Every character in Lost in Translation, Full Frontal and Pieces of April. Oh damn, you said psycho too, not just lacking redeeming charteristics, sorry.
Um… The Hole (Thora Birch’s character especially) Labyrinth (David Bowie…looks good in tight clothes does not count as a redeeming characteristic) Scenes of the Crime ** (Everyone but the store clerks and the dupe. Although I did admire Seth’s willingness to resort to cash before bullets.)
** Little Boy Blue( John Savage) The Prophecy (Christopher Walken…even SATAN is a less psychotic character!)
I wouldn’t quite agree with your assessment of Renton. He did [spoiler]leave some money for Spud. And since Sick Boy and Begbie are, as you put it, “alleged” mates, it’s as he said: they would have done the same thing to him if they’d thought of it first.
My take on it was that he’d already “turned”, shortly before the big score. During the last of Begbie’s numerous go-offs, Renton is in the foreground, sitting silent and tense enough to snap. He’s had it with Begbie, and with this lifestyle in general. He would walk out right then, except that that would lead to another confrontation, and as worked up as Begbie is, he might kill him. Better to wait and leave with the money, which he needs for the “new life”.
Of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s free either. Begbie already found him once, after all…[/spoiler]
All right, I hate it when people do one of those pedantic “You didn’t quite get it then!” posts, but here I go. The way I saw it, both girls were actually fairly normal. The one played by Winslet thrives a little too much on fantasy scenarios and the joy of being a leader, and the other is just timid enough to be led, and not smart enough to see the impending doom. The movie tells us what can happen when a symbiotic relationship goes bad - in and off themselves, neither girl would have been capable of murder. In fact, they’d be completely harmless. But combined, they prove to be a deadly duo. Fantastic film!I also don’t get the nomination for Douglas’ character in Falling Down.To me, he’s just an average guy who’s fed up with it all. To me, the movie shows that under the right (wrong?) circumstances, we all can snap and go on a rampage. That day was his. “I just want to see my kid…”
He’s not a jerk. He’s a normal, nice guy, who one day decides that being nice isn’t going to make him any less miserable than he currently is. Very entertaining film, and a very likeable Douglas, IMHO.
Actually, I have enjoyed a good percentage of the “non-horror” genre movies and actors detailed so far on this post. However, I have to whole heartedly agree in regards to PINK FLAMINGOS. This is one sick movie with little, if any, socially redeeming qualities. I have a strong stomach, but this is a difficult movie! The director’s name escapes me at the moment (please help!), but I can picture him. He is “the smoking guy” shown before films at many US bar and filmworks.
IMO, that movie failed utterly to make Michael Douglas’ character sympathetic. I blame both the director and MD. The director because he was in charge, and Michael Douglas because he can’t play subtle to save his life. Unless it’s subtly biting, and slightly assholish, which is why I liked him in the Game and nothing else. That character (in The Game) seemed tailor made for the range he can display.
I think the character in Falling Down needed more subtleness and a finer sense of the nuances of desperation than he can give in a performance. Another actor could have probably pulled it off, but not MD, he just doesn’t give off “nice guy” vibes in the first place. He gives off “hard ass jerk who’s been getting his own way for too many years” vibes. IMO.
Would have been interesting to see what a female lead could have done with that exact same part.
I had much the same reaction to Michael Douglas’s Falling Down character, but I still enjoyed it very much.
He’s NOT just a normal mice guy who hits a breaking point. He has a very troubled past, very disturbing relationships with his family, that the movie only hints at. He’s the quiet neighbor that people (who don’t know him well) don’t ecpect to snap. But the people who DO know him well are scared of him.
The hints Boyo Jim is speaking of, I saw merely as indications that no one is perfect, we all have our pasts, everyone has a bit of a cross to bear, et cetera. Not as indications of a sick and troubled mind.
I agree with Ava that Michael Douglas wasn’t the most sophisticated actor for the role. I think a guy like John Kusack would have done a lot better. But still, I can’t help but completely sympathise with MD when he’s in that fast food place.
So the Michael Douglas character had some personal problems. Big deal, who doesn’t? But all of us don’t go on a rampage because of our problems. It’s really hard to be sympathic to that character. I don’t care who played the part, it’s the role that had no potential as the script was written.
For the most part, I agree with you, but directors aren’t totally inflexable about filming, so I still say Michael Douglas should get most of the blame for it.
After seeing Robin Williams play a really excellently nuanced creepy in One Hour Photo, I have to wonder what he could have done with the part.
