MovieChat Forums > Versus (2002) Discussion > {Theory]The reason why ' the good guy ' ...

{Theory]The reason why ' the good guy ' becomes 'bad guy'


Firstly I'm sorry for my English. I know it's terrible.
I watched this movie again last night, and i noticed at the end after the bad guy wounded the good guy he said: "Your power is not enough, the darkside has chosen me".it could mean that they were seeking the same power->they fight each other. Altho The good guy was a law enforcer in his past life, he was the kind of guy who would do anything to uphold the law, even becoming the devil himself. Prove:
1. He chopped the girl's head off
2. The is a scene that the bad guy said:"You use to be an aweful man of justice"
3. The bad guy also said that:"I never expect you to be serve a life term in prison".He was mocking at how fate have turned out for the good guy. 500 yrs ago, he was an law enforcer, now a serial killer

What do you guy think?

reply


Well your theory seems to support a balance of powers. First the bad guy was evil and the good guy was pure. Then in the present time, lots of people seemed to notice a phase shift. The good guy was slight darker. Then all of a sudden a big switch roles took place at the end.

There is no real "good guy" or "bad guy" just pro- and an- tagonist

But in all honesty I think RK just did that out of no where, there was no real reason except for the shocker. I think somewhere they said he wanted to end it at the tunnel scene but it didnt feel like it ended right (didnt go out with a bang or spike of emotion.) But that kinna conflicts with the dialogue, since why else would they notable take notice of the "good guy's" change of attitude. That kind of foreshadowing usually has a purpose. But RK said it himself that movie was going to end at the tunnel, so perhaps there was a different purpose behind that dialogue.

I also think that ambiguous ending, that he prolly didnt take much time to think about, is one of the main reasons we havent heard much developement on Versus 2. He kinna put himself in a rut. Look at the way the characters look at the end and the totally ambiguous ending, he has to think of a story for that. When making the new Versus movie, he realizes it has to surpasses Versus 1 so thereby the story's gotta be good and the characters gotta look cool. As a director he knows, all the positives from the first have to be in the second, so while not anywhere near impossible, its goin to be hard to write up a story and design that'll make sense for the ending of Versus 1.

I could go on and on, and there ahve been many theories here on this home of imdb. But I honestly think they just ended it like that, without much thought or reason, with the sole intent on keeping you wondering.




end

reply

maybe every 500 years it changes good guy ,bad guy,good guy.....etc

reply

my take on it was that if the main character had won 500 years ago, the world would have been saved. but since he won in the present where he was reincarnated as a bad guy who just wanted to kill, the world got ruined.

he just won the fight at the wrong time.

reply

Two ghosts of time locked in immortal combat for all eternity. Why would such a rivalry exist if they weren't each fighting for something? I originally thought that maybe 'Mr. Bad Guy' was destined to struggle for the power he craved and 'The Prisoner' was destined to get in his way but the ending miffed all that up. Maybe it really was just "tacked on" to spice things up a bit.

'The Prisoner' (this is confusing with nameless characters) never really shows anything that could pass off as ambition in the story with some exception to his interest in the girl. Such an odd change in his behavior at the end just seems like a way for the director to give out a message as to what the movie is really about... a versus, or an opposition between two opponents that effects the world with every bout they engage in.

reply

Or how bout this: Kitamura as a director is terrible, and would absolutely love all of you here for even breifly discussing his very, very terrible movie in which there is no coherent plot or even characters.

reply

hahaha....I just watched this today....and it was tear-a-bull...I kept having to fight off sleep....

reply

Throughout human history, those given power over large groups of humans (such as kings, legislatures, ruling classes, etc.) have eventually abused their power, regardless of how benevolent their rule might have been to start. The ancient Chinese dynasties would collapse once they would lose "virtue" as Confucianist philosophers and historians believe. The Roman senate was eventually superceded by Julius Caesar and his successors because the senate was greedy and significantly corrupted, and in turn the successive emperors would bring about the fall of the Western Roman Empire. It's the same with the Mongol and Ottoman Empires, the ancient Hebrew kings of the biblical state of Israel, the Japanese shogunate and most likely countries such as the United States and the UK, since parliament/legislature is by no means an incorruptible manner of ruling a nation.
Also, in the last half century, the Western world has had many different enemies; at one point in time, Japan was in direct opposition to the British and Americans during World War II, but do any Western world nations consider them "evil" anymore? For goodness sakes, they're a strong ally and an economic superpower.

My point is, the concepts of "good" and "evil" in human history are as concrete as a feeling such as happiness or melancholy; what might have once been a nation known as a champion of human rights could become an oppressive police state, and vice versa. Just because the prisoner and his counterpart have incredible power doesn't mean they're pure; far from it.
If anything, the prisoner proves that they're still just as fallible as any mortal.
In the early complex civilizations, such as Egypt, Mesopotamia and even the country we now call India, the rulers would claim to be descended from gods, as in rules of immeasurable power and pure of spirit. However, as their descendants intermingled with humans for generations, their successors became more and more human and these empires eventually deteriorated into a mess, only for another divinely-descended ruler to rebuild the empire to its former glory. Now obviously these people didn't descend from literal gods as in deities and supernatural beings, but virtually every great empire has fallen apart over time due to weak leadership, more recently from uprisings that would install new forms of government which will most likely weaken and become perverted in the near future if they have not already.
The girl might symbolize sovereignty, as in the evil ruler usurping the power that is not rightfully his anymore (Macbeth and biblical Old Testament story of Saul and David are good examples) while the "good" king takes back so-called rightful rule, only to be corrupted overtime. In this case, the previously-destested ruler (insinuating either a successor of the evil ruler who was ousted or a new "good" king ready to claim the throne) fights to take sovereignty away from the current corrupted government.
It's a struggle throughout human history played out in a stylized action film, without the shallow "good" and "evil" trappings that are honestly as fickle with human beings as emotions. There are really only two opposing sides fighting for rule, and they are both easily corrupted by the immense power they wield.
But hey, that's life.

reply

I don't think he was a law enforcer per say, just a good guy until maybe he wanted more power, but good theory though.
But why the switch, was the good guy the actual bad guy turned good 500yrs later or was the good guy just mad with power after fighting and fighting for 99years.





never underestimate the power of the mind

reply

Weren't they just reincarnated in opposite bodies?
Such as the hero getting reincarnated into the previous villain's body?

reply

[deleted]

I've posted this elsewhere but the real reason behind the switch is in the special features. The director switched the characters on a whim just before shooting the scene. No deep and meaningful there.

reply

exactly^

reply

power corrupts absolute power absolutly corrupts
"spider-man"

reply

...

"Too close for missiles, I'm switching to guns."

reply