MovieChat Forums > Bloodline (2015) Discussion > Im shocked by the Danny supporters and

Im shocked by the Danny supporters and


I know the character is well written and the actor did an amazing job but he is not an innocent. He is not just a victim. Did people watch the 1st season? He purposely tried to frame his entire family.

I get that he was abused as a child, I get that his family covered it up, but seeking revenge on them does not make him a good guy. Threatening his brothers family by taking Janey out on the boat. His brothers and sisters were just kids for pete's sake. He was a bad dude.

And completely unrelated - anyone else pissed the season only had 10 episodes? UGH!

reply

Danny is like the Joker, he is the worst kind of evil but you can't help but love him and root for him.

reply

Danny is like the Joker, he is the worst kind of evil


Come on, really?? Danny is hardly a one-dimensional character and he certainly isn't evil. He's a poor, lost kid who never grew up....constantly belittled and abused as a child for something that was not his fault (death of Sarah). His family hates him for what happened to Sarah and truly, they always wanted him to fail.

It's his family that's miserable. Danny was just a lost soul. His family murdered him and have murdered others to try to cover it up.

I'm shocked by the Rayburn family supporters.



"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

I'm not saying in the world of standards that we live in, he's the worst kind of person. I'm saying that in the show, he is the worst kind of person. Yes his family drove him to his insanity, but at the end of the day, he is very much insane. He saw his dead sister for goodness sakes. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't rooting for him through the whole first season, but I fact, he was evil. Great writing, great acting, and great character development, one of my favorite TV characters of all time. He was greater than anyone in the show.

reply

That's because you need therapy. Any is the absolute worst humanity has to offer.
Weakling
Abuser
Drug addict
Criminal
Leach
Amoral
Piece of shït

reply

Meant Danny

reply

You do realize that you could have gone back and edited your original reply, don't you?


by larosat » (Sat Jun 11 2016 19:40:07)

Meant Danny

reply

I disagree. Danny was a scumbag and he did a lot of *beep* things. However, he was mentally, emotionally, and even physically beaten into the person he became. He grew up with very little love because of the accident with Sarah and when he tried to get his life straight, he was still treated with disgust and disrespect. I'm not saying he was a stand-up guy by any means, but he was a product of his sh!tty circumstances and upbringing. In my eyes, that makes him a lot more sympathetic than the rest of his family, save for his mother, perhaps.

reply

Yes, I agree with you and I do empathize and sympathize with Danny more than the rest of the family. If I think about John, for instance, I can get him, but I fail to relate to him emotionally. I haven't made up my mind about Sally yet (I think there is more we don't know), but I think she was also mostly a victim of Robert.

reply

When he intimidated Diana and made her feel uncomfortable, was when I disliked him for the rest of the show. This was right after taking Janie out on the boat. He was scarily menacing.

reply

I agree, there is really no excuse for being a tweaker..also just when he is getting a toehold working the family business, just when they are vaccilating about whether to cut him back in on the will in spite of their father, he fks off on a booze and meth/crack bender.

I also hate the way he always breaks their balls in diners and cafes over quality or preparation of their food.The eggs aren't this, the fish isn't that, I'd throw it over him or push his head in it if I cooked it or worked there....guy always looks like he lives in a garbage can and vacations in a gutter, and he's a critic.
Maybe he should be a restaurant critic or chef at Maxims or something..

reply

The abuse he suffered, and the betrayal he felt when his Mom made his siblings lie, were terrible. But they turned him into a psychopath. Nothing excuses what he did. Threatening his niece? WTF?

He was already a bad kid before Sarah died. I get that his relationship with his father was bad but he's not the first or the only one. It doesn't justify just pulling any crap.

The truth he felt sorry for himself and that made him self-indulgent and he blamed his whole *beep* on that event. He should have realized that his siblings being made to lie about what happened were abuse as well but he was too busy crying over himself and justifying everything that happened to him with that.

As all the murdering, I guess that's the writers trying to make people believe this show is not just some soap BS like Dallas with family fighting over just anything and rivalry and secret crap. It's over the top and ludicrous.

For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco

reply

Sarah's death was at least partially his fault. Still he did not deserve to get the beating of his life for it. But what did John ever do to him except give him money for school which he barely attended and lied to him about? What he lied to the police? He was a kid. And so did Danny. They all lied to protect their father at the behest of their mother. For that matter what did Meg do to him. She was really young and didn't even remember most of it. Not sure about Kevin. He seems like he was always an impatient jerk.

The other thing John did was to tell him his dad wanted gone instead of admitting that the 3 of them made the decision. But what did he expect? They run a highly respected Inn and he is wasted on drugs all the time and on the day when John was going to tell him he could stay he is found naked and spaced out on the pier for all the guests to see! Yeah, you would not have had to tell me to leave after I pulled something like that. I would not say a word, pack my bags and leave in shame. Besides, Danny was plotting against the family even before they told him he had to leave.

I would say my memory is not what it used to be. But I don't remember what my memory used to be.

reply

^^^This. I'm rooting for the Rayburn family to be destroyed except for the mom and Danny's son (also the rest of the grand kids).




Global Warming, it's a personal decision innit? - Nigel Tufnel

reply

Worst kind of evil? I'd say the father and John's wife are the worst kind, influencing, manipulating, and egging everyone into their evil mindset.

If anything, Danny is the victim of an entire family with torches ready to lynch him from the getgo.




Global Warming, it's a personal decision innit? - Nigel Tufnel

reply

I wouldn't call myself a Danny supporter but I felt bad for him in some ways. Being a lifetime loser was his choice and that's on him. His revenge plan crossed the line. I think papa Rayburn was the true villian on the show. He was abusive, controlling and held his money/power over his families head. I will blame the siblings and mother for never standing up for Danny. I know there's a lot of debate about Danny taking Janey on the boat. I think he was playing mind games with John but I never felt like she was in danger because I just don't see him hurting a kid. I wouldn't call him a bad dude, he was a tragic character that allowed his piece of trash father to ruin his life

reply

I agree. I'm not a Danny supporter either and am also shocked by the cognitive dissonance many of them are showing. But, I also feel for him in ways, especially when his father beat him so badly, he put him in the hospital when he was just a kid.

Sally did stand up for him later on, as did John and Meg.

About Janey on the boat, at first I thought she was in danger (as we were supposed to think), and I'm still not sure, but only because at that point Danny was really going off the rails. More likely, though, he was playing mind games with John, wanting him to think Janey was in danger, and not being able to do anything about it.

I wouldn't call him a bad dude, he was a tragic character that allowed his piece of trash father to ruin his life


Overall, yes. But, as you said, his revenge plan crossed the line.

reply

Dany is a psychopath without any moral conscience and like many psychopaths he can be charming and interesting. Sure the next second he does something absolutely brutal or sadistic but the audience remembers him as someone they also can positively relate to sometimes.

Thats the problems with psychopaths in real life. They lure people into a false sense of safety and stability.

In that regard Dany is a very good portray.

reply

Finally a voice of reason.

reply

The second season in particular clearly showed that he did have a conscience. Sociopaths don't choose their child's well being over their own. He's a *beep* up person, but I don't see him as some evil, reprehensible villain. I certainly sympathise with Danny more than John, for instance.

reply

You said ti yourself. Fascinating character + good writing + good actor. Audience feels this kind fascination for that type of fictional characters and forget that in real life, villains are not that fascinating. He was the villain of the show.

reply

It's very simple. Danny didn't murder a member of his family, which AUTOMATICALLY makes him NOT the worst of his family. Whether or not you think Danny was threatening Janey (I don't), it doesn't make murder excusable. Murder is NEVER excusable.

So arguing anything else regarding Danny being the worst makes no sense.



"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

It's very simple. Danny didn't murder a member of his family, which AUTOMATICALLY makes him NOT the worst of his family. Whether or not you think Danny was threatening Janey (I don't), it doesn't make murder excusable. Murder is NEVER excusable.

So arguing anything else regarding Danny being the worst makes no sense


This. Its not like he killed his brother in cold blood and tried to cover it up.

reply

Its not like he killed his brother in cold blood and tried to cover it up


EXACTLY.



"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

Except it's only murder when it's a person. If Danny was any other species on the planet he would've been shot between the eyes by a community approved sniper.

imagine a dog doing HALF the things Danny did: aggressive towards other family members, including spouse. Run off with your child. Threaten (bare his teeth) at your younger sister. Incite other dogs to maul your kid brother. Yeah.. I'd kill that dog. But wait!! He's a person! A human being!! Forget the actions.. You have to understand his motivations. He was abused. Would you let an ABUSED dog maul your kid? Give him a pass cos he's a RESCUED dog? Yeah. Its all *beep*

reply

Except it's only murder when it's a person. If Danny was any other species on the planet he would've been shot between the eyes by a community approved sniper.


Sorry....the series is about people, not doggies.



"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

You totally missed the point. My point is Danny deserved death for being the maximum threat to balance that he was. He was a symbol of clear and present danger, him being interesting, sympathetic or fascinating didn't change that.

reply

He was a symbol of clear and present danger, him being interesting, sympathetic or fascinating didn't change that.


I agree.

reply

Doesn't condone murder, whether you liked him or not.

John's far worse. Kevin too. That's the point of season 2.


"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

It's not murder when it's in self defense. John was defending himself and his family from a noxious entity who just happened to be human.. Who also just happened to be his brother. Yes his self defense was a preemptive strike in the sense that he struck before he was struck. But. As I've said the nefariousness of his brothers intentions presented clear and present danger. And needed to be neutralized. People get neutralized by swat teams for less.

reply

Nothing about Danny's murder was in self-defense.

NOTHING.

John even admits that to Kevin and Meg. Go back and watch that scene and the aftermath.

And saying he was pushed to murder? Hogwash. The whole Janey thing was overblown and was just Danny being cheeky, sending a message to John that he refuses to be pushed out by the family.


"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

Being "cheeky" was it eh? Running off with someone's daughter, then threatening said someone, is BEING CHEEKY? Do you also think for instance that waving a gun at your girlfriend is being..CHEEKY? lol just curious.

People who can identify and root for Danny tell volumes about themselves. They're the same people who cheer at movies like Purge:Anarchy. And that's fine. But it behoves you to know what you are. It's the same about women who like people like Danny...think he's alluring and attractive. You're into sadomasochistic interactions. That's your thing. You probably would never be happy with someone who isn't damaged goods, or who treats you like a queen. And again that's fine. But let's not kid ourselves into thinking that sympathy, or attraction is a good enough reason to excuse nefarious behavior.

reply

People who can identify and root for Danny tell volumes about themselves. They're the same people who cheer at movies like Purge:Anarchy. And that's fine. But it behoves you to know what you are. It's the same about women who like people like Danny...think he's alluring and attractive. You're into sadomasochistic interactions. That's your thing. You probably would never be happy with someone who isn't damaged goods, or who treats you like a queen. And again that's fine. But let's not kid ourselves into thinking that sympathy, or attraction is a good enough reason to excuse nefarious behavior.


That was a rather aggressive passive/aggressive attack that is misguided towards those you think are identifying with and rooting for Danny.

I think the point some here are trying to make is that Danny's behavior, as bad as it was, it is not as bad as murder according to moral and legal standards. Not even as bad as conspiracy to cover up murder. I think that is the point of the whole show. It is obvious that Danny is a bad guy. Not as obvious to some is that his living siblings are even worse.

reply

I may have leaned in a lil hard I'll admit. Doesn't make what I said necessarily untrue. But let's talk about your points.

Is neutralizing an imminent threat MORALLY wrong? We all know it's LEGALLY wrong so on that we agree. To elucidate my question: If your daughter had been raped and was never caught, and one day a man accosted you in a bar.. And in the conversation that ensues he gloats and reveals he infact raped your daughter... Not only that.. But he was going to do it again if he got the chance. Now. MORALLY. not LEGALLY. Morally if you ended up killing that man would you be worse than he was??

reply

Your example is non sequitur since that is not what actually happened in the show, which is the topic at hand.

As previously stated I do find murder to be worse than Danny's reprehensible behavior and actions. Legally and morally.

reply

In my opinion there are enough similarities between that scenario and what did happen in the show to answer the question.

John did not commit murder, BTW. Murder requires premeditation, and he had none.

Murder is the killing of another human being without justification or valid excuse, and it is especially the unlawful killing of another human being with malice aforethought. This state of mind may, depending upon the jurisdiction, distinguish murder from other forms of unlawful homicide, such as manslaughter.


It was voluntary manslaughter:

Voluntary manslaughter occurs either when the defendant is strongly provoked (under circumstances that could similarly provoke a reasonable person) and kills in the heat of passion aroused by that provocation. but there are mitigating circumstances that reduce culpability, or when the defendant kills only with an intent to cause serious bodily harm. The most common type of voluntary manslaughter occurs when a defendant is provoked to commit the homicide. It is sometimes described as a heat-of-passion killing. In most cases, the provocation must induce rage or anger in the defendant, although some cases have held that fright, terror, or desperation will suffice.


Danny killed with premeditation, but self-defense is mixed in there as well, so I'm not sure. He probably would have had a case for justifiable homicide.

Kevin did not premeditate either, but I doubt he has a case for voluntary manslaughter. Probably second-degree murder.

reply

That's right and that whole talk about rape was not only completely out of context, but also there is nothing to slightly suggest Danny would abuse his niece. That's all coming from his imagination.

There are a lot of ways John could've handled that situation, if he felt threatened by Danny, without killing his brother.

reply

People who can identify and root for Danny tell volumes about themselves.


You're 100% right. People who identify and root for Danny tell a lot about themselves, and that's exactly the same for those who can't relate to him, or identify with any other character in any other story. I think that's pretty obvious.

However, what you wrote after that tells a lot about yourself. Saying that those who relate to him cheer at terror movies, and girls who relate to him are sadomasochists? This is your psychological projection, and it tells something about you. It's your immense ignorance and prejudice. And I think anyone with a functioning brain and some values, despite relating more to John or Danny, can see that your post is pretty much despicable.

reply

Taking to Danny supporters are like talking to wall and I wonder if it is too bad if john is still the main character of this series unless Nolan somehow ends up the main character. Even if what John did is hopefully sometime I would not do I do not remember hearing people claim it was self defense but that John was not in his right mind and who knows how he would have handled thinks if this moment of insanity whatever you want to call it did not happen

reply

[deleted]

Not so much a Danny "supporter" as I am a believer that his family is much worse. I believe the showrunners have even said this in interviews, yet you all continue to say Danny was the worst of them.

Wrong.

Danny's murder was in cold blood, not self defense. Danny had his back turned and was walking away! The self defense claim is completely ludicrous.

Danny is loud and crude and an easy target. His family's under the table deceptions and manipulations are MUCH more evil.

At the start of season 1, John is the hero of the show. By the end of season 2, he is the villain.


"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

Not a Danny supporter? Give me a break. You think he's just a sweet, lost soul who does what he does out of self-preservation! These are things you've actually said.

The showrunners have never said his family is much worse; they have, in fact, said that Danny pushed John (and his family) to an extreme. He pushed John to the point where he snapped. It was a fight at first, and John lost control of himself. It was not cold blooded murder; it was manslaughter (legally).

reply

I wonder if Ben who plays danny were to say that danny is worse than satan if people would still be in denial when it comes to Danny

reply

 Probably.

reply

If Ben said Danny was a terrible guy....yes, I'd change my mind. But Ben would never say that.

Why?

Because Ben obviously plays many different layers and dimensions to Danny and humanizes him. In a lesser screenplay and with a lesser actor, Danny might have been a one-dimensional caricature.


"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

Ben obviously plays many different layers and dimensions to Danny and humanizes him. In a lesser screenplay and with a lesser actor, Danny might have been a one-dimensional caricature.


That I agree with. And the same is true of all of the characters and their actors.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

While Danny's murder might not meet the legal definition of self defense, John certainly had defending his family's safety in mind. John did not murder "in cold blood" only. John would not have done this had Danny not threatened the safety of his family.

Im not saying John or anyone else in the family are innocent and I dont think John is a hero. But I stand by my initial interpretation that none of this would have happened if Danny hadnt came back with the intention of hurting everyone in the family. Danny directly caused all of this.

So far the show hasnt shown us that Danny didnt do this on purpose.

reply

But I stand by my initial interpretation that none of this would have happened if Danny hadnt came back with the intention of hurting everyone in the family. Danny directly caused all of this.


I understand your point, though I disagree. The Rayburns were simply pushed by Danny and they didn't react well. That suggests there was something with them always under the surface...their OWN issues. Danny's return simply brought their issues to the surface. Note how in season 2, they completely fall apart. Danny is dead in season 2. Not Danny's fault that he is dead in season 2.

When pushed, the Rayburns reacted with more of the same machinations and deception they've always shown Danny. When things got tough for them (because of how THEY treated him), he made it very uncomfortable for them.

Why?

Because, as Danny said, he simply wanted them to know how uncomfortable HE feels. He wanted them to feel how he feels. That is why he took Janey on the boat. He would NEVER harm Janey. Danny isn't the violent type. He just wanted to put John in an uncomfortable position.



"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

Talking to Danny supporters are like talking to wall


That's for sure.

So far, Nolan and Chelsea are the most decent of all the characters. I can't see Nolan becoming the main character, but I do hope there will be a lot more of him in at least the next season.

No, John didn't kill Danny out of self-defense. Preemptive self-preservation for him and his family? Yes, but as you say, John lost it in the heat of the moment. It was manslaughter.

reply

Then the father should've been shot a long time ago because he destabilized the balance long before Danny did.



Global Warming, it's a personal decision innit? - Nigel Tufnel

reply

But he wasn't.... they chose to live with it. John chose not to live with it. At the most it's voluntary manslaughter mitigated by a self defense argument.

reply

After The Sopranos, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Dexter, Homeland, Ray Donovan, Masters of Sex, Nurse Jackie, Shameless, Weeds, The Wire, Game of Thrones, Oz, Rome, Bates Motel, Hannibal, The Americans, Damages, Boardwalk Empire, House of Cards and countless of other shows, you're shocked because people can relate, identify and root for morally ambiguous characters?

And I'm not even mentioning movies or literature.


I see a lot of people focusing on the fact that Danny was beaten up by his father when he was a kid and saying that doesn't justify anything. Well, I'm really tired of talking about the difference between justifying and understanding, so I'll skip that part. The thing is that they don't seem to don't fully understand what happened to Danny. He was most of all emotionally abused and that's the problem: people underestimate too much the power of emotional abuse, people underestimate too much the emotional power a parent has over a kid, people underestimate too much the power of a family as a support system and what happens when that family rejects, abandon, neglect or abuse you. So it's no surprise why they can't relate to Danny or understand him. I remember last year a lot of posters saying they were expecting to be revealed that Danny was sexually abused by his father because they thought what happened was "not enough". I think this comes from indifference or (at least I hope so) ignorance towards emotional abuse.

Danny was not only beaten up by his father, ending up in a hospital, which yeah, it's awful, but he was emotionally abused as well, his family didn't protect him at all from what happened, which is what they were supposed to do, and if all that wasn't enough, he had to deal with the pain and trauma of losing his sister and he was actually blamed for her death, carrying that for the rest of his life. That is so cruel, I can't even imagine the consequences it would have on a kid.

One of the things that, since season 1, I think it's so interesting about this show is how much the fans are pretty much divided between those who root for John and those for Danny. And it's also interesting to see how much people have different interpretations of the same event. While some people see Danny as the antagonist because they see the events mostly through the Rayburn's POV, others see the Rayburns as antagonists because they see the events mostly through Danny's POV. So while for some this is a story of a family that have their peace threatened by the return of the black sheep. Others see as a story of the "black sheep" who returns to expose his family's dark past. Great job by the showrunners.

And the whole thing about the black sheep thing is very interesting. The showrunners said that the idea was to explore those labels that some people get from their family since very young and question that. How much those labels affect you when you grow up? How powerful it is those labels the parents give to a kid? Does that define you or it was defined before? How do you escape that? I don't have any answer, but I think that's quite interesting and fascinating to think about. The family is the first "society" you're inserted, so the roles (or that are assigned to you) that you get that becomes a huge part of your identity, so I do think it's very powerful and worth thinking about.


reply

Danny was not only beaten up by his father, ending up in a hospital, which yeah, it's awful, but he was emotionally abused as well, his family didn't protect him at all from what happened, which is what they were supposed to do, and if all that wasn't enough, he had to deal with the pain and trauma of losing his sister and he was actually blamed for her death, carrying that for the rest of his life. That is so cruel, I can't even imagine the consequences it would have on a kid.


EPIC post, Planet. And very well said. The show is forcing us to analyze what really happened to Danny and to this family. The presentation of him as a simple black sheep, as we're seeing, is a bit of a falsehood. Black sheeps are created...they aren't born as is. Kinda funny that the Rayburns are shocked Danny turned out the way he did...though they betrayed him and shut him out at every turn, starting from a very young age.

The showrunners are showing us that the Rayburn family name, purported to be valiant and noble, is actually a farce. It's a family that (as you said) abuses emotionally and physically.

How some here can demonize Danny after all this remains a mystery to me. For me, he's a fairly sympathetic character, though obviously deeply flawed.

Obviously, there are passionate people on both sides of Team Danny and Team Rayburn, if you will. But I think that blaming Danny for everything is a fairly simple and mindless position to take.


"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

I've seen since season 1 the "blame the victim" behavior towards Danny, trying to blame him for his death instead of John. And I've seen also the same mentality the Rayburns have with Danny with the idea of the black sheep, which is one of the things the showrunners wanted to explore: Is it fair to take one individual of the family and use him as a scapegoat to everything that is wrong with it? I don't think so. And I completely disagree with blaming Danny. His actions was his responsibility, the same way John was responsible for what he did.

reply

Good post and good points.

Maybe shocked was the wrong word, but of course each person watches the show with their own viewpoint. The whole show I watched and took in the events and formed opinions without coming to the boards. When I came on the boards to read what people thought, I was surprised by how many people felt Danny should have been given what he wanted. Of course I dont think John should have murdered his brother and I dont think John was right either. The whole family is very messed up.

reply

I totally understand what you mean because it was the same with me in a way. I also watched the whole first season before coming to the boards, and I was in fact really surprised when I realized some people actually saw Danny as the antagonist. For me it was like watching Mad Men and seeing Don as the antagonist, not the anti hero. But then I just realized it was a matter of perspective and different interpretations that the show allows you to have. I wasn't surprised people related to the Rayburns, I was surprised about how differently we could see the events.

Of course I dont think John should have murdered his brother and I dont think John was right either.


John is an anti hero (another one), and if I stop to think about him, I can easily understand him, but it's more logical than emotional. I like character study and I'm interested in the complexity of human beings, so I don't usually watch stuff to judge the characters, I watch it to understand them. And I like challenging entertaiment and anti heroes are challenging. But I need something to relate to the character on an emotional.

One of the things the show want us to think about is that idea of labels and roles that are assigned to us when we are kids by our family and how that affect us. John was "the golden boy" and I don't think this is really a good thing at all, because it puts a lot of weight on a kid's shoulder. This is a form of opression, and it's through opression that I relate and empathize with John. But we don't see much of this side of him.

So, when I think about John, there is a series of events that drove him to kill Danny, the same way that there is a series of events that drove Danny to do what he did. The major difference between them is that I can relate emotionally to what drove Danny to do what he did and the way he felt towards his family, but I fail to relate to the way John felt about Danny and what he did to him. I can understand, but it's logical, not emotional.

reply

First of all, it's refreshing to talk about some differing viewpoints without resorting to the name-calling that some of the lesser mature people here have engaged in. Great comments, LNH and Planet.

The major difference between them is that I can relate emotionally to what drove Danny to do what he did and the way he felt towards his family, but I fail to relate to the way John felt about Danny and what he did to him. I can understand, but it's logical, not emotional.


Yes, exactly. The Danny "haters" here always say the same things: "he was a drug dealer....he lied....he robbed a store....he threatened Janey and pushed John to this....you really think he was a good person?"

As I've said countless times, Danny did NOT threaten Janey. What he did in taking out Janey out on the boat was for one purpose: to defy John. That's it. John wanted him gone and Danny demonstrated, in that single action (which mirrored some of the relationship with Sarah- the necklace, etc), that he will always be a part of the family...even though they all want him gone.

And let's be honest....through the Rayburn family's half-hearted smiles to Danny, their constant backtracking of including him (both in the will and the family in general), and their snide attitude to him....they HATED Danny. And when you think about it, they didn't want him to succeed. They wanted him to fail. I think when he started to have success at the inn, they actually resented it. Because they reacted WORSE once things started going well for Danny...check it out and watch those episodes closely.

They hated Danny because of what happened with Sarah. And he would never be forgiven by them.

The worst thing you can say about Danny, honestly, is that the worst harm....he does to himself. He is self-destructive. No scene better demonstrates that to me than the one where he antagonizes that man in the bar...virtually begging him to beat himself up. There's a part of Danny that thinks he DESERVES to be beaten and thrown away. To me, that is the REAL tragedy. That sense of worthlessness likely began when he was emotionally and physically abused by his father, and amplified by the knowledge later of the betrayal of his entire family- including his mother, for turning a blind eye.

Danny "supporters" like me are more about comparing Danny than glorifying him. Few of Danny's actions should be condoned. But in tone and the way the characters are presented, the show takes a MUCH more critical view of the rest of the Rayburns, mainly John, Meg, and Kevin. Danny, the character, can be taken at face value. The rest of the family (starting from a very young age) are shown to be liars, manipulators, and charlatans.

And I don't think we've seen ALL the lies yet. That's what Season 3 is for. And you can bet it will further condemn the Rayburns and their history.

And yet, somehow, the Danny haters will find a way to keep blaming Danny, a character dead since the end of Season 1, for the actions of the Rayburns in Season 3.

Funny.




"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

Thread revival...

There's alot of great discussion here. Like already stated, it is fascinating how successful the show's creators were at dividing viewers. I found Danny's murder gut wrenching. I was so emotionally vested in the character that it has stuck with me, even a day or two later. Danny's actions were deplorable, but from the onset I found it easier to empathize for him more so than the others. As their history unfolded, I found myself feeling more and more sorry for him - the total abandonment, physical and verbal abuse. The coping mechanism for the other Rayburns seemed to be to cast Danny out, to make their tragedy his sole burden to bare.

reply

Danny didn't return home to be an antagonist. He returned home and was treated like a leper, and I think the case tapes were a revelation, which sent him off the deep end. That's when it became vengeful. The Rayburns were so toxic with Danny, he was a monster of their own making. His entire life was a tragedy. As long as he was away, the Rayburns could survive their guilt. It was their guilt Danny was attempting to exploit. Danny made poor choices, but by no means was he deserving of his end.

reply

Danny didn't return home to be an antagonist. He returned home and was treated like a leper, and I think the case tapes were a revelation, which sent him off the deep end.


Exactly, and this is what the Danny haters miss, again and again. They say he came home to wreck the family. If you watch the series even a little closely, you know this is not the case. Danny desperately wanted to belong. That's it. He is turned away by his family at nearly every step. None of us are saying what Danny does is honorable or "right". But his actions are understandable.

As long as he was away, the Rayburns could survive their guilt. It was their guilt Danny was attempting to exploit.


EXCELLENT point and perhaps the crux of the entire series. The show is about the deep-seated guilt the entire Rayburn family feels, from events as children onward. Danny exploits their guilt perfectly and they react with venom and hatred. They really hate themselves but they direct it back at Danny. In season 2, with Danny already gone, we see them further implode. Point proven.

Season 3 will surely hammer this home even further.



"This is dead air, Barry....dead air."

reply

Sure he did; that's exactly why he came home. Have you forgotten about the destructive speech he had already written before he got on the bus, and his sister's ghost asking about it?

He had second thoughts and got off the bus, intending to give it up and return to Miami, but when waiting in the bus station, saw the newspaper with the headline about the pier dedication, and decided to go through with it.

He intended to read his speech, in public, right up until he said he'd like to say something. Then suddenly changed his mind, folded it up and put it away, and said something completely different.

Danny took no responsibility for anything he did; it was always someone else's' fault. He didn't deserve to be beaten up by his father, but he also shouldn't have blamed his younger siblings for repeating the same lie about what really happened that he did.

reply

He wasn't a nice guy. But he also was treated pretty badly by his family. He wanted to expose them for all their flaws too. Turns out they're not very nice either, when things get inconvenient for them.

I choose to believe what I was programmed to believe

reply

Yeah, I agree. I don't know what it is about TV series, but if we
believe what so many say they really love the evil characters.
I really could not stand Danny. Now, it took a while long to realize
the rest of the family is not that much different, but certainly Danny
is not a character anyone should like.

reply