No? I don’t do drugs, was raised well and have decent morals but the way these characters usually go just feel like forced badassery if that makes sense, and the usual wooing contradiction with violent actions they take feels boring to me now, proper just heroes I like but this thread is vague…
The actor was so perfect in the rare opportunities he was allowed to play the proper Stannis that people cheered for him, not for the actuall character
moronic view point, Stannis is the rightful king and Stephen Dillane is an amazing actor and did a really good job. People just prefer the other characters because they were introduced first, better looking and or girl boss. Most people you ask don't even know that Stannis is the rightful heir.
There's nothing really noble about Dredd or Roschach though. Dredd is an extremely by-the-book technocrat who just happens to have a gun to enforce the literalist judgements he makes on the spot. He's a satire of a broken, dogmatic and overly militarized justice system. At most you could maybe argue the character himself is not as bad as the system he represents. He's just doing his job, you know? I don't really agree it's about fascism, though.
Roschach is also a satire, but of a vigilante hero in the style of Batman, who dishes out his own idea of justice. Except he's extremely mentally disturbed, which is especially obvious if you've read the book, and his actions are more about satisfying his own sadism than any kind of real justice. OP's quote would better describe characters like Mr. A and Question who inspired Roschach. Characters that were written straight and were meant to be truly just, but ended up being rather terrifying.
Javert is lawful neutral to a fault. The law is to be obeyed because that is what is necessary for society to function. Laws which are unjust must be followed purely by virtue of the fact that they are laws.
I find these characters extremely kino because ultimately I think that doing something you really don't want to do because it is the 'right' thing to do is one of the strongest elements of moral character and these types of characters, despite being change-aversive morons, still show great moral fiber.
>You are wrong, and always have been wrong. I'm a man no worse than any man. You are free and there are no conditions. no bargains or petitions. There's nothing that I blame you for. You've done your duty, nothing more.
Book Javert was pure kino of the highest calibre also.
An autist who joined into a succession war because the current king is the result of cuckoldry, but nobody likes him so he had the least men out of anybody in the war at literally every point. Despite this, he's managed to keep fighting and hold on through autistic stubborness bolstered by knowing that he's the rightful heir, and letting anybody else inherit would set a precedent that every death of a king should result in a power-grab succession war.
that's what separates a fanatic from a just man, the fanatic will do anything to achieve their goals because they believe every action they perform is just if the ends justify the means
Because 99% of characters both in film and IRL are motivated by naked self interest under the guise of this or that ideology.
Characters (and real people) who place their moral code or philosophy ahead of even their own happiness/wellbeing are fascinating because it so goes against the normal human experience. It is something immaterial, that cannot be bought, bargained, bribed, explained, or given objective value. It's also psychologically interesting because the true believer will do for their belief incredible and super human feats, even at great cost to themselves.
In fact, I would say humanities ability to sacrifice the self in pursuit of a noble goal or moral philosophy is what separates and enobles us in comparison to animals. It's why ancient humans saw bravery and conviction in the face of death as the greatest of virtues. True belief is the one thing in human experience that transcends all value.
People who follow the rules hate seeing people get ahead for breaking the rules, so these characters are seen as a divine punishment for arrogant rulebreakers and cheats
>stannis, just
kek no he just wanted to be king >judge dredd, just
because of the law maybe but it's a commentary on facisim. If you like dredd you're an idiot or a facist(same thing) >roar shark
kek, he's a weird smelly schizo who was right once in his life.
>because of the law maybe but it's a commentary on facisim. If you like dredd you're an idiot or a facist(same thing)
What's a facist? Is it someone who discriminates based on faces?
People need to stop believing Rorschach had some unbending moral code, he was perfectly will to make exceptions for the "moral lapses" of men like Nixon and The Comedian. He was a hypocrite.
I don’t, they’re corny
>t. no convictions
Smoke some more weed and pretend you're above it all, dude.
No? I don’t do drugs, was raised well and have decent morals but the way these characters usually go just feel like forced badassery if that makes sense, and the usual wooing contradiction with violent actions they take feels boring to me now, proper just heroes I like but this thread is vague…
You're not wrong
Show Stannis sucked compared to the books, they turned him into a power hungry zealot. Liking him is just pure contrarianism
The actor was so perfect in the rare opportunities he was allowed to play the proper Stannis that people cheered for him, not for the actuall character
moronic view point, Stannis is the rightful king and Stephen Dillane is an amazing actor and did a really good job. People just prefer the other characters because they were introduced first, better looking and or girl boss. Most people you ask don't even know that Stannis is the rightful heir.
It's interesting to see them all struggle and ultimately fail to meet impossible and contradictory but still somewhat noble ideals and goals.
Judge Dredd and Rorschach didn't fail their goals at all
Stannis and Javert aren't exactly truly just, they are fanatics
There's nothing really noble about Dredd or Roschach though. Dredd is an extremely by-the-book technocrat who just happens to have a gun to enforce the literalist judgements he makes on the spot. He's a satire of a broken, dogmatic and overly militarized justice system. At most you could maybe argue the character himself is not as bad as the system he represents. He's just doing his job, you know? I don't really agree it's about fascism, though.
Roschach is also a satire, but of a vigilante hero in the style of Batman, who dishes out his own idea of justice. Except he's extremely mentally disturbed, which is especially obvious if you've read the book, and his actions are more about satisfying his own sadism than any kind of real justice. OP's quote would better describe characters like Mr. A and Question who inspired Roschach. Characters that were written straight and were meant to be truly just, but ended up being rather terrifying.
Was Javert “truly just”? He was a morally absolute maniac. In fact, all of them are (except maybe for Stannis, I didn’t watch or read that gay shit).
Javert is lawful neutral to a fault. The law is to be obeyed because that is what is necessary for society to function. Laws which are unjust must be followed purely by virtue of the fact that they are laws.
I find these characters extremely kino because ultimately I think that doing something you really don't want to do because it is the 'right' thing to do is one of the strongest elements of moral character and these types of characters, despite being change-aversive morons, still show great moral fiber.
Cuz Javert was based in both the book(s) and the movie. He was just doing his job
>You are wrong, and always have been wrong. I'm a man no worse than any man. You are free and there are no conditions. no bargains or petitions. There's nothing that I blame you for. You've done your duty, nothing more.
Book Javert was pure kino of the highest calibre also.
Literally who's top left?
STANNIS THE MANNIS
THE ONE TRUE KING
An autist who joined into a succession war because the current king is the result of cuckoldry, but nobody likes him so he had the least men out of anybody in the war at literally every point. Despite this, he's managed to keep fighting and hold on through autistic stubborness bolstered by knowing that he's the rightful heir, and letting anybody else inherit would set a precedent that every death of a king should result in a power-grab succession war.
some cuck
Characters with a strong moral code are interesting to follow because their beliefs are often tested which makes for good drama
You're just a fedora lord
Because they are heroic in the most tragic sense. They are not guilty of any crimes, but they are also not wholly innocent.
Stannis literally used foreign shadow magic to assassinate his brother. He has zero convictions.
that's what separates a fanatic from a just man, the fanatic will do anything to achieve their goals because they believe every action they perform is just if the ends justify the means
Stannis had no idea about the shadow baby until after the fact. He had intended to beat Renly in open battle.
He didn't assassinate his brother and even if he did Renly deserved it.
Because 99% of characters both in film and IRL are motivated by naked self interest under the guise of this or that ideology.
Characters (and real people) who place their moral code or philosophy ahead of even their own happiness/wellbeing are fascinating because it so goes against the normal human experience. It is something immaterial, that cannot be bought, bargained, bribed, explained, or given objective value. It's also psychologically interesting because the true believer will do for their belief incredible and super human feats, even at great cost to themselves.
In fact, I would say humanities ability to sacrifice the self in pursuit of a noble goal or moral philosophy is what separates and enobles us in comparison to animals. It's why ancient humans saw bravery and conviction in the face of death as the greatest of virtues. True belief is the one thing in human experience that transcends all value.
People who follow the rules hate seeing people get ahead for breaking the rules, so these characters are seen as a divine punishment for arrogant rulebreakers and cheats
>stannis, just
kek no he just wanted to be king
>judge dredd, just
because of the law maybe but it's a commentary on facisim. If you like dredd you're an idiot or a facist(same thing)
>roar shark
kek, he's a weird smelly schizo who was right once in his life.
>because of the law maybe but it's a commentary on facisim. If you like dredd you're an idiot or a facist(same thing)
What's a facist? Is it someone who discriminates based on faces?
kek you're so mad
At what? I'm just confused as to what facisim is
anon look at fascism again please
People need to stop believing Rorschach had some unbending moral code, he was perfectly will to make exceptions for the "moral lapses" of men like Nixon and The Comedian. He was a hypocrite.
We all want to be MarvIn Heemeyer deep down.
They embody this noble, tough concept:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retributive_justice
Judge Dredd is liked because he's hammy.
Literally me
Because they remind me of me: my strength, my fortitude, my genius strategical mind and my utter ferocity when challenged.
Do not mess with me.