Hey all,
Since Drama King's thesis/antithesis/synthesis interpretation of Scarface was as close to flawless as I've seen, and cynicide's evals of some of the movies on DK's "lacking a clear thematic core" list were really good too (but alas, did lack that specific a/t/s dynamic), I thought I'd chime in. . .
I (unfortunately) don't have all day to do DK's whole list. And besides, I haven't seen all the films, but two that I have seen many times, DO have clear and specific thesis/antithesis/synthesis arguments at their cores. And they're arguably the most "commercial" or even "lowbrow" of any on the list. (for any of the remaining "only arty films have themes" crowd out there)
Armageddon & Die Hard (I guess I'm in a Bruce Willis mood today)
Armageddon:
Thesis: "A misfit can be the right man for the job."
Antithesis: "No, misfits are insufficient. Get someone picture-perfect."
Synthesis: "Actually, sometimes it's the misfit who is perfect for the job."
This specific argument is expressed in nearly every element of Armageddon, from AJ being "insufficient" (In Harry's eyes) to marry Grace, to the drilling crew seeming horribly insufficient to everyone to save the planet (but then succeeding where the picture-perfect astronauts fail), to Billybob's character being deemed insufficient to be an astronaut because of his disability, but then being a pivotal instrument in saving the planet. Even the supporting cast all had issues with being misfits in society (problems with the law, fitting in, etc.)
I'm not saying this isn't a common theme. We can see the "misfits save the day" theme in countless films. But it is specific, and it does permeate the entire core of Armageddon.
Die Hard:
Thesis: "Looking out for other people is more important than shmoozing them to get your way."
Antithesis: "Nope, shmoozing people to get what YOU want is what's important. Screw their best interests."
Synthesis: "It's better to be honest and look out for others' interests, than to shmooze others while looking out for your own."
Every character we like is NOT a politiker. Most we dislike are "working it" somehow.
John and Holly's marriage troubles are specifically rooted in the fact that he refuses to give up his core element - being a cop in New York (protecting people) - and join her in the corporate LA shmoozfest world. He feels uncomfortable in the shmoozfest, to the point of not being at the "party" when disaster strikes.
Hans Gruber is extremely polite, and the bad guys literally use "good manners" to get in the front door. BLAM - once in, they kill you. Hans does the same thing with Takakagi - "Nice suit." BLAM Good manners, but at the end of the day, he's out for number one.
Even their heist - it's a simple, selfish robbery disguised as a noble attempt to free their comrades. A bu!!$hit veneer. Politiking. Working it.
Cokehead guy - working it. Hate him from moment one until he gets blown away, trying to "work it" on Hans. Politiking doesn't work.
Outside - We've got Al. He tries once in the movie to b.s. someone (the 7-11 clerk about the twinkies) but fails miserably and goes back to his normal mode quickly, of being honest and commited to duty (i.e., he answers a call without complaint and goes back to work). Protecting people is more important than shmoozing some clerk. Theme expressed.
Enter Dwane Robinson. Politker extraordinaire. Only cares about the cameras. Total tool. We hate him. He's not concerned about the CORRECT way to protect the people in the building - he's just concerned about looking good to the F.B.I.
Nearly every character expresses this dynamic in some way. Yes, there are the events that boil down to just "mano a mano" like Bruce's fight with Blondie, but nearly the entire movie resonates with that clear thematic core.
"It's better to be honest and look out for others' interests, than to shmooze others while looking out for your own."
Again - is this a common theme in stories? You bet. But it's specific. It's the combination between the ill-mannered, but protective urge, and the smooth-talking, but self-serving urge that gives Die Hard its particular thematic flavor.
So, while "One determined man can conquer evil" is also true of Die Hard, those terms - "determined" and "evil" are too general and can be applied to nearly every movie. There are just too many ways for a character to be determined, or evil, to really keep a story on track.
But I will say this; the "Speed" reference - "One determined man can conquer evil - on a bus" had me literally laughing out loud.
Play on folks - and maaaaaaybe we could have this thread just be about trying to "prove" our arguments on one side or the other of this dynamic:
Thesis: Every movie on DK's list (and others if people want to add them) has a specific t/a/s argument at its core.
Antithesis: Many movies on DK's list (or others if people want to bring some up) don't have a specific t/a/s argument at their core.
Synthesis: Done Dealers have too much time on their hands and don't do enough writing.
Since Drama King's thesis/antithesis/synthesis interpretation of Scarface was as close to flawless as I've seen, and cynicide's evals of some of the movies on DK's "lacking a clear thematic core" list were really good too (but alas, did lack that specific a/t/s dynamic), I thought I'd chime in. . .
I (unfortunately) don't have all day to do DK's whole list. And besides, I haven't seen all the films, but two that I have seen many times, DO have clear and specific thesis/antithesis/synthesis arguments at their cores. And they're arguably the most "commercial" or even "lowbrow" of any on the list. (for any of the remaining "only arty films have themes" crowd out there)
Armageddon & Die Hard (I guess I'm in a Bruce Willis mood today)
Armageddon:
Thesis: "A misfit can be the right man for the job."
Antithesis: "No, misfits are insufficient. Get someone picture-perfect."
Synthesis: "Actually, sometimes it's the misfit who is perfect for the job."
This specific argument is expressed in nearly every element of Armageddon, from AJ being "insufficient" (In Harry's eyes) to marry Grace, to the drilling crew seeming horribly insufficient to everyone to save the planet (but then succeeding where the picture-perfect astronauts fail), to Billybob's character being deemed insufficient to be an astronaut because of his disability, but then being a pivotal instrument in saving the planet. Even the supporting cast all had issues with being misfits in society (problems with the law, fitting in, etc.)
I'm not saying this isn't a common theme. We can see the "misfits save the day" theme in countless films. But it is specific, and it does permeate the entire core of Armageddon.
Die Hard:
Thesis: "Looking out for other people is more important than shmoozing them to get your way."
Antithesis: "Nope, shmoozing people to get what YOU want is what's important. Screw their best interests."
Synthesis: "It's better to be honest and look out for others' interests, than to shmooze others while looking out for your own."
Every character we like is NOT a politiker. Most we dislike are "working it" somehow.
John and Holly's marriage troubles are specifically rooted in the fact that he refuses to give up his core element - being a cop in New York (protecting people) - and join her in the corporate LA shmoozfest world. He feels uncomfortable in the shmoozfest, to the point of not being at the "party" when disaster strikes.
Hans Gruber is extremely polite, and the bad guys literally use "good manners" to get in the front door. BLAM - once in, they kill you. Hans does the same thing with Takakagi - "Nice suit." BLAM Good manners, but at the end of the day, he's out for number one.
Even their heist - it's a simple, selfish robbery disguised as a noble attempt to free their comrades. A bu!!$hit veneer. Politiking. Working it.
Cokehead guy - working it. Hate him from moment one until he gets blown away, trying to "work it" on Hans. Politiking doesn't work.
Outside - We've got Al. He tries once in the movie to b.s. someone (the 7-11 clerk about the twinkies) but fails miserably and goes back to his normal mode quickly, of being honest and commited to duty (i.e., he answers a call without complaint and goes back to work). Protecting people is more important than shmoozing some clerk. Theme expressed.
Enter Dwane Robinson. Politker extraordinaire. Only cares about the cameras. Total tool. We hate him. He's not concerned about the CORRECT way to protect the people in the building - he's just concerned about looking good to the F.B.I.
Nearly every character expresses this dynamic in some way. Yes, there are the events that boil down to just "mano a mano" like Bruce's fight with Blondie, but nearly the entire movie resonates with that clear thematic core.
"It's better to be honest and look out for others' interests, than to shmooze others while looking out for your own."
Again - is this a common theme in stories? You bet. But it's specific. It's the combination between the ill-mannered, but protective urge, and the smooth-talking, but self-serving urge that gives Die Hard its particular thematic flavor.
So, while "One determined man can conquer evil" is also true of Die Hard, those terms - "determined" and "evil" are too general and can be applied to nearly every movie. There are just too many ways for a character to be determined, or evil, to really keep a story on track.
But I will say this; the "Speed" reference - "One determined man can conquer evil - on a bus" had me literally laughing out loud.
Play on folks - and maaaaaaybe we could have this thread just be about trying to "prove" our arguments on one side or the other of this dynamic:
Thesis: Every movie on DK's list (and others if people want to add them) has a specific t/a/s argument at its core.
Antithesis: Many movies on DK's list (or others if people want to bring some up) don't have a specific t/a/s argument at their core.
Synthesis: Done Dealers have too much time on their hands and don't do enough writing.
Comment