ITT: Villains who were actually in the right
>>222513107The PEE PEE POO POO MAN
>>222513107>le it's personal now assassin man who doesn't take moneycringe. the execution was good so to speak
>>222513197What do you mean he doesnt take money?
>>222513107The Siberian BVLL
>>222513344literally who?
>>222513264I mean he wasn't getting paid to mow down random people and die in a hail of bullets. He was a wasteoid objectively, just written to be superman
>>222513438>gets injured multiple times>superman
Everything he said was correct. John was also right regarding Ralphie.
>>222513438you didn’t watch the movie
>>222513354God
>>222513523Of course we assume he's being paid because he was sent by someone but it's so much more SpOoOkY and EPIC that he's never seen to take money and does things no employee would do like leaving a trail of dead bodies and destruction around.
>>222513547God is an aging sea monkey?
>>222513562He goes rogue on his employer in the beginning of the film.
>>222513107ArtemisiaThe movie sucked. I'm just finding an excuse to post Eva Green
>>222513107Blumpf
>>222513568Yeah
>>222513547>>222513568Was it worth it?
>>222513715>>222513820I don’t get it
Gustavo Fring was right about everything and was an honorable man.
>>222513344wanna fight?
Chigurh wasn't right about anything though. He wasn't some unstoppable force of nature. He doesn't even kill Moss, it's random gangbangers. The wife had the right of it that he was just a crazy person that used his fatalism as an excuse to choose violence because he likes it. His entire ideology was undone because someone told him no, they weren't going to play his stupid game.
>>222513514Uncle Philly!
>>222514297I meant to say was it worth the blasphemy against someone sacred just for barely a laugh. More of an attempt at one.
>>222514396>His entire ideology was undone because someone told him noIt wasn't because he just accepted it into the doctrine.>i got here the same way the coin didIn the movie he's still all about fate. That's probably the biggest change between the book and the film. In the book, it's suggested he goes into business for himself.
>>222514427God isn’t real
>>222514396you’re wrong and you didn’t get the movie
>>222514411UNCLE PHILLY MY ASS
>>222514541But that was the point. It wasn't about fate, it was about people making bad decisions. And not just "bad" as in "poor", but as in choosing to do and inflict bad on the people and world around them. I do not care about what the book is about or what differences there are as it has no bearing on the movie. >>222514562you're wrong and you didn't get the movie.
>>222514600You said his ideology was undone, anon. It wasn't. He still believed it.
>>222514552honestly, why do people say this? Do they assume the recipient will suddenly implode? It's basically like telling someone random that they're about to go play in some shit. What do you expect the random passerby to say?
>>222514613The end of the movie shows him pleadingly shove money into a kid's hands to try and justify the whole "you didn't see me" bit because he knows it's a farce.
>>222514643>because he knows it's a farce.No, because that's what he's always done. Plenty of people saw him, anon. He didn't kill everyone he came into contact with, like he didn't kill the lackey in the office building.
>>222513344I thought this was the good guy
>>222514675Right, because it's a farce. He can pretend he's some instrument of fate and that people "deserve" to die because fate put them in his path and saw him, but it's a cop out. It's an excuse he makes because he likes making the choices that he makes. And him getting into a car crash because he wasn't paying attention, or maybe even shaken by the encounter with the wife, and then shoving bloody money into a kid's hands after asking for his shirt to keep up his whole persona. The movie doesn't really reckon with it and leaves it ambiguous, but how do you think it went down when the wife just keeps refusing to call it? He loved his "I can't call it for you" shtick, but it doesn't show what actually happens when someone refuses to call it. It just implies he killed her anyway. I suppose if you just want to be pedantic and say that it wasn't "undone" because he still personally believes it after making ideological concessions and revising it, sure. Okay. But the movie's story directly challenges and refutes his ideology. And the larger conversation was about whether or not he was "right", which he isn't.
