Haven't seen that film in over 2 decades. I feel stupid b/c I'm not sure if I get your joke.

@@RetroDawnmaybe you feel that way because there’s a chance you are?🤔

@@cabalogia That is what someone means when they say that. Care to enlighten me?

@@cabalogia lol, your life isnt going the way you want it to, and you're miserable. That's funny. People who are happy wouldn't mess with people online for fun, that's just not how humans behave.

But he did swear. At his wife while his child is crying. In public he put forth a different man he never was, and it turns out he didn’t even do that all so well.

​He was talking about Prendergast the cop, mate.

Excellent perspective

@@kagato23 why did three people like your comment? One person being idiotic, i understand, but three more who did not have the intellect to understand that OP was referring to Prendergast's swearing? We're doomed.

@@robinmohamedally7587 go cry about it.

We truly live in a society

@@Low_Fidelity_3D not funny didn’t laugh

@@placer7412 yeah i was being sarcastic

@@Low_Fidelity_3D I wasn't.

@@placer7412 i could tell

He's a real person, one of the few ever portrayed so well in cinema.

You are shown his point of view and from his point of view he is a hero, and victim and then finally at the very end he realizes he is the villain. This movie is an indictment of that victimhood mindset.

I dunno about hero. Protagonist definitely, victim sure. But only a hero in his own mind (and an unfortunate number of movie watchers who took the wrong message)

The film makes it painfully obvious that D-Fens was ALWAYS the villain. An abusive husband who blames everyone and everything but himself for his failings, who was on his way home to murder his ex-wife and child before he got sidetracked by roadworks.

​@@CharlieNoodlesThough it was confirmed few times in the movie that he had not any murder plans, at least towards his daughter. And if he'd blamed himself, he'd been gone long ago, same result with fewer phases.

It will always be relevant

Facts ✍🏻🔥🚨💔

Well, I agree but for very different reasons.

​@@Michael_the_Drunkard and what are they

It becomes more relevant and more important as each year ticks by. It’s one of my favourite films and one that resonates with me the most. It’s incredibly clever and insanely accurate.

Not

Not

Exactly!

California is only the rest of America twenty years later. And we're seeing that now

I'm not sure the L.A. setting of the film maintains much relevance, if any, though it certainly had relevance at the time, being shot before, during & after the L.A. riots, but anyway, I otherwise couldn't agree more about the continuing importance & timeliness of this film.

What? It's not about the price, but also it is about the price? If the quarter for the call was really that imperative, he could have bought a pack of gum or something cheaper. But, no, he gets hung up on wanting change AND a Coke, deciding to fight for them. You're not waging some war on unjust prices by assaulting a small convience store of all places. I also don't buy that the owner was an asshole when he casually tells him "No change, have to buy something" and passively stating the price of the soda as "85 cents." He only gets heated when Foster starts complaining about the price, to which the owner firmly states, "85 cents. You pay or go."

​@@MoviesWithMark I think that "It's not about the price, but also it is about the price?" is perfectly on point for this movie. The way the camera shows the store owner breaking a roll of coins to load the register, among other specific choices in dialogue and such, DO clearly convey that it's not about the price of the soda, but about the store owner using his leverage to force a sale rather than just help DFNS out. However, the characters themselves may not be aware of it. The transactional & monetary nature of capitalism infects every interaction in this movie. Even though it's always beneath the surface, it's too ubiquitous throughout the movie to be an accident. IMO, that dissonance where DNFS does not understand why his social expectation has broken down, and then lashing out at something close but not right (first the price of the soda, then onto less correct things like the shopkeep's race, ect) is a BIIIIG part of the movie. . From the gangbangers demanding a "toll" to the black version of DFNS protesting outside a bank due to a denied loan, it's honestly impressive how many times the film really pushes that button. Every problem has a thread saying "capitalism did this." Even the home video of DFNS' turning dark does so with something like ~"I bought her the damn rocking horse and she's going like it! Now get her to stop crying and put her on it!" It's not a naked "this guy was always evil" it's a moment to realize he's been infected, and affected, by the same evil he's been rebelling against. . When DNFS first asks just for change, the shopkeep denies him with something like ~"no change, make a purchase." And *that* is what DFNS should have objected to. That's a kind of common courtesy of a "good society" that is within the shopkeep's power, But in the movie, the transactional, money-grubbing interactions have become so normalized, both characters don't even think of that denial as being the unreasonable step. Instead, that anger finds a scapegoat. It's not the unwillingness for change, it's the price of the soda being so high as to "not leave enough" for his needs. The "price" of the status quo grows and grows, until some cannot afford to pay. The movie does a masterful job of showing, not telling, how those kinds of misdirected outbursts can happen, and how destructive they can be. Even characters like the neo*azi show what happens when that misdirected anger is *not* acted upon as DNFS does, but is instead allowed to stew and grow. . I just love how much the black DFNS just shreds any hope of DNFS being a simple bad guy clearly in the wrong. In such a short amount of time, you have a mirror of DFNS who can't take it anymore, doing his breakdown "right," and he still gets dragged away by the cops for just protesting. That once scene sneaks in an entire layer to the film. DFNS and his violence cannot be ignored. How many others snap as the black guy does, the "right" way, yet we never even notice? How many people forget the black guy? I honestly don't know if I've ever seen a move more carefully give the mass audience the pieces and threads needed to understand the ways in which capitalism rots at society, while still hiding things enough to make it to that mass market.

@@haydenhuffines8648 what do you want to replace capitalism with?

Go to another store. Jesus christ. It ultimately doesn't matter what his real problem was with the store clerk. His actions are not justified.

​@@haydenhuffines8648 commie tool

Prendergast's situation is a much better. He did not lost his job, wife and house. He is respected man amongst others, despite disrespect from his wife and coworkers. He are much older, in that age when a man become indifferent and tired from life. It's his last day on work, he retires willingly, and so he can say "fuck off" to his boss and to hit that asshole collegue. And he saw Foster as a living warning, while Foster itself have not such a teacher.

Thats a matter of opinion. O see a guy who is too scared to leave his controlling wife or leave a job that is clearly not for him.

@@kelvingriffiths6017 Too scared to leave his wife .. or he loved his wife (which was important enough point for him to run after his female co-worker and tell her) and also a man who respected his marriage vowes "for better, for worse". I despise people who make vowes and don't keep them.

@@Axel_Andersen I do too.

@@user-ut8ed1mz3d Interesting that hitting a person to take out ones frustration on a colleague is not brought out more. Of course it is in a different league as Dfences actions but still. He only killed one person which could also be seen as justifiable homicide or self defence. In my books the worst of his actions was demolishing the poor Koreans shop. The gang members had it coming when they attacked him twice. The heart attack, I read the dialogue and acting so that if the pills had been somewhere near Dfence would have given them to him but once he saw that there was nothing to be done he hid his behind the cold act, I don't buy for a moment that he was violent at home or that he was on his way to kill his family.

He’s basically a nerd, a vengeful nerd. He worked in the defence industry, was let go because of defence budget cuts. The Cold War ended and he was out of a job because the geopolitical landscape changed, he was no longer needed.

Since literally every character (with exception of cop), falls within the same morality. Dfens only symbolizes the extremism of the films values. Whereas the cop is probably the anti-anti hero (relative to real life society), and true main character of the film.

That was a great insight "all fall down". I really think that this a great point, everyone except Pendegrast is falling down in this movie, people and society.

It’s much deeper than that but most don’t get it

@@VegasTwins Sounds like something a Lynch fan would say. It's just too deep for you to get it!!1 I mean the emperor's new clothing. Sure, you can blame any number of factors, the economy, the heat, racism, poverty and so on but the theme is just the theme, disenfranchisement from society. ... which again is summed up nicely in the showdown scene, where the detective simply says "is that what all this is about?!?!??!" As in, that little, lol. You could argue the whole point of the movie, is about how little the movie is about.

@@notsure6796 that line is important but your interpretation is surface level thinking, it’s yet another part of the pendergrass and foster parallel, and also a reference to how the average person can relate to foster cause they lied to everyone

@@VegasTwins Which is... still just alienation from society. We examine how much bs everything is, including the main character, the babyless wife that went crazy, coworker willing to have an affair and even the movie itself. The spineless nature of lamers in retard land... is what push people over the edge. But, the theme is still just about snapping.

Maybe not in America ... here in Scandinavia police very seldom draw a gun and when they shoot they try not shoot to kill.

Police will defend themselves @@Axel_Andersen

@@AndrewOzolins Sure, but in a country I live they most of the time use proportional violence, they do not shoot to kill always, which seems to be the norm in American cinema, TV as well as reality.

But if someone pulls a gun on you, what they're really saying is that they're going to kill you. It is proportional to respond with deadly force if someone is actively trying to kill you. It doesn't matter that it's a water gun either. He told the officer it was a real gun and then violently reached for it. Was the officer just not supposed to believe him?

@@anoriginalname8695 That is not what I said nor implied. What I said was in reply to "there is no police officer in the world that would not" ... and I simply stated that this is different from USA in many countries.

You know, it's not 'broken,' it was meant to work that way.

His wife removed him from his home and the daughter he loved most of all because she “felt “ he could be dangerous. When she cut the ties to his happiness and made him all alone he became bitter and angry.

@@map3384 It was not that simple and it was definitely more than a 'feeling'. They make a point to specifically show in the film that D-Fens was clearly emotionally unstable at best, even before his bad day. He reflects on this when watching the home movies and even he was unsettled by his own behavior when on the outside looking in. You say she "removed him from his home" as if he was some unassuming victim who was just targeted by his wife for no reason. If he was willing to behave like that while recording, we can reasonably extrapolate that he behaved the same or worse off-camera. Verbal/emotional abuse and erratic emotional changes are big red flags that someone's mental health may not be on the up and up. And when you have a child involved, their safety and emotional/mental security is paramount above everything else. Bill was clearly troubled, but he was also a grown man. He made his choices and unfortunately never got the help he needed before it was too late. If I were his wife, I wouldn't take the chance on my kid's life if I even thought for a single moment that my partner was capable of doing them serious harm.

@@cjdouglas3464 She assumed he could do something violent against him. Taking his daughter away from him was violent. Women always assume and assume wrong. It’s why 90% of divorced are filled by women.

@@map3384 Bro, what are you on about? You’re dropping a lot of blanket generalizations, idk if you’ve just had bad experiences but your bias is very heavy. First, 70% of divorces are filed by women in general, the 90% only applies to college educated couples. And there are a MILLION different reasons why people file for divorce, to say it’s all bc “woman make assumption” is disingenuous and completely ignores the complexity of actual human relationships. Cheating, abuse, irreconcilable differences, the list goes on. Taking away his daughter is a heavy blow, but once again the film shows you that was a consequence of Bill’s own actions. He brought his wife and child to tears because she didnt want to ride a damn horse. Does that sound like someone stable to you? His wife didn’t want herself or her child to end up another cautionary tale about a guy going off the deep end. “Women always assume and assume wrong”…well clearly Elizabeth wasn’t wrong. It doesn’t matter what he lost, it doesn’t make it okay to murder people. He lost his family because he couldn’t address his own anger/mental health. You’re trying to absolve this grown man of personal accountability. He made a choice to do what he did.

Thanks Kanye very edgy

Wow, he is literally you, huh? Clown.

Yes. He absolutely overreacted. 1. This was 1993 not 1988 and soda cans of that era usually cost $0.50-$0.75 (it's also not off-brand, it's clearly Coke). $.50 is also the price that he counters with. 2. It is not worth busting up a store just because you won't get change to make a phone call for buying one can of soda. Especially since the entire reason he went into that store was to get change to make that call. If that's what was important, he could've just bought gum or something. But, no, he chose a Coke and decided to die on that hill and insult the owner for being Korean.

@@MoviesWithMark Im not justifying fosters actions in the slightest, but you have to admit, the store owner was being a bit of an asshole. The scene starts with him litterally stocking the register with change, yet he refuses to break a dollar for foster saying he must buy something.

​@@joshuarubenstein2298 Okay, so he didn't want to make change and said Foster should buy something? So what? You think that warrants Foster's tirade? You ever wonder why the owner had a baseball bat at the ready? You think he might've been robbed in the past and doesn't want to be as open with his money, prices, or store policies? The argument of "he started it by not breaking a dollar" is a weak defense for Foster's actions.

@@joshuarubenstein2298 Interesting, your excellent response was shadowbanned by KZfaq. I can only see it on my phone by clicking your profile pic to see your last 3 comments. KZfaq censorship at its finest unfortunately. Looks like MoviesWithMark doesn't like people mildly disagreeing with him.

What if... it can be about tradition AND Dfense's delusions that he's the good guy? In a lot of ways, he acts out his own Western "making the world right" self-narrated fable in ways that are overexaggerated, Hollywood-like in the vein of old cowboy stories? Stories that got more and more black and white, simplified and all about the hero with the gun, and never seem to show that even the villains might by someone to pity, someone with a family to mourn them too. Even gangbangers who break the law have siblings or parents to leave behind in many cases. 50s cowboy movies NEVER EVER show the Hero assaulting women or murdering children, or anything beyond the most shallow tragedy with the Bad Guy. Those Baddies never have motives beyond greed, lust or rage to be bad, they never steal to feed families or to defend their home. The true Old West histories involved lots of gruesome torture of innocents by all parties, and the mass genocide of native Americans, deep prejudice against anyone not white and meager rights for women. His obliviousness to the innocents he terrorizes is like a whitewashed spaghetti western or wholesome serial show like Gunsmoke where the bad guy gets punished and the hero is pure and never overreacts or accidentally shoots the wrong person. Personally, I think tradition and the sense of easily dissected justice- a type of morality with no grey area and only heros or villains and no in between are pretty tightly wound concepts. I watch a lot of older movies and shows, I love a lot of it, but it can be jarring to realize how different the values of the times were. Both the time in which the story was written and filmed, and the historical times the art is trying to idealize. I think the retirement party, with the cowboy hats might be influencing me, but every man I know who is close to my dad's age (a child in the 50's) is OBSESSED with western stories. Not all of them are white dudes, but the media they all consumed was absolutely steeped in Lone Ranger and cops and robbers.

@@aazhie Not delusions

@@aazhie No he isn’t acting out like that

@@aazhie It isn’t a self narrated fable

​@@aazhie what a load of drivel

If D-Fens was played by a woman of the same age, half the people praising him would be calling the character a Karen.

Me, too.

No matter how shitty it gets, be a Mr. Pendergast, not a Mr. Foster.

Pretty much. I still think that was the idea and take it as such.

YES... except it's not clear whether D Fens would of mudered his wife and daughter. He did make a reference to men murdering wives if they dishonored them, in South America... I think he was capable of killing his wife. But he would die for his daughter.... which he did, in a way.

lol He had a real gun at the end of the film. They manage to steal it from him

I feel he misses the point entirely.

He wouldn't have killed his daughter...

Awesome cloaker.

Definitely this. No matter how shitty it gets, be a Pendergast, not a Foster.

@@CaliCurmudgeon Sadly, too many people view Foster as a hero.

@@Ragitsu Well, I view him as a tragic character in the classic literary sense of those words.

@@CaliCurmudgeon I pity him. The man is a product of his environment. Still, I don't wish to excuse his actions as "justified".

Defens didn’t see himself as a hero but a man on a mission which is his demise.

@@map3384 Yes but that is my point. When I say "hero" I'm referring to a person who feels justified and righteous. In Defens situation, he was constantly talking about what is wrong with the world as if he was the guy with the moral compass. Good villians throughout history do that all they time. Do mass murder for "the greater good". They shoot up a club killing some bystander but it's okay because its revenge and just unfortunate. The point a villain has a warped sense of self and thinks they are justified when doing villainous actions.

You first.

But everyone SHOULD be Pendergast, and even if his rage is very understandable, no one should become D-Fens.

Well if you think society is evolving you are knowingly being blind. The movement of society towards liberalism and self indulgent individualism and self victimizing for gain while leaving anyone with some bit of respect in the dust to be stepped upon. I can see a day where those people have had it and those people are the truely strong ones then and only then will the soft shitty people of modern day society will have what they have coming. People have become too comfortable so they create problems in their own minds and consequently infringe on others rights just because they are soft. There will be a rude awakening to those people and when it comes they will fall. I don't care how much people whine that this is pessimistic and horrible to say because these people should know nature isn't fucking fair it will swallow the weak whole. And it seems everyone is just getting weaker and weaker. And I say good riddance I'm tired of these self indulgent first world complainers who almost never experience anything hard in their entire lives. I can't wait to see it happen. Modern society has allowed itself to embrace being ignorant, and worst of all fucking degenerative. And anyone who dares point it out is yelled at by the same degenerate weirdos who will likely see a day where their lifestyle has spelled their doom. Even more fun for me is if that doesn't happen I'm sure when they are older they will regret who they were. It's such irony.

Exactly

"gets mugged by latinos" "yeah you're the problem whitie!" ...

People who are complacent with the system ITT

The main character here doesn't realize that both can be true

This analysis is completely stupid

Pretty sure its his only good film

It’s actually a pretty flawed analysis.

@@systemofadown945 Don't let the Batman films he did mess with your perception of Joel Schumacher. He was actually an extremely talented director with many good films under his belt.

@@My-Name-Isnt-Important ill give him another shot then maybe

I live in the Czech Republic and in the 90s, this movie inspired a webpage that is now one of the most popular and long-lasting Czech webpages. It is called D-FENS, has screenshot from the movie on the front page and mostly deals with political and societal issues. Even leaked some informations that forced police to investigate cases of corruption and other crimes.

I agree with your interpretations of both films but I don't think that means that the above video is stating redundant things. Both the Joker and Falling Down have been interpreted by many as a revenge fantasy. Men taking charge and rebelling against a flawed society (rather than just men who think they're doing that). Just look at how many people clapped and cheered in theater's when the Joker did his first kills. Imo they're not just clapping that sexual harassers are being murdered. They're clapping for the Joker emerging from the ashes, like a phoenix. A moment of glory, not abjection. What is meant to be a tragic turning point where a horrid society turns a man just as horrid, is seen as a point of catharsis and clarity with people rooting for and validating the character's actions. For the record I like both films, but the "can you really blame him?" take is a popular one and one I completely disagree with (because yes, I do blame them).

Splitting hairs, honestly.

I don't like it.

I also don't like the commentary

@FriendlyCrooc Then explain why you don't like it.

Probably to avoid copyright detection. It's corny, but sort of necessary if you want to do media analysis and make money on youtube.

It's not there anymore, but now on DVD that is.

It's more of a Michael Douglas film than Joel Shumacher's. Shumacher did direct and did his job very well. Douglas though spent his own money to get the film made. He went to bat for the screenplay and did what he could do, to make sure it would be made.

I think the film makers are pretty aware of that, which makes it more of the latter In fact it is you who are stuck in a tunnel vision of how the challenges imposed in dfens life is entirely of his own making, he didn't ask for the inhospitable attitude of the korean, nor being mugged and nearly being murdered in a drive-by, his actions were reactive of a world that actively tries to profit from the misery of a man out of touch with himself

It is by turns one and then the other. Schumacher wanted Bill "D-Fens" Foster to ultimately be the villain, but like Joaquin Phoenix's Joker, he is a villain that has a good backstory.

The old rich guy sucks and Foster makes a solid point about the waste of property amid disproportionate wealth. The old guy's death, however, is fittingly a stroke of luck for Foster more than of his own actions. Not to mention if Foster were to proceed further down this line of thought, he'd end up confronting the "property is theft" ideas of anarchists, and I doubt Foster's mindset of American patriotism would radicalize him to such a degree. Also, it'd take a lot more than one dead wealthy golfer to better handle land rights. To sum up, the golfer dude sucks and there's little pity for him beyond basic human nature of not wanting people to die, considering he could most likely afford the most lavish of healthcare.

I mean it fits with his character. He is a man who thinks the world owes him because he did the "right" things. He thinks he is owed a job a happy family a pleasant day etc and that he is justified in using violence if the world doesn't meet his expectations. This is an overgrown entitled man baby who would totally snap at his family if they didn't behave how he thought they should.

I agree. I wish they could have came up with a better way to end the movie other than making DFNS legit crazy. Would have been more interesting to end the movie with him still being morally ambiguous. But audiences don’t tend to like that

Everyone seems to read too much to that tape ... I don't think it says the bill was a bad parent or abusive spouse. It was just one random sample from his life, with a sample size of one we cannot draw too much conclusion. Me, I'm not violent, never laid a hand on anyone, but yes as a parent I've been angry and frustrated a few times and once or twice lost my temper and said words, still I don't think I'm a bad parent and I think my family and friends would agree.

@@Axel_Andersen They left him because of his anger issues. His wife goes to the cops numerous times about him. Later on in the movie he threatens to kill his wife on the phone. This guy was a self entitled asshole who in the end cared about nothing but himself and thought the world owed him.

@@Axel_Andersen on its own it's just a snippet, but we also learn earlier in the movie that his ex wife had a restraining order placed on him. That gives the tape a kind of different meaning. She herself admits Bill never hurt her and their child. Without the tape the viewer is brought to think the restraining order is overkill and it ties neatly in the injustices Bill is faced with, but the tape is put there to suggest that maybe he is the bad guy after all

"I did everything they told me to" he literally didnt though

@@geezer2365 Yes he did. It's like you didn't watch the movie nor any of the film analyses.

@Morbutt You're right. And there is many aspects of this film that he don't understand.

@@Morbutt Just because you get lied to doesn't give you the right to take revenge on everyone else around you and commit violent and criminal acts.

@@rn6312 Nobody ever said it was _a right_ to act like he does in this film. At some point the pendulum swings in the opposite direction if it gets pushed too far. It is a natural occurrence; it's what happens when people get fed up with how they are treated.

Not ironic.

Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver.

@@Madbandit77 You talking to me????? That's the character.

Nah, he was crazy before he got in it that morning.

@@kagato23 they mentioned in Los Angeles no one leaves their car if you're travelling through a place u don't know

People cling to their interests and their values because they remain their interests and their values. They are not clinging to "the past". They quarrel with others because their interests and values and those of others clash. Neither side [as if there are ever only two] represents "the past" or "the future" except in very practical senses like changing economic power or demographic balances, which are not "the past" or "the future" in any inherent, law of physics kind of way, but the kind of subjects that are actively in contention. The result of the contention determines which is "the past" and which "the future", presuming those mean anything.

This video sucks and it isn’t great

Ewww

Hey, me too

Sempre a esquerda em izzy

@@Gabriel-no6wv ????

@@Gabriel-no6wv aleatório demais

Not a phenomenal analysis dude. DFens was always the hero

@@Gabriel-no6wv Not

Nah- if you live in peace and work hard and get screwed anyway, you may not be a hero or a victim, but you are not a villain either. If you cease to live in peace and do violence for gain or revenge, you may or may not be a villain but you are doing as plenty of others already do, you just joined in.

@@randomobserver8168That will make a a useless meaningless lifeless NPC.

This film is like First Blood. Rambo is seen and treated as a villain as well but all he is a a victim of crooked people who pushed him over the edge. Both D-Fense and Rambo are strong men who only want an easy time. All D-Fense wanted is to spend time with his daughter on her birthday and all Rambo wanted is to get breakfast at a town as he passes through. Weak men create hard times and D-Fense and Rambo had to deal with weak men who give them hard times. All they wanted was to create and have an easy time by doing their work, but weak men ruined it and made the hard times when they are done with their work. First Blood is about hard times for veterans made by weak people. Falling Down is hard times of retired working class citizens made by weak people.

And to be honest, Michael Douglas' Bill D-Fens Foster is a more realistic depiction of a marginalized character going mad than Joaquin Phoenix's Joker is.

The video essay is absolutely wrong on many issues, it's effectively a political rant thinly disguised as a movie review. It purposefully lies about the protestor scene, because movieswithmark wants to talk about his political propaganda and the real scene doesn't fit into it. Being honest about the scene would prove the protagonist isn't a racist, so the whole ideological point of the video would fall apart. I was born in the eastern bloc and I have seen this too many times. For example a 15th century religious movement being described by the communist party not as a religious movement, but as a proto-communist collective. In the same way the narrator wants people to think D-FENS is a racist sexist, while it is clear from the movie he doesn't care about race, has a deep connection to a black man in the same situation as he is in and he sacrificed everything for his family, which consists of 3 women.

Never said it couldn't be viewed through more than one lens.

@@MoviesWithMark true, everyone has an opinion. Right and wrong can depend on “from a certain point of view”.

What's your answer to the question? Are you the bad guy?

Are you the bad guy?

It is NOT an awesome analysis, it’s shit

Every action of his day is connected to his larger mission of going to his ex-wife’s home, even though she doesn’t want him there, she doesn’t want him calling, and she has an active restraining order against him. He wasn’t in his car going to work. We know that. A store owner got beat up, a bunch of minimum wage fast food kids had to dodge gunfire, and an old man died because he was hell-bent on stalking his ex-wife. And considering the bag of guns he held onto the closer he got to her house, he may have had other ideas.

That she didnt want but some judge wanted to set an example.

@@firestrikerii810 Well, I consider this analysis good and and in my book, D-Fens is definitely the bad guy. You however are entitled to your opinion.

I like Prendergast's story. This movie is almost 2 stories in 1 and both stories collide at the end. It's great. I like that he stands up to his wife and boss at the end. He is the true hero.

Ironically “MAGA” don’t claim victimhood. That’s all minorities do on the left, that’s your entire identity.

Go live in a place that's not a capitalist country, then you can complain.