# Unexpected unfairness in movies (probable spoilers)
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031
**Category:** Cafe Society
**Created:** [December 13, 2008, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031 "2008-12-13T18:21:20Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 3
### Author:  [@susan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/susan)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/41 "2008-12-14T19:26:11Z")
> [@Lamia](#):
>
> In both the book and movie _Harry Potter and the Philospher’s/Sorcerer’s Stone_ I’ve always felt Dumbledore was unfair at the year end banquet. I’m not a particular Slytherin sympathizer, but it seems unnecessarily cruel to let all the Slytherin kids go to the banquet thinking they’ve won the House Cup and then snatch it away from them at the last second. The bit about how the hall was all decorated with Slytherin banners and them Dumbledore changes them to Gryffindor banners particularly bothers me. It’s like he went out of his way to humiliate a whole House. He could easily have awarded Gryffindor the points for Harry/Ron/Hermione/Neville’s adventure _before_ the banquet and then publicly explained what they’d done to earn them.
Yes, exactly.
---
### Author:  [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/42 "2008-12-14T19:39:02Z")
> [@Linty\_Fresh](#):
>
> I agree. From the first movie, I always thought that Snape was treated like shit. He’s a hardass, but he’s not a kiss-ass, and while he singles Harry out, it’s not like this was entirely undeserved. I thought he was just trying to treat Harry like the other kids without giving him the celebrity treatment. When he tries to punish Harry and Ron for stealing the flying car (which would have gotten any other student expelled), he’s overruled by Dumbledore _right in front of the children!_ Yeah, that’s fair. :rolleyes:
Maybe the movie shortens the book there, but Snape plays terribly favourites. He doesn’t try to treat Harry like a normal kid - McGonagall does that, or Flitwick. He carries an active grudge against Harry because he looks like his father James who was a bully against Snape in their schooldays and belittles and demeans him instead of normal criticism. He also treats Neville like shit for being a poor student (in the movies, that’s more shifted to Sean), although once Harry starts teaching Neville DADA by encouraging him, Neville turns out to be a good student
At the same time, he’s playing favourites with the Slytherins, especially with Draco - he accepts misbehaviour in class from Draco that would earn detention for other students.
Likewise, while flying the car into Hogwarts was a dumb move by Harry and Ron, Draco dressed up as Dementor on purpose to influence a Quidditch game, and got off lightly (only lines, I think).
> [@](#):
>
> Also, he seems to be the only competent adult in the school. Almost all the other grown-ups either don’t see the danger until it’s right on top of them, or sort of see the danger, but they go ahead and manage to get the children almost killed anyway. It always comes down to Snape to investigate on his own without thanks, ward off danger without thanks, help Harry learn defensive magic without thanks, teach the dangerous thankless classes without thanks, etc . . .
That’s not the whole picture, I’d say. For one thing, Snape is looking out for Harry on purpose in the first book because he wants to pay off his life-debt to James. Plus, he did agree to work as double agent for Dumbledore, knowing that this is going to be a thankless job with lots of hate because people will misunderstand his motives, constantly on guard. But it’s a job necessary to be done, and Snape, skilled at hiding his feelings, and in Voldemorts circle, is uniquely suited for that.
---
### Author:  [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/43 "2008-12-14T19:47:20Z")
> [@Uosdwis\_R.Dewoh](#):
>
> The whole points system is arbitrary and a cruel way to pit children against one another. And why put the bullies in the same house where all their negative character traits get positive reinforcement.
The points system, as arbirtrary it may seem, is however a British school system tradition.
As for the Slytherin house - for once thing, it was founded by Slytherin who believed that a thrist for fame and so on were good traits. Dumbledore simply closing it down and distributing the students to other houses would not only cause an outcry for breaking with tradition, it would also not cause the traits to go away.
As Dumbledore said in regard to Harrys gift: It’s not what we are given, but how we use it. Harry himself has a certain disregard for rules, too.
Secondly, Dumbledore believes that the characters of children aren’t already full formed and thus people are condemned to be good or bad, but that children can develop and that people can change.
> [@](#):
>
> Hogwarts is lucky that Harry is an orphan. If Harry’s parents were alive and they’d notice how much shit he has to go through for Dumbledore, they’d sue the school for all its got.
Outside of America, people aren’t that wild for suing anything in sight. Most of the kids there do have some family. Neville is bullied by Snape and has a tough grandmother and other family members, yet he never complains.
That’s because it’s tradition, and, similar to the American belief that beating children is a valid pedagogic method, the British believe that treating children harsh will make them tough.
---
### Author:  [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/44 "2008-12-14T19:56:52Z")
> [@pseudotriton ruber ruber](#):
>
> He DID win the Wookie-of-the-Year award, though.
That was awesome.
In _Pulp Fiction_, you had to be surprised at…
“You shot Marvin in the face!”
You don’t expect a likeable character who we can easily identify with to leave the story so suddenly. Of course, that whole subplot ends up revolving around the incident, causing the gangsters to ultimately reconsider their lives.
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#):
>
> Vincent saves Mia when she OD’s. Butch saves Marsellus from Zed. Butch kills Vincent.
Jeez, haven’t you people ever heard of spoiler tags? Some people might not have seen the movie, you know. (I’m not just talking to **DtC** here, it’s just the most striking example.)
---
### Author:  [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/45 "2008-12-14T20:19:32Z")
> [@Hostile\_Dialect](#):
>
> Jeez, haven’t you people ever heard of spoiler tags? Some people might not have seen the movie, you know. (I’m not just talking to **DtC** here, it’s just the most striking example.)
It’s a 14 year old movie. Isn’t there a statute of limitations on these things?
---
### Author:  [@Darth\_Nader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Nader)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/46 "2008-12-14T20:32:17Z")
> [@Raguleader](#):
>
> _Serenity_:
>
> “I’m a leaf on the wind… watch how I–”
"–become a tasty yakitori snack for the space zombies!I liked his shirts ☹
---
### Author:  [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/47 "2008-12-14T20:33:44Z")
I always hated at the end of The Wizard Of Oz, where Glinda says “You always had the power to go back home.” Then Glinda tells the Scarecrow, who asks why didn’t you tell her, “She wouldn’t have believed me.”
How does Glinda know? Glinda could’ve gotten Dorothy, the dog and everyone else killed.
And if Glinda was protecting her, the whole thing was pointless.
It also bugged me that if the shoes 'caused the Wicked Witch of The West to be shocked when she touched him. Why didn’t Dorothy seem to realize this and charge the witch with her feet?
---
### Author:  [@Justin\_Bailey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justin_Bailey)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/48 "2008-12-14T20:40:30Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#):
>
> It’s a 14 year old movie. Isn’t there a statute of limitations on these things?
Not when spoiler tags are so easy to use.
---
### Author:  [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/49 "2008-12-14T20:44:54Z")
> [@Illuminatiprimus](#):
>
> Possibly, however The latin guy had killed him for money, and for all we know it’s not the first time he’s done it either. He clearly wasn’t a good person. Sam, on the other hand, was, and only killed him to avenge his own death (and potentially protect his girlfriend). So I guess it’s what school of theology you come from that that would be okay, it’s not the like the bible is flat out against killing other people.
Ah, I looked at it form European theology, where if one type of killing (for money) is wrong (and the intent was only to rob, not to kill, it went bad), then the other type of killing (for revenge) is also wrong.
We don’t share the American attitude that killing for revenge is just, or in accordance with the Bible. Even the Old Testament is a legal code, not self-justice as Sam does.
---
### Author:  [@Justin\_Bailey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justin_Bailey)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/50 "2008-12-14T21:01:26Z")
> [@constanze](#):
>
> Ah, I looked at it form European theology, where if one type of killing (for money) is wrong (and the intent was only to rob, not to kill, it went bad), then the other type of killing (for revenge) is also wrong.
> We don’t share the American attitude that killing for revenge is just, or in accordance with the Bible. Even the Old Testament is a legal code, not self-justice as Sam does.
[spoiler]Sam doesn’t actually kill the bad guy. He pushed him through the window, but the pane of glass that stabs the bad guy to death falls on its own.
If I remember my sunday school correctly, its because he didn’t have murder in his heart. He was only protecting Demi Moore.[/spoiler]
---
### Author:  [@Lakai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lakai)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/51 "2008-12-14T21:46:18Z")
In _Burn After Reading:_
Brad Pitt getting shot.
That came from left of left field. No one expected that to happen.
---
### Author:  [@Illuminatiprimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Illuminatiprimus)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/52 "2008-12-14T21:49:48Z")
Well he _did_ break into someone’s house with the intention of stealing. No that doesn’t mean he deserved to die but it’s not like he was just out taking a walk minding his own business when someone randomly shot him in the head.
---
### Author:  [@GraceTX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GraceTX)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/53 "2008-12-14T21:50:03Z")
> [@Justin\_Bailey](#):
>
> [spoiler]Sam doesn’t actually kill the bad guy. He pushed him through the window, but the pane of glass that stabs the bad guy to death falls on its own.
>
> If I remember my sunday school correctly, its because he didn’t have murder in his heart. He was only protecting Demi Moore.[/spoiler]
Ghost
He also wasn’t trying to kill the hispanic baddie. The guy was running away in fear from Sam and ran into the street and got hit by a car.
---
### Author:  [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/54 "2008-12-14T22:03:42Z")
Right, we’re still discussing _Ghost_
> [@Justin\_Bailey](#):
>
> [spoiler]Sam doesn’t actually kill the bad guy. He pushed him through the window, but the pane of glass that stabs the bad guy to death falls on its own.
>
> If I remember my sunday school correctly, its because he didn’t have murder in his heart. He was only protecting Demi Moore.[/spoiler]
But if we’re discussing intent, it’s still unfair: the white banker guy who worked with Sam didn’t order the latin/hispanic guy to kill Sam, only to steal the code book.
And the latin/hispanic guy didn’t intend to kill Sam, he only threatened Sam until Sam had to play the hero for Demi.
He also wouldn’t have needed to protect Demi later if his actions through Whoopi hadn’t pointed the baddies on her trail.
So either intent counts more then the outcome of dead people - than all should get off free, because they didn’t intend killing. (Though I think from the satisfied way which Sam looks that he wanted more revenge than protection of Molly.)
If results, not intents, are more important, then Sam should go to hell, too.
It’s simply another case of “The Hero is good because he’s the Hero, so he gets an automatic pass for all bad things he does, while the Bad Guys are bad simply because they are Bad Guys, and therefore deserve everything bad” trope that turns up in almost every Hollywood movie.
But to moral people, \*saying (or thinking) \* you are the Good Guy doesn’t make your behaviour automatically good.
---
### Author:  [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/55 "2008-12-14T22:12:45Z")
> [@](#):
>
> Vincent saves Mia when she OD’s. Butch saves Marsellus from Zed. Butch kills Vincent.
I’m pretty sure Vincent would have just dumped Mia’s body somewhere if he could have figured out a way to get away with it. He wasn’t concerned about Mia; he was just afraid of what Marsellus might do to him.
---
### Author:  [@Lakai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lakai)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/56 "2008-12-14T22:30:49Z")
> [@Illuminatiprimus](#):
>
> Well he _did_ break into someone’s house with the intention of stealing. No that doesn’t mean he deserved to die but it’s not like he was just out taking a walk minding his own business when someone randomly shot him in the head.
Burn After Reading.
No but no one in that house was a killer or anything. It’s not like he was robbing Tony Soprano’s house.
---
### Author:  [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/57 "2008-12-14T22:55:58Z")
> [@Illuminatiprimus](#):
>
> Well he _did_ break into someone’s house with the intention of stealing. No that doesn’t mean he deserved to die but it’s not like he was just out taking a walk minding his own business when someone randomly shot him in the head.
Also, Clooney didn’t shoot Pitt out of malice, but out of pure, shit-scared defensive reflex. That’s the chance you take when you break into someone’s house. He scared the crap out of the occupant and suffered a natural consequence.
---
### Author:  [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)
#### Post date: [December 14, 2008, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/58 "2008-12-14T23:38:06Z")
> [@constanze](#):
>
> At the same time, he’s playing favourites with the Slytherins, especially with Draco - he accepts misbehaviour in class from Draco that would earn detention for other students.
This is true, but considering the low opinion most of the Hogwarts faculty and staff have of Slytherin and the fact that there’s at least one example in the series of the Headmaster apparently going out of his way to make Gryffindor look good at the expense of Slytherin, I can see how Snape might justify his favoritism toward Slytherin as merely evening the score.
Snape’s behavior towards Draco is likely more complicated than it seems. Harry, and even Draco, seem to believe that it’s in part because Snape thinks so highly of Lucius Malfoy, but this can’t really be true. Snape must have long since lost whatever respect he once had for Lucius Malfoy and has little reason to think well of his son. Draco is a snob and has all the advantages that young Snape never had. Snape may favor Draco in part as a way of indirectly getting at Harry, but he is likely also hoping it will help him to preserve his own cover. Although this isn’t stated in the books, it’s possible he may even think that by favoring Draco he’ll be able to influence him not to join with Voldemort.
---
### Author:  [@SCSimmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SCSimmons)
#### Post date: [December 15, 2008, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/59 "2008-12-15T00:55:31Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#):
>
> It’s a 14 year old movie. Isn’t there a statute of limitations on these things?
Dude, the OP spoiler-boxed stuff from a _ **62** _ year old movie, and was thanked for it upthread. There is always going to be someone who hasn’t seen a classic but still wants to; why not be kind to those people at virtually zero cost?
---
### Author:  [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)
#### Post date: [December 15, 2008, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031/60 "2008-12-15T01:48:28Z")
Because it’s ridiculous, that’s why.
Can I say that everybody dies at the end of _Hamlet_? Can I say that Odysseus makes it back home and kill the Penelope’s suitors?
At certain point, if you haven’t seen something, you give up the right to expect people to tiptoe around on eggshells about spoilers.
By the way, the thread title already has a spoiler warning.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031.md?page=2)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unexpected-unfairness-in-movies-probable-spoilers/477031.md?page=4)