October 1st, 2024 | Devon Kash

Three Movie Villains Who Weren't Wrong

They were portrayed as bad guys, but how could we disagree with them?

In cinema, villains often serve as the embodiment of chaos, destruction, and moral corruption. However, a closer examination of some of the most iconic villains in modern cinema reveals a more nuanced perspective. The lines they speak, the words they use, and the motives they pursue are not always inherently evil or wrong; in many cases, they are right, or at least understandable. Three movies in particular have villains that weren't necessarily wrong in their pursuits and visions.

The Dark Knight Rises (2012): Bane's Vision of Justice

In The Dark Knight Rises, Bane, portrayed by Tom Hardy, is initially perceived as a ruthless terrorist intent on destroying Gotham City. However, a deeper analysis of his motives and the words he speaks reveals a complex character with a vision of justice that, while extreme, is not entirely without merit.

This villain's views about the world around him are based in truth and reality. In this movie, Bane is not wrong about what he sees. Although his methods are extreme, there is a lot to be learned from his actions. In the end, we are also left with an obvious take-away: had it not been for Bane and his wrath, Gotham may not have been saved.

Bane's primary objective is to liberate Gotham from the corruption and inequality that have plagued it for decades. He believes that the city's elite, including Bruce Wayne and the Wayne Enterprises, have exploited the lower classes, creating a system of oppression that must be dismantled. Bane's actions, though violent and destructive, are driven by a desire to create a more equitable society. The words of his master, Ra's Al Ghul, reflect this ideology:

"Gotham's time has come. Like Constantinople or Rome before it, the city has become a breeding ground for suffering and injustice. It is beyond saving and must be allowed to die. This is the most important function of the League of Shadows. It is one we've performed for centuries."

From Bane's perspective, the destruction of Gotham is not an act of evil but a necessary step to cleanse the city of its corruption. He sees himself as a revolutionary, akin to historical figures who have fought against oppressive regimes. His methods are brutal, but his goal is to dismantle a system that he views as fundamentally flawed.

Bane's philosophy is rooted in the idea of sacrifice. He believes that true change requires the willingness to endure pain and suffering. This is evident in his treatment of Bruce Wayne, who is subjected to physical and emotional torture in the Pit. Bane's words to Bruce underscore this belief:

"There's a reason why this prison is the worst hell on earth. Hope. Every man who has rotted here over the centuries has looked up to the light and imagined climbing to freedom. I learned here that there can be no true despair without hope."

Bane's insistence on embracing despair as a means to achieve a greater good—and a personal catharsis—is a kind of moral righteousness. He believes that the suffering endured by Gotham's citizens is necessary to bring about a new order. While his methods are extreme, his underlying motive—to create a more just society—is not entirely without merit.

Fight Club (1999): Tyler Durden's Rebellion Against Consumerism

In Fight Club, Tyler Durden, played by Brad Pitt, is the charismatic and anarchic leader of an underground movement that seeks to dismantle the consumerist society. Tyler's words and actions are often seen as destructive and nihilistic, but they are also a reaction to the pervasive emptiness and materialism that define modern life.

Tyler's primary critique is of consumerism and the way it has eroded individual identity and autonomy. He believes that people have become slaves to their possessions and the expectations of society. His words reflect this disdain:

"Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need."

Tyler's fight club is a direct response to this perceived enslavement. It provides a space for men to reclaim their masculinity and assert their physicality. The violence of the fight club is a means of reclaiming control over one's body and identity, which Tyler sees as being eroded by modern culture.

His ultimate goal is to create Project Mayhem, a movement that seeks to dismantle the corporate infrastructure that he views as the root of society's ills. His actions, though destructive, are intended to provoke a radical shift in the way people think and live. He believes that the current system is unsustainable and must be destroyed to make way for a new order. His words to the protagonist, underscore this belief:

"We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a spiritual war, our Great Depression is our lives."

Tyler's vision of a world free from the constraints of consumerism and corporate control is utopian, albeit extreme. His methods are violent and anarchic, but they are a reaction to the perceived emptiness and purposelessness of modern life. From Tyler's perspective, the destruction of the current system is necessary to create a new one that values individual autonomy and authenticity over materialism and conformity.

At the end, like in Chuck Palahniuk's original book, Durden's methods succeed. We see this as the buildings explode and collapse in the film. Through immoral terrorism, Project Mayhem, to the dismay of Edward Norton, succeeds. Although he appeared nihilistic, Tyler's ambitions were driven by a desire for a better world.

Collateral (2004): Vincent's Worldview

In the film by Michael Mann, Collateral, Vincent is played by Tom Cruise as a professional hitman hired to carry out a series of assassinations in Los Angeles. Vincent's actions are undeniably violent and immoral, but his words and motives reveal a character who is not entirely devoid of moral complexity or awareness.

Vincent's primary objective is to complete his contract, but his interactions with Max, the taxi driver he hires, reveal a more nuanced perspective. Vincent is a man who operates in a world of moral ambiguity, where right and wrong are not always clear-cut.

Vincent's acceptance of his mortality and the finality of life is a form of existential resignation. He operates in a world where violence is a means to an end, and he has made peace with this reality. His actions are driven by a sense of professionalism and duty, rather than a desire for personal gain or power.

Vincent's interactions with Max reveal a sense of empathy and understanding. He sees Max as a kindred spirit, someone who is trapped in a life of monotony and routine.

His recognition of Max's potential and his encouragement for Max to pursue a different path suggest a character who is not entirely devoid of moral insight. His actions may be immoral, but his words reveal a man who is aware of the complexities of life and the choices people make. Or, he may be flattering Max to extort him. Even so, Vincent's words and his impact on Max's future are undeniable.

Vincent's views on humanity and his perception of our ignorance to genocide are jarringly forthright, often couched in a chilling indifference that underscores the film's exploration of existential emptiness and moral ambiguity.

Vincent's perspectives on the modern world, namely Los Angeles and its disconnectedness, ring true. “Seventeen million people. If [California] was a country, it'd be the fifth biggest economy in the world and no one knows each other,” he tells Max.

“I read about this guy, gets on the MTA here, dies,” Vincent says. “Six hours he's riding the subway before anybody notices his corpse doing laps around L.A..”

Throughout most of the movie, it's difficult to deny the truth behind most of Vincent's views and attitudes about our current world. It also raises a question about whether this type of environment has any responsibility in producing such cold and callous serial killers like Tom Cruise's character.

The Righteousness of Villainy

The villains in these movies are not simply embodiments of evil. Their lines, words, and motives reveal a complexity that challenges the traditional dichotomy of good and evil. Bane's vision of justice, Tyler's rebellion against consumerism, and Vincent's moral ambiguity all reflect a desire to address the flaws and injustices of the world in which they live.

While their methods are often violent and destructive, their underlying motives are not entirely without merit. Bane seeks to dismantle a corrupt system, Tyler seeks to liberate individuals from the constraints of consumerism, and Vincent operates in a world where right and wrong are not always clear-cut.

In two of the movies, we see suffering and pain as a means to an end. We see villains who use destruction and mayhem not for the purpose of evil, but for the creation of a better world. Even in Collateral, Vincent makes note that he is killing mostly “bad guys” and people who lack any real moral convictions. In that movie, we see a villain who appears to be a byproduct of a corrupt, callous and disconnected world.

Examining these villains forces us to reconsider our own perceptions of morality and justice. Their actions may be reprehensible, but their words and motives reveal a deeper truth about the complexities of human nature and the challenges of living in a world that is often unjust, disconnected, and oppressive. In this way, the villains of these films serve as powerful and thought-provoking figures, challenging us to look beyond the surface and consider the deeper implications of their actions.