant monologue with the camera is funny also. Without him, the movie would be TOO serious to the point of being corny. he's also the voice of reason in many scenes- which is why he doesn't flatline. It's crazy.
~~~
I've never met a racist person, just a scared and uneducated person.
~~~
Yes
share[deleted]
Yes.
Platt was brilliant as ever. He’s a 27%er (he improves any film he’s in by 27%). Flatliners is remarkable for starring 3 27%ers - Platt, Kiefer and Bacon.
As others have pointed out, he brings comedy (‘pussy marauder!’) and a rational head. I like that one guy didn’t go under, it’s unpredictable and provides contrast.
Nah, Platt was integral to making Flatliners a classic.
He’s the jester, the comic relief
share