It's the apocalypse. Relatively sure a failed operation that can't even reach their home operations center is no longer
-
Flabrezu — 11 years ago(October 14, 2014 11:38 PM)
Where in the movie was it said that the science/helicopter crew were planning on abandoning the soldiers? He commanded Steel to shoot Sarah just for disobeying an order to sit down. He only agreed to give Logan more time after Logan pointed out that he had no where else to go.
Shooting Logan was a huge overreaction, and the following sequence CLEARLY shows that he was the bad guy. You can't just say that he shot Fisher as a desperate act. He didn't know that the zombies were coming down at that point, so he thought he had plenty of time to do whatever he wanted at that point. Then he just throws Sarah and John to get eaten alive despite the fact that it'll make it LESS likely for him and his men to get out of there.
Yes, you can say that some people made it hard on him and it was a tough situation, but he was the bad guy. Nobody else. -
VoiceGamers — 11 years ago(October 20, 2014 03:13 PM)
Captain Rhodes: Listen, egg head, let me bring you up to date on what's
Dr. Logan: Excuse me.
Captain Rhodes: Let me
Dr. Logan: Excuse me! Is there food?
Captain Rhodes: I'm runnin' this monkey farm now, Frankenstein, and I wanna know what the beep you're doin' with my time!
I love Rhodes lol -
Verdugo85 — 10 years ago(July 13, 2015 01:01 PM)
Captain Rhodes: Listen, egg head, let me bring you up to date on what's
Dr. Logan: Excuse me.
Captain Rhodes: Let me
Dr. Logan: Excuse me! Is there food?
Captain Rhodes: I'm runnin' this monkey farm now, Frankenstein, and I wanna know what the beep you're doin' with my time!
I love Rhodes lol
I still laugh about this -
EndlessUniverse — 10 years ago(October 05, 2015 05:53 PM)
Very nice, detailed analysis. Apart from killing Fisher on the assumption that the
entire
science team had a hand in Bub's feedings (and mostly everything after that), It's easy to see how fair Rhodes was throughout the movie. -
user-769 — 9 years ago(May 19, 2016 05:52 AM)
A lot of writers fall into this trap, where they think in order to cement the idea that someone is "bad" they have to give him every negative trait that exists. So right at the end, they say "Oh yea! Well he's also a buddy beep coward!"
I'm surprised they didn't say he was a Nazi pedophile. -
Giallo1963 — 9 years ago(October 09, 2016 07:49 PM)
Hmmkay. Honestly I think you're a bit far fetched saying Captain Rhodes was the protagonist. First of all he did not take interest in the lives of his men, he only thought about protecting himself. He only said he was doing it for the sake of his men to make sure they are on his side, with them on his side he would have better chances of survival. But at the end he ran away as the coward he is without thinking twice he was abandoning his men. A leader does not run away to save his own skin at the price of his men's lives. No. That is what a coward does.
Second of all Captain "the big hero" Rhodes was the most aggressive among all the characters. He barked at people, threatened and pushed them around and that aggressive behavior implies strong fear. He was not only afraid but he often succumbed to his fear; leaving himself completely incapable and incompetent to make any logical reasoning and decision. That makes him a dangerous person, combined with his incompetence being so strong he couldn't see his own incompetence. That strengthens my claim of he was a coward and an incompetent leader. If you're in doubt, have you ever seen a frightened puppy? Frightened puppies can bark a lot. Any animal for that matter will get aggressive in the face of a threat. If I were in Rhodes shoes I would be scared too but I would not walk about oppressing others just so I can feel comfortable.
Third of all, yes Frankenstein's experiments went above all ethics and dignity. But executing him right then and there is just plain stupid considering there were less than a dozen people left. I am not saying what "Frankenstein" did can be justified but killing him can not be justified too, considering it was at the hands of a cowardly, incompentent leader. "Frankenstein" lost it because he was spending too much time secluded and being surrounded by the living dead it made it worse. With some reasoning and understanding the situation could have been diffused.
Fourth of all, the "antagonists" could see not only Rhodes' cowardice; but also his sheer incompetence that he thought he was capable of any logical decisions and what he decided was for the good of mankind. I wouldn't hang out with "Frankenstein" or tolerate his experiments but I sure would not be anywhere near what the "antagonists" was planning to abandon. I don't trust incompetent people who think they are capable of something when the only thing they can do is point fingers and blame others for failure, that is the kind of character Rhodes was.
Sarah was really just there to try and release the tension between the scientists and the soldiers, what Rhodes did was making things worse by being hotheaded and being too eager on the trigger. That led to an atmosphere choke full of tension and fear all the time people reacted naturally by rebellion. So what Rhodes did was making things worse. So in short, I disagree with you. -
user-769 — 9 years ago(October 16, 2016 03:35 PM)
If I called him the "protagonist," I misspoke. He's not the protagonist because he wasn't the one the film featured, regardless of intentions.
But up until the very end, I don't see how he was any worse than the support staff (scientists/pilot/radioman.)
Rhodes and his men were making nearly all the sacrifices, they were doing all the dangerous work (and considering the others never accomplished anything during the film, you could presume Rhodes and his men were doing 100% of the physical work.)
Effectively the soldiers were used for everything.
Eventually that dichotomy falls apart, especially when Rhodes demanded results ANYTHING to support further sacrificing of men.
To put it in a question, Rhodes gave the scientists three opportunities to prove what they were doing had shown any results what-so-ever. Do you find it unreasonable for him to demand this?
I won't argue Rhodes was an beep but Rhodes seemed to be the only person in the entire film who expressed concern about his men dying. -
WarrenPeace — 3 years ago(September 03, 2022 06:12 PM)
Everything bad that happens and goes wrong can all be blamed on Dr. Freakenstein since it is his experiments and insistence of having zombies in their safe space that starts the chain of events of the **** hitting the fan.
You don't let a loose murderer into your house with weapons laying around, right?
"Please vote to preserve the unique character of Warren…" - Robert Duvall