Why in the world would anybody want to see a positive ending for Samuel L. Jackson's character? He is an *beep* and a criminal. He attacks numerous people, destroys other people's property, sabotages a car that could have led to the deaths of numerous people. F him! That is why I did not like this movie, because they work out an ending that benefits Jackson's character, as if to imply he is a protagonist or something.
Salvation is free
There is no "good guy" in the movie, and there is no "bad guy" either (among the two main characters). They're just "real people".
-Goodnight, mother of six!
-Goodnight, father of two!
Please! Affleck's character is just as vile. He is a lawyer cheating his clients, cheating on his wife, he did some of the same sneaky stuff such as calling the police on samuel jackson when he went to pick up his kids.
shareTime to clean house...
First of all, the movie isn't about one being good and the other being bad. It's about two good men who have made some bad decisions over the years who clash in a random event, and the elevation of road rage and vengeance, from a problem with fairly simple solutions that are avoided, thus leading to bigger problems. About two-thirds of the movie, we see the characters use the day's events to put their lives and future in perspective and work towards a solution, not only to their rivalry but to their lives as well.
The ending ties things up nicely - a little too nicely for my tastes. Are we really supposed to believe that Ben Affleck convinced Samuel L. Jackson's wife to take him back? I want to know what he said. So that was a copout. And as for Ben Affleck putting his father-in-law in the line of fire? Anybody see The Firm? You think he would have just taken that lying down? Affleck was in the minor leagues. He could erase SLJ's credit (I'll get to that) - what could the senior partner have done? Had him killed, for starters. Affleck gave him plenty of reasons and plenty of chances.
Both of the characters basically did one major thing that crossed the line. Affleck with erasing SLJ's credit. The setup with the school was pretty bad, but not as bad as erasing his credit. And of course SLJ with the sabotage. These incidents accentuate the barrier between these men: SLJ, the poor black man, and Affleck, the rich white lawyer. They both used their stereotypical strengths to hit the other where it counted. I make no apologies or excuses for what SLJ did, but you can't apologize for or excuse what Affleck did either. The point, in the movie, wasn't just how they crossed the line; however it was the realization that they had and the consequences of their actions.
As for the bar scene. Yes SLJ did cross the line by making the remark about those guys' dads. But then he left the situation. Those guys came out after they finished their drinks and pretty much hunted SLJ down. They thought because there were two of them they could take them. Basically armchair racists, the kind of guys who sling the N word over drinks but don't have the stones to take any kind of action. They thought this would be an easy beatdown but it wasn't, and when they tasted their own blood, they realized they'd messed up. "I got kids!", the one guy cries out in his defense. And that's a metaphor for the rest of the movie. Road rage and casual racism are one thing in your head, but when you take action it doesn't just come back on you, but you put your family on the line. Maybe these guys thought they'd take a hit apiece, but they didn't consider that they were putting their family's support (assuming they were the breadwinners) on the line as well.
Let's see, what else? I think there was some confusion over the school scene. The setup wasn't just Affleck warning the school, he also had SLJ paged (through his work?) and got him thinking his kids were in danger. Affleck must have known SLJ wouldn't take the office's word for it. A parent believes his kids might be in danger, he has to find out for sure. He might have made it clear to the office that he was informed that his kids were hurt, maybe they could have better reiterated that no such call was made, at which point he would realize that it was a setup, but, like Affleck, he was not being rational and was jumping to conclusions.
- Dark Reality
[deleted]
lol. I can't imagine how exactly you decided that Samuel L Jackson's character was a vile criminal and Affleck's character isn't, let alone how that could make you not like this movie.
shareNone of them were vile, and none of them were saints. That's the beauty of the script, Doyle and Gavin are portrayed as simple human beings. They have the same flaws and qualities as the rest of us. Which person hasn't ever done smtng he/she'd later regret?
"Love and bruises"
[deleted]
I completely disagree. Yes his character did some bad things but I tried to put myself in his position and if all that happened to me in a day I'd probably act more desperate, unstable and angry than I usually would. He was the person in the whole ordeal that tried to do things the right way by trying to get the insurance info. and he didn't blow up or anything at Affleck for making his car go into the thrash cans or whatever they were. Ben's character on the other hand was completely acting selfish by thinking that he was the only person that needed to get somewhere on time and didn't even offer him a ride to whereever he needed to be at. And then because of that goddamn file completely didn't give a *beep* what was going on in the other guy's life and competely *beep* him over by making him bankrupt and making that decision in like 2 min. I'm sorry but I really don't see your point about how Samuel's character was worse than Ben's. And also the whole time he felt bad that he even was gonna return the file to him while Ben's character was thinking of ways to screw him over. And you could tell he also felt bad once he did that to his car then realizing that he did something horrible so he wasn't laughing it up after. Maybe people are just going to see the message in the movie differently but this was my opinion.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
Man, I cant believe how some of the comments on this thread just stink of pure racism! How can anyone who watched the movie and without such ulterior attitudes, simply dismiss SLJ's character as being 'VILE' while sympathizing with Ben's character? Honestly??
From the beginning, Ben was the provoker, the instigator. He started the whole thing by leaving SLJ stranded on the roadside, then took it to a whole new level with that bank credit prank. In literally every situation SLJ was basically reacting to Ben's actions. Over-reacting sometimes, that is true. But only reacting.
If anything, both characters were 'VILE' up to a point. But as John Rambo would say: 'He drew first blood, not me'.
Ditto. Both characters are mirror images of each other, both need major change of lanes and both do it.
"I don’t know that I’d want to visit my brain
except with a gun and a flashlight.” Don Winslow
I think we saw different films
shareGuy lost his children because he was 20 minutes late to the court thanks to the accident. The judge wouldn't give him the time of the day. Then he finds himself bankrupt and nowhere to go. His loan got cancelled. Then he got arrested for trying to see his kids in school and his wife gave him a mouthful while he was in custody. Yes, in a way he brought it all on himself but he wasn't vile. He hit rock bottom and those are the actions of a man who has very little to live for anymore.
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither ~ B. Franklinshare
^^This. Both characters are far from perfect but neither are really "vile" I felt more sympathy for Jackson's character than Affleck but I will say the movie is much harder on Jackson's character, especially when he tries to see if his two sons are hurt at school.
"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna `*beep*` wit me!"- Hudson in Aliens.