Yeah, Australian films are never good guy/bad guy movies.:rolleyes::dubious:
If I’m understanding Princhester, what he’s trying to say is, “You call that a moral ambiguity? No, mate, that’s not a moral ambiguity. THIS is a moral ambiguity!”
Jack McCoy is one of the most morally repellent characters on TV. Brenda Johnson of The Closer is another.
I’d forgotten about her! Didn’t she end up being responsible for … half a dozen deaths? … by gaming the system?
I see you’ve played knifey/moral ambiguity before.
I can clearly remember one, at any rate.
You know “usually” doesn’t mean “always”? Right?
Plus I doubt you see many Australian films. Far more of them have greater moral ambivalence than US films (which is why they never make any money…;)). I would guess you only see Australian films made for the US market which tend to be simplistic and black and white.
The Hays Code is long dead of course but it created a tradition for mainstream US cinema. As did Disney. The Hays Code didn’t just regulate sex, it also encouraged films to have certain attitudes to various things such as “sympathy for criminals” which is the very subject of the OP.
Ok, list the Top Ten Aussie films. Crocodile Dundee, Mad Max?
Hays Code? You think something that has been dead since 1968 has much effect on todays film-making? It is to laugh.
You want me to name the very films that -as a consequence of being made for the U.S. market - will be the biggest films and be like I said the the ones that have clear good guys and bad guys?
Yeah. It’s right there in the title.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned Dexter or Luther.
Dexter is just plain evil, he’s not morally ambiguous at all.
Well, the title is “best” not “ran out of ideas after two seasons and/or was tedious and derivative”.
I watched both of those, and was disappointed.
Three at least.
The Russian mobster/informant she outed in ep. 3 “The Big Picture”. As Taylor put it, approximately, “He’ll be buried in three hours. He’ll be dead as soon as he leaves the building.”
The cooked Mexican cop she sent to jail under the name of someone with a death warrant in “Tijuana Brass”. If any one of her murders should have lead to prison, it’s this one, not Turell Baylor. They had a paper trail!
And of course that useless piece of story arc Turell Baylor. And to top it off, she clearly thinks she didn’t do anything. Not, “do anything wrong” - I think she convinced herself that she didn’t do what she actually did. At least Sanchez isn’t fooling himself - he knows exactly what she did, but doesn’t care.
I disagree. It is pretty clear that the world is in fact a better place because Dexter is killing all these other serial killers. But does that make it OK for him to be killing them? Especially since he isn’t really killing them because he wants the world to be a better place, but because he really likes killing people? OTOH, he does restrain himself from acting on his urges to kill non-evil people (but is that due to actual morality, or to a pragmatic realization that killing people who have loved ones is more likely to get him caught?). As he asks in voiceover at one point, “Am I a good person who does bad things or a bad person who does good things?”. I think this is pretty much the definition of moral ambiguity.
Dexter murdered about 10 people who did not “deserve it”. And a few that were no longer a danger. Yes, true, killing* a serial killer who will kill again is morally ambiguous but killing others by mistake or because they might turn witness against you is evil.
- even if you enjoy it. killing
Hmmm…maybe so. But I saw BB as a send-up, an exaggeration of how a lot of folks (perhaps especially of a certain age) will go balls-to-the-wall for their careers, to prove themselves, all in the name of “for the family;” while simultaneously jeopardizing the family life. In fact, Walt wasn’t the only one to behave this way…so did Ted, Skylar, and Hank. Oh, and Mike as well. So in that context, I see where the moral ambiguity argument comes in.
I love that movie.
A few words here about following people. People know they’re being followed when they turn around and see someone following them. They can’t tell they’re being followed if you get there first.
As I recall the last season of “The Closer” had Brenda being investigated for one of her actions, the death of a gangbanger. When she gets out from under that the same guy charges with another. Besides being a serial killer who used gaming the system as her weapon, Brenda was horrible to Fritz, her family, everyone. I LOVED that show. Everyone treated it like it was a normal TV show with a clever cop, not the tales of narcissistic sociopath. When they broke out a nemesis at the end who knew her for what she was, it was great TV. Yeah, the guys she killed were horrible people but does that make it OK?
I agree L&O is full of morally ambiguous characters and plots; and has lots of good conversation about their choices.
“Shallow Grave” is good ambiguous funny creepy movie.
My favorite Western “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance” has easily identified good/bad guys, but the situations have much to debate over. For one do you need a gun to fight a gun? Is John Wayne or Jimmy Stewart right? What about Pompey? Is The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence the man who shot Liberty Valence? See:http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-the-man-who-shot-liberty-valance-1962
I’d like to hear more from the people who mentioned The Sopranos. Is Tony, for example, morally ambiguous? I’d like to hear the argument that says his positive moral qualities do, in fact, counterbalance his naughtiness.