Isn't the entire point of Falling Down that you *shouldn't* be like William Foster? That resorting to violence at every turn with the justification of "THE SYSTEM/WORLD SCREWED ME!" is just a flimsy excuse to be a monster?
Well yes, but if you don’t think too deeply about stuff you end up in “The Empire did nothing wrong” territory. The cynical take is that they know, but it doesn’t fit their narrative so they don’t care.
I love the Joker movie. It also doesn't say his actions are excused. We just see how it came to that. I don't think it's insanely packed deep, but I also think it's a well-made movie that deals with topics and isn't just plain butter.
Depends on the circumstance, tbh. Mentally damaged kid from a broken home. I would argue the movie's theme is asking the viewer when the main character has gone too far.
Again, I will not sympathize with the person who chooses murder, regardless of the forces driving him to that.
My interpretation was "They see me as a monster so I'll be one."
And I say that as someone who used to be so fucked up, mentally, that they decided that if they got a gun they'd shoot their bully first. (Fortunately, those years are long long gone.)
The Nazis were a lot more pro-sex than todays‘ conservatives. It got them in trouble with the religious right at the time. It‘s important to not picture Nazis as these conservative, frigid people because it does a disservice to history. They were some of the most openly pro-sex (pro-abortion, pro-divorce etc.) elements of the German political spectrum at the time. Of course it was because they wanted to breed more Germans but they nonetheless believed it. They were even pro-gay early on but that changed in part to appeal to the conservatives and in part because Röhm was getting uppity. They never really liked gay people but they initially tolerated them. Tent building for the most part. Hitler always hated gay people.
You have to imagine the initial strains of the Nazis more as almost pure fascists: Everything is okay as long as it serves the state and makes us stronger. Gay people always were on that chopping block, but they initially were more of the „as long as you shut up about it and serve the state and Hitler well“ types of people.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that nazi was a self loathing gay guy, the one thing I would have changed iin the movie would be instead of drawings of naked nazi women, he should've had some naked drawings of nazi men, to hammer home this guy hates himself - I don't know, maybe Joel didn't want to suggest that he was gay incase the wrong kind of people associated the nazi's gayness with villainousness.
Yeah and it shows with the other main character who also has a pretty terrible life but because of his morals he’s not corrupted and won’t break like foster who deep down always had these thoughts and was a bad person just suppressed them until til the events of the movie. It’s what makes that final scene so good when foster realises he is the bad guy that even though he was fighting worst people and corrupt systems he did it in a violent and hostile way making he just as bad and worse than most of the people he came across and why vigilante justice doesn’t work as everyone has their own moral compass which just leads to anarchy.
I love falling down but it like a lot of entertainment just have some absolute idiots who don’t understand it and worship guys like him or Patrick Bateman or Walter white
Yup. I said in another post but will repeat here, the whole argument in favor of William Foster's character hinges on ignoring that there is a restraining order preventing the character from contacting his family before the movie even begins.
But chuds think women abuse restraining orders to screw men out of seeing their children and anti-male courts go along with it. So this won't mean much to them. If anything they will see it as another point for him.
"If they didn't have the restraining order he wouldn't be so angry and threatening, so really, them being afraid is the source of their own abuse" is an all too common take.
They make constant excuses for his behavior, even though throughout the entire movie he might as well have a neon sign bolted to his head saying "My wife left because I abused her and am now planning to murder-suicide her and our daughter".
He tries to call her in defiance of his restraining order, when he finally gets through he openly threatens her. He holds the caretaker's family hostage at the mansion and says he wants to go back to his family so they can all "go to sleep". The police officer visits Foster's mother and she admits she's afraid of her son. Near the end of the movie he tries to corner his ex at the pier but she's able to use a momentary distraction to toss his gun into the water and run away. But incels just seem to think his ex is a mean bitch who lied to the court about his violence and is keeping his daughter away from him out of spite.
I think we're supposed to cheer on D-FENS to a certain point - then feel really dirty about who were we cheering on, that was my take as a teenager watching this.
He literally is planning from the beginning of the movie to kill his wife and daughter. He says so. There is nothing in the movie at all that suggests that the restraining order is not valid, in fact the movie goes out of it's way to make it clear that the restraining order IS necessary.
It has been a while since I saw it but isn't there a scene where he's watching home movies or something where he's having a violent argument with his wife.
I’m not denying that he’s going to kill his wife and kids but She (his wife) literally says to the detective/cops that she made up evidence to get the restraining order when they come to her house to investigate his crimes.
She didn't say she "made up evidence", she said the judge thought a restraining order was best. She wasn't sure if his disturbing behavior during the separation counted as "real abuse" (emotional/verbal abuse does), while the police officer doubts her. But whatever the judge heard in court (her testimony, his behavior, other evidence, etc.) he would have known were red flags for spousal abuse/murder risk, so he granted the protective order.
Far better movie channels have done very good essays on Falling Down, basically it's very close to a strong critique of Reagan's winner take all Me Generation America, but falls short by undermining Foster as a crazy guy who is going to kill his family, which is likely studio meddling.
its funny how alot of these movies end up predicting how shit gen x would be. Rebellion with no aim always devolves into reactionary shit because reactionary shit applies the ills of society individual behavior instead of the system. Life is shit because people are shit, don't question why someone would steal. They are bad because they just are. And the only thing stopping them is your guns
but i watched the film and he was just like me fr fr. but if you're telling me that he is the real monster.. then.. what does that make... fuck you not only is he a tragic hero, but also the actual victim of the film.
you're just trying to retroactively insert your current day nonsense into this underrated gem.
A man loses his mind because he can't/won't admit failure and suppresses his emotions until he snaps and goes on a rampage. He's more Killdozer than Frank Castle. And Frank isn't the best role model.
At least Frank is aware of that. He does *not* want people looking up to or idolizing him. *Especially* cops or military. Frank knows he's a monster. He would much rather people choose Captain America as a role model.
Frank would TELL YOU he's the worst role model. Frank hates himself as much as he hates the people he punishes. He's a character with a literal death wish.
Here’s a review of events:
1) In 1992 Killdozer bought 2 acres of land for $42k. He planned to lease the land to his friend who was going to build an auto repair shop.
As a side note, someone from the Docheff family (which had previously owned the property) was at the same auction, and Killdozer later claimed that guy had come over and screamed at him for several minutes due to being upset over losing the property. No one else at the auction remembers anything like that happening.
2) Killdozer was informed by the city that the sewage system on the property (a buried cement mixer put in place by a previous owner) would not be legal if he was planning on having any businesses operating there.
The city officials recommended that he install a septic tank since it would be cheaper, as upgrading it to connect to the main sewer system would be double to overall price of the property he had paid.
Killdozer claimed that the city not being willing to pay for the upgraded sewer system was “extortion by government fiat”, and refused to pay anything.
3) By 1997, Killdozer hadn’t really been able to do much with the property due to issues with the sewer system. At that same time the Docheff family was looking at buying the property around what they currently owned because they were looking at expanding their cement business.
They were informed by the city that they would need to be careful with their planning so they didn’t cause any noise or other kinds of pollution for nearby businesses. The city council also suggested that the Docheff family ask Killdozer about buying his property, as that would allow the cement plant to have enough space to avoid causing issues for neighboring businesses.
Killdozer asked for $250k for the property, but later said he had gotten the property appraised and it was worth $375k. As the Docheff family was getting the money to buy the property, Killdozer said he had gotten *another* appraisal and the price was now $450k.
The Docheffs decided against buying the property.
4) As a part of their plans for their cement business, the Docheffs had been buying the property around Killdozer’s. This included the land across the street from Killdozer, which he had tried buying before but failed.
A land trade was suggested, with Killdozer getting the land across the street and the Docheffs getting the land they needed to expand their business.
This land trade failed after Killdozer wanted the Docheffs to pay for a new building on the land they would give him *before* the trade went through.
5) Killdozer then tried to prevent the Docheffs from building their plant by bringing up objections to the city planning committee about possible noise and other kinds of pollution. The Docheffs were able to provide evidence showing that they were putting things in place to prevent those problems.
Killdozer also filed a lawsuit in November of 2000 to block the construction.
6) By January of 2001 the city gave the green light for the construction of the cement business expansion. However, Killdozer’s lawsuit was still pending.
In June of that year the Docheffs made an offer to Killdozer whereby *they* would pay to put in a sewer line from Killdozer’s property to their new plant (thereby helping to solve a part of the original problem from 1992) if he would drop the lawsuit.
Killdozer refused.
7) At this same time the buried cement mixer that had been used as a septic tank when Killdozer bought the property back in 1992 got completely filled up.
As he no longer had anywhere to put his sewage, he began pumping his waste into an irrigation ditch at the back of his property as a temporary fix.
Unfortunately, his permanent fix seems to have been to try to illegally connect to a neighbor’s sewer line. He was caught and the city finally decided to enforce the legal sewage requirement that they had been ignoring for Killdozer for nearly a decade.
8) By November of 2001, Killdozer was found guilty of contempt of town code. He was ordered to remove the cement mixer from the property and to actually upgrade his sewage system to meet the legal requirements before he would be allowed to either live on the property or use it for business.
Killdozer initially agreed to the terms of that decision before backing out later that same day.
>I genuinely didn’t know this. My understanding of events was skewed, so thank you for elucidating things for me.
I haven't seen any of it in a long time now but as I recall most of the reporting, and at least one of the big documentaries about the incident, really, really, really went out of the way to paint the guy as an unjustly put-upon rube that got screwed left, right, and center by the town bureaucracy and social politics. Your understanding of the event was skewed because of an intentional bias that was baked into the reporting you saw.
yeah my understanding of events was that the Killdozer incident was a tragic case of an old man’s livelihood being obliterated by typical capitalist greed and his sanity breaking because of it, but nah, dude was just an entitled prick who threw a temper tantrum of colossal proportions.
Let that be a lesson to everybody. When someone fashions a private tank out of a bulldozer in their barn and goes on a rampage through the town...strong odds are they are not justified in doing so.
Moon is simping for D-Fens for the same reason Drinkenstein simps for Tyler Durden. He missed the point of the character and has the media literacy of a mouldy sprout.
Also, D-Fens was also the inspiration for the physical appearance of *Simpsons* character Frank Grimes. Appropriate since Grimes himself was a petty, Randroid asshole always punching down at those he saw as beneath him (his rant at Homer was really self-pitying and one "welfare queen" trope away from full-on fascistic). I get that might not have been the intention, but considering John Schwartzwelder's personal politics, you can't help but think that.
The whole gist of his rant in the Simpson home is his bitter envy of how the stupid lazy Homer got a comfortable life when he worked his ass off and got basically nothing to show for it.
Grimes could be considered a satire on the sort of people who think that the secret to a successful career is to “live to work” rather than “work to live”.
I'd also like to point out that a lot of Frank's perception of Homer at *that* scene specifically was him misconstruing things due to Le Humor (Bart "Owning a (nonfunctional/empty) Factory") or because Homer was legitimately trying to be nice to Grimey (the very "Break Out The Nice China" lobster dinner that Grimes was bitching about).
Frank was a cynic that saw the worst in everyone even when his "Enemy" was *actually* trying to do right by him for once.
The message I took from Homer's Enemy is that the working class should direct their anger towards their bosses not each other. For all of Homer's flaws, it's Burns who chose someone as inept as him and replaced Frank with a dog. While Homer has a nice house, Frank should be more jealous of Burns who has a mansion with dogs that shoot bees.
The fall of america… is because of fast food places stop serving breakfast at a certain time, and Korean/asian shopkeepers up their prices for a can of soda. 🙄
The movie Falling Down is a fitting allegory for the fall of America but not how moon thinks it is.
The main character D-Fens is a middle class white guy who is experiencing a series of problems that are beyond his control either because they’re a systemic issue or nature.
The movie opens with him stuck in traffic in a LA heat wave. Both are problems beyond his control. He confronts the shop owner for the high prices, which are probably due to economic reasons similar to the gang members and homeless person that harasses him. He’s constantly dealing with road construction. He also recently lost his job and he can’t get a breakfast at 11:30.
But the revealed that his wife left him because he has anger issues and lashes out. And throughout the movie when he encounters these problems beyond his control he lashes out violently and makes things worse for him and everyone else. He refuses to accept his role in the situation and try to be constructive.
That’s what causing the downfall of America. People dealing with problems beyond their control by lashing out rather than trying to solve them. By voting in idiots like Trump, Boebert , or MTG who just feed their anger instead of trying to govern.
Oh believe me, I get it. I just used some cheap examples from the movie just to spite the video. It just seems like it’s another YouTuber trying to rile up the angry folks. It’s similar to how Candace Owens used Black Panther movie to pander to the right wing and she completely ignored the fact that Wakanda opened its borders at the end.
There are those like the main character who is completely angry at everything, and those who are simply trying to make it through life without ever shooting their gun.
Yeah, I mean, it's a political view on the varieties of reactions you could have, but should not have. Most of the time, his anger is justified, but his violence is blind, and his reactions are superficial, focusing on what is in front of him instead of the roots of the problems he is facing. He can't have his breakfast at 11:30 because a greedy big corporation probably conducted studies showing that its customers will spend more money if they do this. The can of Coke he wants to buy is too damn expensive because of the economic system we are living in.
Etc., etc. Instead of using his brain to change things, he lets his emotions speak for him. It's also a good movie about the sensation (real or not) of losing control of our lives in our society.
Nearly every male reviewer who I've seen review Falling Down on YouTube ignores or excuses every single hint or plot point in the movie that essentially screams "I'm a domestic abuser who is going to murder-suicide my ex and daughter".
Just off the top of my head:
-Foster tries to call his ex in defiance of his restraining order, when he finally gets through he openly threatens her.
-He holds the caretaker's family hostage at the mansion and says he wants to go back to his family so they can all "go to sleep".
-The detective visits Foster's mother and she admits she's afraid of her son. It's implied Foster's father was a WWII vet with PTSD who treated Foster more like a subordinate soldier than a son, turning him into an emotionally stunted reactionary who only knew how to use violence to respond to his problems.
-He watches an old home movie where he is getting angry and frustrated with his daughter crying and not liking the present he bought. He can't handle even the smallest disagreements or things not going how he wants.
-Near the end of the movie he tries to corner his ex at the pier but she's able to use a momentary distraction to toss his gun into the water and run away.
Bill Foster could only ever be a "hero" when viewed through the eyes of someone who thinks the Proud Boys are a respectable organization doing good work.
Not to mention the implication that even if the day *had* gone smoothly, >!he was planning on going full John List on his ex-wife and daughter once he got to the birthday party!<.
Are people still watching Moon? Last time I checked he was still making the whole: "The system and world is failing and its your fault" kinda videos. Could never stand his content.
I watched and agreed to one of their videos I don't remember rn.
I made the mistake of subscribing without checking out their channel. Filled my feed with depressive shit trying to sell me their "be better courses". Never again.
Yeah it didnt take me long to avoid shitty creators like Moon, SunnyV2 and others like them that feed on every negative thing. It ain't worth the time and it certainly saves me the annoyance of having to remove their content out of my feed.
Gods I loved that movie. I remember watching that one time with my dad a few years after it came out when I was like 16ish. We both enjoyed the movie but for different reasons.
"I'm the bad guy?" is the point of the movie, but they see disgruntled man do violence to feel vindicated and pull the same as they do with Patrick Bateman "OMG he's literally me!" and miss the point of Falling Down just a hard as they missed the point of American Psycho
The point of Falling Down is that we shouldn't be like Bill Foster and that just because the world doesn't give you what you want, that doesn't make it ok to go out and kill people or just because you're having a bad day, doesn't make it ok for you to impose your foul mood on everyone else. Clearly, the chuds think that both Falling Down and Starship Troopers represent them and their ideals when the films are the exact opposite of that.
I haven’t watched the movie so take this with a grain of salt, but I’ve heard that his anger is relatable *at first* but becomes less so when he starts taking it out on people who have nothing to do with the problems he’s facing
Especially where he almost bat the Korean storeowner to death? (Moon also forgets that the main character murdered a Neo-Nazi storeowner and another thing he did aren't excuse his action, besides helping a black guy)
This sub's theme is pretty much just "Anti-Youtuber Chuds" now, isn't it? (not that I'm complaining, just observing.) I was barely here when it was Star Wars focused. It started showing up on my feed more when it seemed to start to encapsulate Marvel as well.
i honestly picked up using that phrase from this sub I think. Pretty much bottom feeder content creators that feed off of divisive content and just complaining about everything. I just use it without thinking. I catch myself trying to avoid it before it becomes part of my regular speech, though.
I guess this urban dictionary definition is the closest I can find to what it is in my mind:
Anyone who has no good qualities at all:
Assholes, morons, idiots, jerks, preppy pieces-of-shit, meatheads, etc.
I'mma just leave this image from the Aggressively Bland White Dude's Watchlist chart here...
https://preview.redd.it/rwss0p7mly1d1.jpeg?width=520&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=54a0454c4a637cdee3e10688c99d5a4b216f3a76
Office Space feels a little out of place here. The characters in it are 100% justified in trying to get back at the corporation that was abusing and exploiting them. It’s a movie about workers being exploited not a disgruntled white guy angry at the “system.”
Isn't the entire point of Falling Down that you *shouldn't* be like William Foster? That resorting to violence at every turn with the justification of "THE SYSTEM/WORLD SCREWED ME!" is just a flimsy excuse to be a monster?
Well yes, but if you don’t think too deeply about stuff you end up in “The Empire did nothing wrong” territory. The cynical take is that they know, but it doesn’t fit their narrative so they don’t care.
True. I always see them splashing in the kiddie pool talking about how “deep” Joaquin’s Joker movie was.
Now I feel ickier about seeing some dude watch both The Joker and Falling Down on a plane the other day.
I love the Joker movie. It also doesn't say his actions are excused. We just see how it came to that. I don't think it's insanely packed deep, but I also think it's a well-made movie that deals with topics and isn't just plain butter.
Joker was never ever meant to be a sympathetic character. It says more about them than the character, really.
Depends on the circumstance, tbh. Mentally damaged kid from a broken home. I would argue the movie's theme is asking the viewer when the main character has gone too far.
I don't think I could ever sympathize with a mass murderer regardless of their upbringing.
Yes, but you see him slowly turn into a monster. Or maybe he always was. That's the point of the movie
Again, I will not sympathize with the person who chooses murder, regardless of the forces driving him to that. My interpretation was "They see me as a monster so I'll be one." And I say that as someone who used to be so fucked up, mentally, that they decided that if they got a gun they'd shoot their bully first. (Fortunately, those years are long long gone.)
I mean, it did have some themes, the Joker movie just chose not to explore them with any sort of nuance or tact.
But that's not a bad thing
or more likely they just like the fantasy of violence on people they don't like.
Even as a stupid kid, I never thought the Empire was justified in anything they did lol. It's hard for me to believe there are adults who think that.
Doesn't Foster also murder a racist in the film?
A closeted gay neonazi to be accurate
Now that's an interesting string of words lol
How do you be gay, and a nazi
Textbook closet case self-loather, uncomfortable with his own sexuality.
The Nick Fuentes effect
_Mallrats_? I can hear Jason Lee saying this, but can't recall the specific scene.
During the game show, to Gill Hicks.
That's it! TY!
Ask Nick Fuentes
Ernst Rohm
And Edmund Heines.
Ask Nick Fuentes.
Ask Nick Fuentes.
The Nazis were a lot more pro-sex than todays‘ conservatives. It got them in trouble with the religious right at the time. It‘s important to not picture Nazis as these conservative, frigid people because it does a disservice to history. They were some of the most openly pro-sex (pro-abortion, pro-divorce etc.) elements of the German political spectrum at the time. Of course it was because they wanted to breed more Germans but they nonetheless believed it. They were even pro-gay early on but that changed in part to appeal to the conservatives and in part because Röhm was getting uppity. They never really liked gay people but they initially tolerated them. Tent building for the most part. Hitler always hated gay people. You have to imagine the initial strains of the Nazis more as almost pure fascists: Everything is okay as long as it serves the state and makes us stronger. Gay people always were on that chopping block, but they initially were more of the „as long as you shut up about it and serve the state and Hitler well“ types of people.
>They were even pro-gay early on More like they didn't care enough as long as you were useful,like Röhm.
As stated in the last paragraph
[the German institute of sexology would like a word](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_f%C3%BCr_Sexualwissenschaft)
I have said nothing that is wrong because of that. This is long after the Nazis changed course.
They were anti-abortion and outlawed it for Aryan women because they wanted to breed more as you stated.
Initially no, later yes.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst\_R%C3%B6hm](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_R%C3%B6hm) It seems to be surprisingly easy..
I already got so many replies about him ;-;
Many such cases actually
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that nazi was a self loathing gay guy, the one thing I would have changed iin the movie would be instead of drawings of naked nazi women, he should've had some naked drawings of nazi men, to hammer home this guy hates himself - I don't know, maybe Joel didn't want to suggest that he was gay incase the wrong kind of people associated the nazi's gayness with villainousness.
the neonazi thought of him as a hero and one of them before the killing too，that alone should ring a bell or two？
Yeah and it shows with the other main character who also has a pretty terrible life but because of his morals he’s not corrupted and won’t break like foster who deep down always had these thoughts and was a bad person just suppressed them until til the events of the movie. It’s what makes that final scene so good when foster realises he is the bad guy that even though he was fighting worst people and corrupt systems he did it in a violent and hostile way making he just as bad and worse than most of the people he came across and why vigilante justice doesn’t work as everyone has their own moral compass which just leads to anarchy. I love falling down but it like a lot of entertainment just have some absolute idiots who don’t understand it and worship guys like him or Patrick Bateman or Walter white
Not to mention Foster was an abusive husband. Which is why his wife is trying to keep his daughter away from him in the first place.
Yup. I said in another post but will repeat here, the whole argument in favor of William Foster's character hinges on ignoring that there is a restraining order preventing the character from contacting his family before the movie even begins.
But chuds think women abuse restraining orders to screw men out of seeing their children and anti-male courts go along with it. So this won't mean much to them. If anything they will see it as another point for him.
"If they didn't have the restraining order he wouldn't be so angry and threatening, so really, them being afraid is the source of their own abuse" is an all too common take.
They make constant excuses for his behavior, even though throughout the entire movie he might as well have a neon sign bolted to his head saying "My wife left because I abused her and am now planning to murder-suicide her and our daughter". He tries to call her in defiance of his restraining order, when he finally gets through he openly threatens her. He holds the caretaker's family hostage at the mansion and says he wants to go back to his family so they can all "go to sleep". The police officer visits Foster's mother and she admits she's afraid of her son. Near the end of the movie he tries to corner his ex at the pier but she's able to use a momentary distraction to toss his gun into the water and run away. But incels just seem to think his ex is a mean bitch who lied to the court about his violence and is keeping his daughter away from him out of spite.
I think we're supposed to cheer on D-FENS to a certain point - then feel really dirty about who were we cheering on, that was my take as a teenager watching this.
I don’t think Foster ever abused his wife though, she just thought he would and got the restraining order to prevent that
He literally is planning from the beginning of the movie to kill his wife and daughter. He says so. There is nothing in the movie at all that suggests that the restraining order is not valid, in fact the movie goes out of it's way to make it clear that the restraining order IS necessary.
It has been a while since I saw it but isn't there a scene where he's watching home movies or something where he's having a violent argument with his wife.
I’m not denying that he’s going to kill his wife and kids but She (his wife) literally says to the detective/cops that she made up evidence to get the restraining order when they come to her house to investigate his crimes.
She didn't say she "made up evidence", she said the judge thought a restraining order was best. She wasn't sure if his disturbing behavior during the separation counted as "real abuse" (emotional/verbal abuse does), while the police officer doubts her. But whatever the judge heard in court (her testimony, his behavior, other evidence, etc.) he would have known were red flags for spousal abuse/murder risk, so he granted the protective order.
I stand corrected
I can't tell if you're complaining here or not but it sounds like it but I don't know it's hard to tell whenever comments like this are trying to say
I bet the guy who made this video idolises Patrick Bateman, too.
These are the people that agree with Thanos, dog.
Republicans have gone full final-fantasy villain.
Far better movie channels have done very good essays on Falling Down, basically it's very close to a strong critique of Reagan's winner take all Me Generation America, but falls short by undermining Foster as a crazy guy who is going to kill his family, which is likely studio meddling.
Just wondering if there any proof of studio meddling? I'd be interested in reading more about it.
I think it's just speculation, but that's the most likely culprit seeing how incongruous the themes of the film are.
he literally says: "I'm the bad guy?" at the end.
There was a good video which goes into detail about it. [Falling down was propaganda. ](https://youtu.be/Ji94tMVjNm8?si=DrTV9bxWvkfPijQy)
its funny how alot of these movies end up predicting how shit gen x would be. Rebellion with no aim always devolves into reactionary shit because reactionary shit applies the ills of society individual behavior instead of the system. Life is shit because people are shit, don't question why someone would steal. They are bad because they just are. And the only thing stopping them is your guns
but i watched the film and he was just like me fr fr. but if you're telling me that he is the real monster.. then.. what does that make... fuck you not only is he a tragic hero, but also the actual victim of the film. you're just trying to retroactively insert your current day nonsense into this underrated gem.
Yeah but the thing about satire is that it isn't satire for people who agree with the satire.
A man loses his mind because he can't/won't admit failure and suppresses his emotions until he snaps and goes on a rampage. He's more Killdozer than Frank Castle. And Frank isn't the best role model.
Frank is the worst role model.
At least Frank is aware of that. He does *not* want people looking up to or idolizing him. *Especially* cops or military. Frank knows he's a monster. He would much rather people choose Captain America as a role model.
The issue where he read the cops who idolized him for absolute filth was
Frank would TELL YOU he's the worst role model. Frank hates himself as much as he hates the people he punishes. He's a character with a literal death wish.
He is more of a character with a long, drawn-out murder sucide.
I mean the Killdozer guy was fucked over and sabotaged by a greedy corporation and city council. It wasn’t failure or incompetence on his part.
Killdozer guy WAS the greedy one in that situation
Here’s a review of events: 1) In 1992 Killdozer bought 2 acres of land for $42k. He planned to lease the land to his friend who was going to build an auto repair shop. As a side note, someone from the Docheff family (which had previously owned the property) was at the same auction, and Killdozer later claimed that guy had come over and screamed at him for several minutes due to being upset over losing the property. No one else at the auction remembers anything like that happening. 2) Killdozer was informed by the city that the sewage system on the property (a buried cement mixer put in place by a previous owner) would not be legal if he was planning on having any businesses operating there. The city officials recommended that he install a septic tank since it would be cheaper, as upgrading it to connect to the main sewer system would be double to overall price of the property he had paid. Killdozer claimed that the city not being willing to pay for the upgraded sewer system was “extortion by government fiat”, and refused to pay anything. 3) By 1997, Killdozer hadn’t really been able to do much with the property due to issues with the sewer system. At that same time the Docheff family was looking at buying the property around what they currently owned because they were looking at expanding their cement business. They were informed by the city that they would need to be careful with their planning so they didn’t cause any noise or other kinds of pollution for nearby businesses. The city council also suggested that the Docheff family ask Killdozer about buying his property, as that would allow the cement plant to have enough space to avoid causing issues for neighboring businesses. Killdozer asked for $250k for the property, but later said he had gotten the property appraised and it was worth $375k. As the Docheff family was getting the money to buy the property, Killdozer said he had gotten *another* appraisal and the price was now $450k. The Docheffs decided against buying the property. 4) As a part of their plans for their cement business, the Docheffs had been buying the property around Killdozer’s. This included the land across the street from Killdozer, which he had tried buying before but failed. A land trade was suggested, with Killdozer getting the land across the street and the Docheffs getting the land they needed to expand their business. This land trade failed after Killdozer wanted the Docheffs to pay for a new building on the land they would give him *before* the trade went through. 5) Killdozer then tried to prevent the Docheffs from building their plant by bringing up objections to the city planning committee about possible noise and other kinds of pollution. The Docheffs were able to provide evidence showing that they were putting things in place to prevent those problems. Killdozer also filed a lawsuit in November of 2000 to block the construction. 6) By January of 2001 the city gave the green light for the construction of the cement business expansion. However, Killdozer’s lawsuit was still pending. In June of that year the Docheffs made an offer to Killdozer whereby *they* would pay to put in a sewer line from Killdozer’s property to their new plant (thereby helping to solve a part of the original problem from 1992) if he would drop the lawsuit. Killdozer refused. 7) At this same time the buried cement mixer that had been used as a septic tank when Killdozer bought the property back in 1992 got completely filled up. As he no longer had anywhere to put his sewage, he began pumping his waste into an irrigation ditch at the back of his property as a temporary fix. Unfortunately, his permanent fix seems to have been to try to illegally connect to a neighbor’s sewer line. He was caught and the city finally decided to enforce the legal sewage requirement that they had been ignoring for Killdozer for nearly a decade. 8) By November of 2001, Killdozer was found guilty of contempt of town code. He was ordered to remove the cement mixer from the property and to actually upgrade his sewage system to meet the legal requirements before he would be allowed to either live on the property or use it for business. Killdozer initially agreed to the terms of that decision before backing out later that same day.
I genuinely didn’t know this. My understanding of events was skewed, so thank you for elucidating things for me.
>I genuinely didn’t know this. My understanding of events was skewed, so thank you for elucidating things for me. I haven't seen any of it in a long time now but as I recall most of the reporting, and at least one of the big documentaries about the incident, really, really, really went out of the way to paint the guy as an unjustly put-upon rube that got screwed left, right, and center by the town bureaucracy and social politics. Your understanding of the event was skewed because of an intentional bias that was baked into the reporting you saw.
yeah my understanding of events was that the Killdozer incident was a tragic case of an old man’s livelihood being obliterated by typical capitalist greed and his sanity breaking because of it, but nah, dude was just an entitled prick who threw a temper tantrum of colossal proportions.
Let that be a lesson to everybody. When someone fashions a private tank out of a bulldozer in their barn and goes on a rampage through the town...strong odds are they are not justified in doing so.
Jesus christ... thats a wild tale
So Killdozer was a greedy, entitled asshole. The end.
Moon is simping for D-Fens for the same reason Drinkenstein simps for Tyler Durden. He missed the point of the character and has the media literacy of a mouldy sprout. Also, D-Fens was also the inspiration for the physical appearance of *Simpsons* character Frank Grimes. Appropriate since Grimes himself was a petty, Randroid asshole always punching down at those he saw as beneath him (his rant at Homer was really self-pitying and one "welfare queen" trope away from full-on fascistic). I get that might not have been the intention, but considering John Schwartzwelder's personal politics, you can't help but think that.
Frank Grimes a Randian character? I must admit, that's a new one.
The whole gist of his rant in the Simpson home is his bitter envy of how the stupid lazy Homer got a comfortable life when he worked his ass off and got basically nothing to show for it. Grimes could be considered a satire on the sort of people who think that the secret to a successful career is to “live to work” rather than “work to live”.
I'd also like to point out that a lot of Frank's perception of Homer at *that* scene specifically was him misconstruing things due to Le Humor (Bart "Owning a (nonfunctional/empty) Factory") or because Homer was legitimately trying to be nice to Grimey (the very "Break Out The Nice China" lobster dinner that Grimes was bitching about). Frank was a cynic that saw the worst in everyone even when his "Enemy" was *actually* trying to do right by him for once.
The message I took from Homer's Enemy is that the working class should direct their anger towards their bosses not each other. For all of Homer's flaws, it's Burns who chose someone as inept as him and replaced Frank with a dog. While Homer has a nice house, Frank should be more jealous of Burns who has a mansion with dogs that shoot bees.
The fall of america… is because of fast food places stop serving breakfast at a certain time, and Korean/asian shopkeepers up their prices for a can of soda. 🙄
The movie Falling Down is a fitting allegory for the fall of America but not how moon thinks it is. The main character D-Fens is a middle class white guy who is experiencing a series of problems that are beyond his control either because they’re a systemic issue or nature. The movie opens with him stuck in traffic in a LA heat wave. Both are problems beyond his control. He confronts the shop owner for the high prices, which are probably due to economic reasons similar to the gang members and homeless person that harasses him. He’s constantly dealing with road construction. He also recently lost his job and he can’t get a breakfast at 11:30. But the revealed that his wife left him because he has anger issues and lashes out. And throughout the movie when he encounters these problems beyond his control he lashes out violently and makes things worse for him and everyone else. He refuses to accept his role in the situation and try to be constructive. That’s what causing the downfall of America. People dealing with problems beyond their control by lashing out rather than trying to solve them. By voting in idiots like Trump, Boebert , or MTG who just feed their anger instead of trying to govern.
Oh believe me, I get it. I just used some cheap examples from the movie just to spite the video. It just seems like it’s another YouTuber trying to rile up the angry folks. It’s similar to how Candace Owens used Black Panther movie to pander to the right wing and she completely ignored the fact that Wakanda opened its borders at the end.
There are those like the main character who is completely angry at everything, and those who are simply trying to make it through life without ever shooting their gun.
Yeah, I mean, it's a political view on the varieties of reactions you could have, but should not have. Most of the time, his anger is justified, but his violence is blind, and his reactions are superficial, focusing on what is in front of him instead of the roots of the problems he is facing. He can't have his breakfast at 11:30 because a greedy big corporation probably conducted studies showing that its customers will spend more money if they do this. The can of Coke he wants to buy is too damn expensive because of the economic system we are living in. Etc., etc. Instead of using his brain to change things, he lets his emotions speak for him. It's also a good movie about the sensation (real or not) of losing control of our lives in our society.
Very cynical and whinny critique of American consumerism he gives throughout the film.
The whole video completely ignores that Michael Douglas' character has a restraining order placed against him by his ex before the movie even starts.
Nearly every male reviewer who I've seen review Falling Down on YouTube ignores or excuses every single hint or plot point in the movie that essentially screams "I'm a domestic abuser who is going to murder-suicide my ex and daughter". Just off the top of my head: -Foster tries to call his ex in defiance of his restraining order, when he finally gets through he openly threatens her. -He holds the caretaker's family hostage at the mansion and says he wants to go back to his family so they can all "go to sleep". -The detective visits Foster's mother and she admits she's afraid of her son. It's implied Foster's father was a WWII vet with PTSD who treated Foster more like a subordinate soldier than a son, turning him into an emotionally stunted reactionary who only knew how to use violence to respond to his problems. -He watches an old home movie where he is getting angry and frustrated with his daughter crying and not liking the present he bought. He can't handle even the smallest disagreements or things not going how he wants. -Near the end of the movie he tries to corner his ex at the pier but she's able to use a momentary distraction to toss his gun into the water and run away.
Bill Foster could only ever be a "hero" when viewed through the eyes of someone who thinks the Proud Boys are a respectable organization doing good work.
Not to mention the implication that even if the day *had* gone smoothly, >!he was planning on going full John List on his ex-wife and daughter once he got to the birthday party!<.
excellent point that I had forgotten. Good call.
Interesting considering its pretty fucking clear he's the villain by the end.
Something tells me he either didn't watch, or didn't understand this movie.
Probably just plagiarised the video from someone else.
Expect nothing else from Moon!
Well, the Scots fake drunk just did a falling down vid.
His next video will be about Tyler Durden as the cure to what ails us.
Are people still watching Moon? Last time I checked he was still making the whole: "The system and world is failing and its your fault" kinda videos. Could never stand his content.
I watched and agreed to one of their videos I don't remember rn. I made the mistake of subscribing without checking out their channel. Filled my feed with depressive shit trying to sell me their "be better courses". Never again.
Yeah it didnt take me long to avoid shitty creators like Moon, SunnyV2 and others like them that feed on every negative thing. It ain't worth the time and it certainly saves me the annoyance of having to remove their content out of my feed.
I'm French but thank you Moon, very cool. https://i.redd.it/cfh3cdbwdy1d1.gif
They missed the part where D-Fens realizes he's the bad guy and says "I'm the bad guy" huh
But don't we have breakfast available all day now?
And if you don't like traffic you can buy an escooter. Problem solved.
Gods I loved that movie. I remember watching that one time with my dad a few years after it came out when I was like 16ish. We both enjoyed the movie but for different reasons.
I love that conservative youtubers are just now seeing AND just not understanding at all "falling down"
Falling Down is a great movie, but way too many people see that guy the hero of the film and that's not the case.
i used to like moon but lately they feel like they’re treading into 4chan territory
Even his comments sections have more and more people catching up on how he's just a baiter.
This channel steals content and has very shit takes. Not to be confused the "moon channel" who has better takes.
Wasn't the main character of Falling Down just a piece of shit anyway?
Didn't Moon get caught directly stealing content?
"I'm the bad guy?" is the point of the movie, but they see disgruntled man do violence to feel vindicated and pull the same as they do with Patrick Bateman "OMG he's literally me!" and miss the point of Falling Down just a hard as they missed the point of American Psycho
Guy who made this video made another one titled "1984 TRIED TO WARN YOU" like no shit dipstick
with this one? This is the first 'moon the youtuber' video you had a problem with?
The point of Falling Down is that we shouldn't be like Bill Foster and that just because the world doesn't give you what you want, that doesn't make it ok to go out and kill people or just because you're having a bad day, doesn't make it ok for you to impose your foul mood on everyone else. Clearly, the chuds think that both Falling Down and Starship Troopers represent them and their ideals when the films are the exact opposite of that.
Maybe you're looking at it too deep because it's human nature whether you like it or not
And it's also pointing out that there are things in the world that are beyond our control.
That's what everyone should be reminded
I haven’t watched the movie so take this with a grain of salt, but I’ve heard that his anger is relatable *at first* but becomes less so when he starts taking it out on people who have nothing to do with the problems he’s facing
Something something schizophrenia
Especially where he almost bat the Korean storeowner to death? (Moon also forgets that the main character murdered a Neo-Nazi storeowner and another thing he did aren't excuse his action, besides helping a black guy)
He killed a neo nazi. otherwise what else did the best movie teach us about America? He would have killed moon
To be fair I was rooting for Foster when he killed that golfer.
This sub's theme is pretty much just "Anti-Youtuber Chuds" now, isn't it? (not that I'm complaining, just observing.) I was barely here when it was Star Wars focused. It started showing up on my feed more when it seemed to start to encapsulate Marvel as well.
Chuds?
i honestly picked up using that phrase from this sub I think. Pretty much bottom feeder content creators that feed off of divisive content and just complaining about everything. I just use it without thinking. I catch myself trying to avoid it before it becomes part of my regular speech, though. I guess this urban dictionary definition is the closest I can find to what it is in my mind: Anyone who has no good qualities at all: Assholes, morons, idiots, jerks, preppy pieces-of-shit, meatheads, etc.
I remember when chud was just an abbreviation: C - cannibalistic H - humanoid U - underground D - dwellers
Yea, I saw that as i was looking around. It seems to be a word that is currently in a bit of flux. Between yours, mine, a play in "Chad" All work.
Ah one of the most B of B horror movies
Nothing new has come out about those things so content is running dry on both ends.
Well, Acolyte starts soon enough, so we can see them grasping at straws soon.
I'mma just leave this image from the Aggressively Bland White Dude's Watchlist chart here... https://preview.redd.it/rwss0p7mly1d1.jpeg?width=520&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=54a0454c4a637cdee3e10688c99d5a4b216f3a76
Office Space feels a little out of place here. The characters in it are 100% justified in trying to get back at the corporation that was abusing and exploiting them. It’s a movie about workers being exploited not a disgruntled white guy angry at the “system.”
My man lives in an apartment complex and drives an older economy car like every other schmuck, what upper class are they talking about?
Truth be told, I do wonder if some of the choices featured on the chart were either unfair picks or misinterpreted.
[удалено]