MovieChat Forums > The Mechanic (2011) Discussion > The whole movie paints Foster as a douch...

The whole movie paints Foster as a douche and Statham as a decent guy...

posted 13 years ago by crownklown
5 replies | jump to latest

yet a lot of people on this board are upset Statham lived. Why?

Statham killed his mentor because he was shown proof, as we are led to believe, that for money, Sutherland killed or his info led to the killing 5 men, one of which Statham knew.
- Statham was cordial to all those around him, seemed friendly with he boat guy, and may have actually cared for the girl
- he took in Foster, and seemed geniuenly concerened for him
- he stopped him from killing the guy, lets face it, no one would know in the end who killed that guy even if Foster was left to kill him, he saved the guy because there was no reason to kill, or maybe because after he sobered up in would have been on Foster's conscience
- the guy who he thought was dead, he didnt kill him willy nilly, he asked him what happened, and told him I got paid till kill off four of my colleges
- then its revealed he was set up, sure he pulled the trigger but it was the sleazy guy who took advantage of him and set him up, he was the one ultimately responsible for the father's death; this is not the first movie to have this situation, and usually people dont blame the actually trigger man, they always love to hate the guy pulling the strings, but here everyone is out to make Statham the bad guy
- and even at the end, lets face it Statham could have killed Foster easily once he saw the gun, but he waited in the car to see how it would play out he chose to kill him
- the letter and record player were set up in advanced, and Foster had been warned about both, remeber when he touches the record player and Statham says dont touch it

Foster on the other hand
- he was a pyschopath
- his own father acknowledge he was a failure, he beat some guy up on a job he had set up for him, he had anger management issues from the get go
- he never listened to orders and only incovienced everyone, he almost *beep* up several jobs, and this was before he knew Statham killed his father
- oh lets let this guy get his revenge, he deserves it, for what , trying to kill a guy whom he purposely set up to car jack him, just so he could brutally beat him before shooting him
- and lets not forget even Sutherland's character is no Saint, he was also a killer who taught Statham to kill
- not to mention he did not seem to care about the father much, he even at one point made it obvious he was jealous that Sutherland did not make him a mechanic

I honestly dont see any reason to be upset by this ending.

[–] tenantennae 13 years ago

I like this movie fine, but the ending doesn't really resolve anything for Bishop's character. I think the ending worked better in the original. Seems like that's the most common criticism people have. Spoiler warning, if you haven't seen the 1972 version.

In the original, Steve was a truly evil guy who genuinely liked to manipulate and kill people just for the hell of it. He didn't even care that Bishop killed his father, and was plotting to kill Bishop before he even found out. It was all a game to him; he just wanted to outsmart the guy who trained him. The ending was more rewarding because even though Bishop dies, he got the last laugh, and Steve really deserved what was coming to him. It was also a jarring ending, because you didn't expect both the main characters to die. BOOM! The End. The audience says "Woah!"

In the new one, Steve is a sympathetic character. You can tell he is genuinely busted up about his dad. You also get the sense that his loyalty to Bishop is genuine, at least until he finds out he killed his father. Even then, he asks him probing questions about it to figure out Bishop's motivations. It really seemed like if Bishop had just leveled with him about how he was tricked, Steve probably would have understood and forgiven him.

But he didn't, which, to me at least, gave Steve a moral justification for killing Bishop. It wasn't as rewarding to see Steve get blown up, because he didn't really have it coming, imo. He's reckless, yes, but he's not some heartless psycho who deserved to get blown to smithereens. Steve is a likeable character, and as the guy who's learning the ropes in a new world, the audience naturally identifies with him. more

Statham lives at the end, but what the hell kind of character arc is that? A guy feels guilty about killing his mentor, so he takes his son under his wing to make up for it, but then ends up killing his son, too, even though he didn't really need to? Now he's completely alone, and killed his only two friends in the world. Not exactly an inspiring way to end it. If Statham had died, at least it would have been clear cut.

But all that being said, the movie has other strengths, and the ending isn't really that bad.

[–] crownklown 13 years ago

See, I disagree, I just spent my opening post explaining why Steve is not sympathetic. The death of a family member does not make you a sympathetic character. He is a psychopath that enjoys violence.

[–] neshastrah 13 years ago

I agree with OP. Steve was just jealous, ungrateful sissy.... He didn't care about his father at all. And the rest of OP's post is correct.

I really like this movie, I must say/

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] pbento68 13 years ago

I agree if by "decent" you mean a emotionless robot murderer.