Jolt Country

pinback wrote:Bruce ruined the thread. United 93 is not a "movie where he dies at the end".

Everybody on the plane dies, Ben. That's most of the characters in the movie. Oh, by the way, many of the people on the movie - like the Air Traffic Controllers and the supervisor - were the actual people who were there at the time on 9/11.

And now to add to the thread "I can't believe he died before I did," err I mean "This person who is the main protagonist of the movie dies at the end." I add the following:

Die Hard
The Matrix Trilogy (well, the third one, anyway)
American Beauty

Tdarcos wrote:And now to add to the thread "I can't believe he died before I did," err I mean "This person who is the main protagonist of the movie dies at the end." I add the following:

Die Hard

Who do you think the protagonist of Die Hard was? Karl?

NOT ONE OF YOU...

Dead Poet's Society

Of all the Robin Williams Movies... What Dreams May Come? WTF.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:

Tdarcos wrote:And now to add to the thread "I can't believe he died before I did," err I mean "This person who is the main protagonist of the movie dies at the end." I add the following:

Die Hard

Who do you think the protagonist of Die Hard was? Karl?

Absolutely. Karl was the "Villain Protagonist," in which he is shown carrying out his plan - to steal 650 million dollars - and John McLane is the "Hero Antagonist" who is trying to stop said plan.

Die Hard - in fact probably the whole franchise - is one of a few movies where the protagonist is the villain, and the antagonist is the hero.

Oh, as to both types of lists, movie with a villain protagonist and protagonist who dies at the end of the movie, I will add

Star Tret II: The Wrath of Khan

Tdarcos wrote:Absolutely. Karl was the "Villain Protagonist," in which he is shown carrying out his plan - to steal 650 million dollars - and John McLane is the "Hero Antagonist" who is trying to stop said plan.

I -- what? KARL? Do you mean Hans?

Die Hard - in fact probably the whole franchise - is one of a few movies where the protagonist is the villain, and the antagonist is the hero.

This is 100000000000000000000000000000000% wrong and I will prove it tomorrow.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:

Tdarcos wrote:Absolutely. Karl was the "Villain Protagonist," in which he is shown carrying out his plan - to steal 650 million dollars - and John McLane is the "Hero Antagonist" who is trying to stop said plan.

I -- what? KARL? Do you mean Hans?

Yes. I apologize, his reference to "Karl" mislead me and I was in error. The protagonist was the leader, Hans.

Die Hard - in fact probably the whole franchise - is one of a few movies where the protagonist is the villain, and the antagonist is the hero.

This is 100000000000000000000000000000000% wrong and I will prove it tomorrow.

Like a cat eating tuna, I await your reply with baited breath. Also, the maximum possible error in any case cannot exceed 100%. Even Homer Simpson knows that!

I am also waiting for an answer, Ice Cream Person.

If we are extending the list to films where the antagonist dies at the end, I have a bunch to add.

Sure thing.

Hans Gruber, the antagonist, killed Harry Ellis, brought the hostages to the roof to put them in danger, held Holly hostage at gunpoint, tried to steal millions, admitted to being a thief ("I am an exceptional thief") attempted numerous times to kill a cop, including squeezing the trigger with an unloaded gun at McClane's head and was prepared to take Holly to her death after he was shot and fell out the window.

He does not go on a journey, he does not learn anything, he does not have a character arc and he does not learn anything. He is the antagonist.

John McClane is our POV character, engages in several heroic acts while taking on one grievous injury after another and saves as many people as he can. In 99% of all movies the "hero" is the protagonist and Die Hard is no different.

However.

I want Tdarcos to tell me who gave Holly her watch ("It's a Rolex") and I will further demonstrate why John McClane is the protagonist. If Tdarcos cannot do that then he hasn't watched Die Hard seriously enough to have the opinion that the antagonist and protragonist are switched.

Wait wait wait.

Are you suggesting, sir, that Tdarcos would simply Google a topic and post about it on this very forum without fully understanding the topic?

Do you expect us to believe this? Do you really think you have a chance against us, Mr. Cowboy?

Flack wrote:Wait wait wait.

Are you suggesting, sir, that Tdarcos would simply Google a topic and post about it on this very forum without fully understanding the topic?

Do you expect us to believe this? Do you really think you have a chance against us, Mr. Cowboy?

If Tdarcos read about it on the Internet, that would be one thing, yes. That we can all understand. If he's saying that he saw the movie and came to that conclusion, I am happy to explain to him why he is incorrect.

I can see where he's coming from Wrath of Khan (though that is also incorrect; Kirk is so clearly the chief protagonist that I won't get into that one) but saying that about Die Hard shocks me.

Die Hard is also one of the best-plotted movies a person like myself would ever see. The script is perfect. People who like action movies and try to work in fiction should understand why Die Hard makes so much sense, it's perfectly made and cast. I really hope they never remake it.

That said, I think there's a greater chance they bring Alan Rickman back for the next Die Hard movie than Tdarcos seeing this thread and replying to me up there. :/

I'd like to go on the record and say that the protagonist of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn was the ear worm.

The ear worm definitely went through the Hero's Journey.

It always bugged me that Captain Terrell disintegrated himself, but Chekov's ear worm just .... sort of came out on its own, due to Chekov's screaming. I guess.

I would like Pinback to address whether I have forgotten the logic here or if they just fucked up.

Terrell was the one charged with the task of killing Kirk. Rather than do that, he killed himself.

Chekov's worm, seeing this all go down, and realizing that these people are crazy and would rather phaser themselves than do what Khan wants, said:

Christ, they don't make scenes (or movies) like this anymore.

[youtube][/youtube]

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:Sure thing.

Hans Gruber, the antagonist

No, no, no, no, no. Hans is the protagonist. He has a plan, a goal, and a thing to be done. McClane is the antagonist, the one who stops said plan.

Let me take a look at Wikipedia:

"The word protagonist (from Ancient Greek πρωταγωνιστής (protagonistes), meaning "player of the first part, chief actor")... in addition the word takes on more formalized definitions. For example, the protagonist, while still defined as a leading character, may also be defined as the character whose fate is most closely followed by the reader or audience, and who is opposed by a character known as the antagonist. The antagonist will provide obstacles and complications for the protagonist;"

Hans is a leading character in the story, and John McClane is providing obstacles and complications to him.

I stand by my statement.

Nakatomi Corporation, probably from Takagi, her boss, gave Holly her watch. (Takagi states to McClane it was a present [presumably from her employer] for her hard work.

Tdarcos wrote:or example, the protagonist, while still defined as a leading character, may also be defined as the character whose fate is most closely followed by the reader or audience

So, in other words, John McClane.

You're wrong on this one, Paul. I mean, also on everything else in the world, but especially this.

I do give the screenwriter and director of Die Hard a ton of credit for giving Hans Gruber a lot more motivation than most action movie villains get.

It really is the perfect movie.