The case for Captain Rhodes (he wasn't the bad guy.)
-
veisbier — 16 years ago(September 21, 2009 07:24 PM)
I don't ever recall Rhodes threatening to rape Sarah. He made a lewd comment about her giving the other men a chance if Miguel was out of the picture, that was it. When he had the chance, after finally snapping he never threatened her with sexual assault, though tossing her and Billy to the zombies is pretty bad as well.
I'd never noticed Rickles' wedding ring myself. This does make the character much more sypathetic in my eyes. -
BlondeZombie — 16 years ago(September 21, 2009 01:24 PM)
Rhodes is the bad guy. Is his anger justified? Absolutely. Do I understand where he's coming from when he kills Logan? Of course. Is it necessary for him to kill Ted? Sure, he needs John to realize he's serious.
But he threatens Sarah with rape, and that makes him a bad guy.
"When there's no more room in Hell, the dead will walk the Earth." -
BlondeZombie — 16 years ago(September 22, 2009 06:39 AM)
No, he never actually threatens to rape her, but in critical analysis I've studied (I wrote my senior thesis in college on George's zombie movies, so I've had to really dig deep!) most critics sum up Rhode's lewd comment as "threatening rape", so I've come to say that as well. But he still threatens to remove the man in her life in order to leave her "vulnerable" - except she's the strong one in the relationship, so it's a flawed plan - which several critics deem to be a "rape", not necessarily in the "taking sex by force" way that is typically used today, but more of a "violation", which is how the term "rape" was formerly used.
"When there's no more room in Hell, the dead will walk the Earth." -
user-769 — 16 years ago(September 22, 2009 04:44 PM)
The defense I would make is that Rhodes was in a position where if he wanted, he could have easily removed Miguel from the situation and took advantage of Sarah at the drop of a hat.
Yet, he never did, nor did he make any move to even after she openly disobeyed him and doped Miguel up again. -
shipwreckdelgado — 16 years ago(September 23, 2009 12:36 AM)
This is funny. I was just answering the same question in another forum. This was my last reply to the question of Rhodes as a bad Guy
Another thing about the character of Rhodes that I noticed is that he is more concerned about his command than anything else. When we first see him in the movie, he starts off by pacing around stating that he is in command. Also when he finds that Logan is feeding Bub the dead soldiers he doesn't state "That's Johnson in there!" Instead he goes into hysterics, screaming "Those are MY Men in there!" He won't salute Bub because it is demeaning to his command. We he talks about "giving some of us a chance at some loving" it is clearly directed at himself. He even forces Steel to shoot Sarah because he commanded it. It's funny in a way, but rewatch the movie. Every speech he gives and all of his actions are about one thing only Himself.
To sum up the theme of this topic Yes, Rhodes was a bad guy. He was self centered, narcissistic, a murderer, a coward and selfish.
And if that doesn't clear it up, even Joseph Pilato states in the dvd extras that Rhodes was a very bad man. -
McQualude — 16 years ago(October 23, 2009 06:30 AM)
This is funny, because I was in the army, and NO ONE ever behaved the way any of these guys do. Not that you couldn't have fun, but if Rhodes or the Major had run a tight ship, there wouldn't be anyone growing pot, having unshaved faces, having long hair, or being so out of shape as some of them were.
Historical context is important, Army discipline was much more relaxed following the Vietnam war. In the early 80's it wasn't uncommon (in my unit and probably others) for soldiers to smoke pot in their barracks during the day. Reagan changed all that very quickly.
|Statistics show that 100% of people bitten by a snake were close to it.| -
livid_86 — 16 years ago(September 27, 2009 07:08 PM)
I think he deserved everything he got.
"he was facing what amounted to a rebellion of support staff" By that point there wasn't any government in my mind, so him seeing this as a "rebellion" is crap. He was pissed that he was losing control and Sarah didn't want to sleep with him.
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion. -
livid_86 — 16 years ago(September 27, 2009 08:20 PM)
But there was no more "job"! It was over man!
And as for "And if he wanted Sarah to sleep with him, he would have made her." we don't really need any more proof of him being a bad guy, do we?
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion. -
and did he actually threaten to rape her? I remember him saying he'll let move Miguel to give the other guys a chance, but that was said more as spite any thing.