Heroes and Villains
I watched the AFI thing the other day, and, According to Jim, somebody suggested that I, your humble blogger, write about it. Well, it was really long and kind of boring. I was deeply impressed that the AFI selected Atticus Finch as the best/ most important hero of the past 100 years of cinema.
But is Hannibal Lecter the greatest villain? Maybe the best played in many minds, but I find it curious that we're able to point to a hero who is able to stand up for justice against insurmountable odds and at the potential cost of alienating not just him, but his whole family, and then select a villain who is pretty much the boogie man. True enough, there are vicious predatory killers in our midst, but if we're selecting a hero based upon a moral fiber we'd like to find within ourselves, are we really afraid of finding a cannibalistic englishman dwelling in our psyche? (btw, I find Brian Cox's portrayal of Lecter at least as spooky as Hopkins). I suppose Lecter was chosen because he is, clearly, no longer "human", but a monster. He's something tangible and, ultimately, defeatable.
The threat Atticus faces is not Bob Ewell. It's a jury and a system which he knows he can't beat, but it's worth trying. It's interesting we can't point to ourselves in that jury box as villains, but I guess that's always kind of difficult.
No comments:
Post a Comment