MovieChat Forums > Under Siege 2: Dark Territory (1995) Discussion > Why do people deny that Travis Dane was ...

Why do people deny that Travis Dane was evil?

posted 10 years ago by gpapa1998-24-961204
10 replies | jump to latest

I mean he blew up an airplane. He almost blew up Washington DC. If that's not evil then what is? I want serious answers.

[–] avortac 10 years ago

Why are you under the impression that people are saying he's good instead of evil?

Besides, you are wrong - _HE_ didn't do those things. All he did was operate a computer and other devices and push a few buttons and switches and such. It's the SATELLITE (or more precisely, the RAY from the satellite) that did the exploding and killing and whatnot.

So is the satellite (or its ray, that's of course gone - although new rays can be generated) evil?

[–] George (605) 5 years ago

But he was operating the satellite

[–] daniel-nagle-dn-dn 9 years ago

Of course he's an evil character he was willing to blow up the east coast for money from others who mean us no good

[–] gpapa1998-24-961204 9 years ago

I agree my friend. By the way who was more evil? Travis Dane or Richie Madano from Out For Justice? Which one of the two was more evil?

[–] Diss_Oriented 9 years ago

Umm, duh. Anyone who you've seen claiming he wasn't evil was probably a real-life disgruntled fired government employee, and most likely a techie/IT geek-type employee..........

- - -
"And the number one reference that I am running into the ground is: Homer Simpson!"

[–] fud-slush 9 years ago

Serious answers to a boring question regarding an appalling film. No chance.

[–] Diss_Oriented 9 years ago

Umm, did you see my post? That's a fairly simple and conclusive answer.

And it's not an "appalling" film. It's an entertaining and awesome one. Caaaaaaaaaaaaaalm dooooooooooown Mr/Mrs. Sherman-iddily-diddily-diddily! (to make use of two separate quotes from the simpsons episode "Hurricane Neddy")

- - -
"And the number one reference that I am running into the ground is: Homer Simpson!"

[–] fud-slush 9 years ago

It is an appalling film. Mindless shyte for a rainy afternoon perhaps, but the acting, the script, the sfx, the direction, the story & particularly that huge lump of untalented paranoia, Seagal, are all, somewhat predictably, hopeless. The first one was a bit better. Are there any decent Seagal movies?

I didn't see your post I'm afraid, mainly because I have no interest in discussing the supposed personality disorders of stock characters.

[–] residentevil6901 8 years ago

Is there any pleasing you? Chick Flicks? Documentaries?

[–] GetWokeGoBroke (638) 2 years ago

fud-slush it's not nearly as bad as you're making it out to be. Maybe action movies aren't for you?