MovieChat Forums > John Doe: Vigilante (2014) Discussion > A movie with no answers.

A movie with no answers.

posted 10 years ago by rushknight
14 replies | jump to latest

This is not a review, merely a commentary. This movie served it's purpose in me, which was to provoke thought.

Two things need to be said:

1. Justice is blind. The best caricature of justice is the image of the Goddess Justicia, who is presented as a blindfolded woman holding scales in her right hand and a sword in her left. She knows no truth, no lies, no circumstances, no evidence, no feelings. She knows only when the scales appear to balance. APPEAR to balance. And she does not know who she smites with her sword, good men or bad men, she does not care. That is justice; blind and stupid, and yet necessary.

2. The lines between evil people and good people are never truly black and white. Every person does many things in his or her lifetime, most of us try to do good, and find that bad results. Once in a while people do evil, and unexpected good results. The simple truth is that "good and evil" are truly objective, and that the world is full of good people who do bad things. So you have to leave "good and bad" out of it, and judge people by their actions. Otherwise, you get into plenty of worthless philosophical discussions leading nowhere.

This film makes an interesting assertion, one that I cannot stand by. In terms of the "scales balancing", I can understand why murderers could deserve to be murdered. However, I don't believe that the scales balance when rapists have their genitals ripped out and are left to bleed to death, or pervy old men get shanked in the side because they molest kids. Call me immoral, I know many here will, but these crimes do NOT rise to the level of murder. This movie asserts that they should stand upon even ground with murder.

In reality, my opinion means little. It seems that other people have already decided that pedophilia and rape are worthy of death, and they are acting on it.

Here are some notable cases (I will sum up the articles in a sentence if you don't have time to read them):

(Predator watch website falsely accuses man of being a pedophile. A woman organizes a mob and they beat him in his own home)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2448371/Woman-jailed-organising-beating-man-wrongly-named-paedophile.html

(A mob burns a man to death after he was falsely accused of being a pedophile)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/04/bijan-ebrahimi-burned-to-death-pedophilia_n_4209497.html

(This one is truly bizarre. A woman kills her husband because he "may have looked" at child porn)
http://articles.philly.com/2013-02-13/news/37061073_1_basketball-team-matthew-white-school-record

(And we can finish up with ten worthy examples of vigilantism, one of which results in a pedophile's wife being burned alive. Another, a 17 year old boy accused of rape is murdered by a mob in Bolivia)
http://listverse.com/2014/01/30/10-controversial-cases-of-vigilantism/

It's a good thing that vigilantism is against the law, otherwise you get a lot of people deciding for themselves how the scales should balance. Rape and child sex abuse are terrible things and I would give a lot to stop them from happening. But I cannot agree with the assertion that rapists and pedophiles should be murdered in the streets. I don't feel that that even comes close to being an acceptable response. Unfortunately I don't have any great ideas on how to fix it either.

Other than that, I thought the movie was pretty good. It pointed to some pretty important concepts and really got me thinking, which was it's purpose I think. There were only a few places that bugged me, mainly that when you see the "footage" on screens it's clear that someone is filming it. It never looks like it should.

[–] rainydal74 9 years ago

How to fix child molestation and rape?

Allow the victims/families to rape the pedophile or rapist with blunt objects. If he stabbed a woman during the rape, tie him down and let the group stab him to feel the terror, helplessness and domination he implemented upon his victims.

Truthfully, I have no problem killing child molestors or rapists. If it stops people from doing it, then so be it.

You said something interesting about good and evil. Some good people do evil things, and this was in fact mentioned in the movie. When john doe stated he did forgive hundreds who redeemed themselves and felt remorse. So it is not just a matter of kill them all... it is a matter of whether the person learned and rehabilitated.

In the 1990s, a woman walked into court and killed the man who molested her son. The people of California were outraged that she was arrested and charged with first degree murder. I was among the crowd picketing. 20 years later, I feel even more strongly that children need to be protected. Pedophiles will never change, and if they refuse to restrain themselves, they should be destroyed. Their victims suffer from life long events that all stem from the initial trauma. so either do something to them that is just as traumatic or kill them.

www.rhodadettore.com

[–] rushknight 9 years ago

Might I humbly submit that you cannot rehabilitate if you are dead.

The rape of children is a terrible thing, but I know hysteria when I see it. Movies makers always cater to it. There's a million movies out there that use the "abused child" stereotype as a plot device to justify almost anything. Do we truly believe that children are completely incapable of recovering from trauma? They are more resilient than we give them credit for. If people truly believe that children who are molested and raped are beyond saving, then why don't we just give up on them once they are broken? We treat them like a broken record that we just don't want to throw away, and we make excuses for their behavior, label them as victims and allow them any sort of behavior. It's disgusting on our part and insulting to them. It stifles their growth as people and keeps them from achieving their true adulthood.

The fact is that abused children can overcome their difficult trials in life. We help them by letting them put their pain behind them. There is no other way to move on.

What concerns me is that we are becoming paranoid in the extreme. These days we label even what is even the most incredibly soft treatment of children as "Abuse!" Parents are demonized if they even dare to spank their children for behaving badly. Doesn't it ever occur to people that our extremist reactions regarding children's safety are causing us to eat away at our own fundamental rights? What good is protecting our children if we can offer them no future except to live in the ever-smaller box we make for them?

Don't forget that the other point of this movie is that vigilantes choose their own justice. We live in a country of laws, and we do that for a reason. We don't support vigilantism.. or at least I don't. Apparently you do.

This woman who killed a man for molesting her son.. I don't know the details of this case, but she is guilty of murder, plain and simple. You want to punish him? Then please hold to your standards. You mentioned that "the rapist should be raped." So you clearly support an "even keel" type of judgement system. But then you go right off saying that it's ok to murder someone for rape. Have him raped. Have him beaten if that was what he did to the boy. Do all that stuff. But death is not an even comparison. You'll have to make up your mind about what you believe in. Choose one or the other.

And thank you for your thoughts, by the way.

[–] ChuckFinnley 9 years ago

The funny thing is she did not mention who would be the one to rape the rapist. Are we supposed to breed or train an army of responders in kind?

[–] Nethlem 9 years ago

The funny thing is she did not mention who would be the one to rape the rapist. Are we supposed to breed or train an army of responders in kind?

Well there could be a case made for victims having the power over enacting the actual punishment.

In theory that sounds somewhat functional, as it leaves room for mercy and reconciliation for both involved parties. Hope for the good in the people to actually forgive and have mercy, maybe sharing that ability for compassion with the perpetrator/accused.

But what happens if the one who enacts/speaks this "justice" (like the victims) gets it wrong? Would they be subject to their own treatment by the new victims they created trough their misjudgment?

And wouldn't that create more victims with the power to enable more violence, creating even more victims ending pretty much in an endless circle of violence? Imho that'd the most likely outcome, so vigilante justice ain't really a viable approach.

[–] ChuckFinnley 9 years ago

I suppose if courts are left to determine if the person is guilty and next of kin to determine how the guilty should be punished, we could be looking at a viable system.

[–] Nethlem 8 years ago

I suppose if courts are left to determine if the person is guilty and next of kin to determine how the guilty should be punished, we could be looking at a viable system.

But that's merely reflecting responsibility, even courts can make wrong decisions. How would the next of kin feel when they tortured another person to death, on the assumption it's the guilty party, just to have hindsight reveal "he wasn't the guilty one"?

I don't think the fact that a court spoke the ruling, would change anything about what actually transpired. If the next of kin can absolve their consciousness as easy as going "Well the court told me the guy was guilty, so I tortured him to death, it's not my fault at all!", then those next of kin must be horrible people. I mean sure some people would probably able to rationalize it to themselves like that, but tbh I wouldn't want to live in a society that rationalizes this kind of behavior in such a way on a regular basis.

Having tortured the wrong guy to death would suddenly become something "normal", something accepted by society, accepted as in "we don't mind the collateral damage". That sounds like an cold and harsh society, a society that turned into exactly the kind of monster it originally wanted to hunt down.

[–] ChuckFinnley 9 years ago

You might want to check your eligibility for living in a civilised society governed by law.

[–] ChuckFinnley 9 years ago

You might want to check your eligibility for living in a civilized society governed by law.

[–] Edohiguma 9 years ago

She was charged with first degree murder because the law clearly defines first degree murder.

The people of California were outraged? So they gave in to hysteria and cheap emotion rather than following reason and fact. The law is blind. She did not act in self defense. She did not act in a motion of defending somebody else. She went there, cold blooded and killed the guy. That is murder.

There's a separation of powers for a reason. You don't see street judges, like in Judge Dredd, for a reason.

The punishment must fit the crime.

That murderers like the infamous "Otaku Killer" in Japan, or the monster behind the Osaka School Massacre get executed is absolutely clear. There are crimes so utterly evil that death is the only possible punishment.

However, a pedophile? Or a rapist? Such things get out of hand quickly. So we destroy rapists. Okay. Then who do we destroy next? Bankers who steal millions? Who next? It will get out of hand, it's inevitable, it always happens. And what if you catch the wrong guy?

Sure, let the family of the victim have a go at him. Okay. What if he's innocent? Under the law he is innocent until proven guilty.

Despite of what people may believe thanks to garbage TV shows like Law & Order or CSI, there are no mystical machines that let you determine the guilt or innocence of anyone, there are no miracle devices that can find evidence everywhere, there is no way to find the truth and facts in every single crime.

Why do you think police grills rape victims? They need to find possible inconsistencies, they must make sure that the alleged victim isn't lying about the alleged attacker (which happens, which is why this is done.) And polygraphs are notoriously unreliable (that the US still uses them is pretty ridiculous.) Things need to be proven, conclusively. If you can't do that, well, too bad.

The concept of the law is: innocent until proven guilty. Yes, it's not perfect and a lot of bad guys get off because that proof can't be done. But at the same time it's a million times better than... guilty until proven innocent.

[–] seans_life 9 years ago

OP you say it is a movie with no answers? LOL! It tells you right in the damn movie what we need to do but people are too scared and too worried about their own little lives to do what is right. We need the death penalty for more crimes and we need to get rid of these second chances people get for crimes that just shouldn't allow for second chances. Simple as that.

[–] MeowOinkMoo 9 years ago

You make a good point about the problem with vigilantism, and the one woman in the movie points it out saying something along the lines of "What happens when he runs out of murderers to kill? Jaywalkers? Someone running a red light?" That's the main problem with vigilantism, the danger of someone who decides to be judge, jury and executioner but then taking it too far and killing people for petty things. As far as rape goes, especially child rape, I have no problem with anybody killing them, vigilantes, police officers, the criminal justice system through the death penalty.

[–] kcspam 9 years ago

Great post but I disagree with some of it. In particular...

...pervy old men get shanked in the side because they molest kids

They are PAEDOPHILES, not 'pervy' old men.

I used to think that they are sick and it's not their fault. Then I had kids. Now I still think that, but above all else our kids need to be protected. Put a bullet in them and then they cannot harm any more kids. End of story.

[–] RipRip 8 years ago

Following your logic, we should just kill all the humans, then they can't harm anyone. End of story. Maybe your logic is suspect. I'm not saying kids shouldn't be protected. I'm just tired of people saying that and then acting like once you are an adult it doesn't matter what happens to you. Children don't stop being important when they become adults.

Sometimes evil is just applied stupidity-Ronar

[–] morbidmunkees 8 years ago

Lots of good points and the answer you're looking for is the system needs to be changed, but that's not going to happen. Right now, the system is set up, from the cradle to the grave, for slavery.

Look at it like this: Imagine your house is infested with mice or some other type of pest you wouldn't want there. Pick your pest. You try to get rid of them, but no matter what you do, they won't leave, so you finally decide to use this "infestation" to your advantage. You put them to work as your slaves. You work them as hard as you can and pay them as little as you can get away with. You could set up a system that allows them all to be happy and healthy, but that would take away from your profits, and if they got too smart, they might want to be something other than a slave. Besides, you didn't want them there in the first place. What do you care if they get raped, beaten, or murdered? Every once in a while, one of them gets "all uppity" and tries to convince the others that they're being treated unfairly, so you just take him out, and everything returns to "normal".

You're not going to change the system, so the only solution is not to breed. Why would you want to bring another life into this hell anyway?

And remember what he said about the pain of hope. Don't let this movie give you false hope. Don't think you can go around killing "sex offenders" and expect Anonymous to show up and save you.