'evil' Bruce Willis
-
TomWilhelm — 15 years ago(May 24, 2010 11:09 AM)
His character might not be a villain by definition, but he's a grade A beep Court-martial awaits his sorry ass. Like we would ever seen such military action against citizens of the USA under a democratic President (Bill Clinton was the President during the time line of this movie) is much more debatable.
The Siege is a good movie, and raises many questions that are just as important today as they were in 1998. -
leobourne — 10 years ago(July 05, 2015 10:50 AM)
bouchkilele: Yes, I thought the same. He was doing what he believed in. He had his methods to protect his country. How does that make him evil? At the end of the day, the terrorists are killing people are they not? A suspect is a suspect, even if it happens to be an innocent looking beautiful girl.
-
foster1234 — 15 years ago(August 22, 2010 07:30 PM)
I think Bruce hit the mark very well as a professional soldier.
HE warned the civillian Govt. exactly what would happen under martial Law, a suspension of all rights civillians have under the constitution
And then he gave them what he said he would
Even the Huffington wench wanted martial law
Mpst folks don't know what they are asking for in reguards to martial law, which is why it seldom happens
In a world where a carpenter can be resurrected,anything is possible -
koffeenkreame41-1 — 13 years ago(March 05, 2013 09:39 AM)
The President told him to do it, he was just following orders. I really thought he was really good in here though. He was just so cold in The Jackal though, killed a guy and went back to his meal, something Denzel would do in American Gangster.
"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna*beep*wit me!"- Hudson in Aliens. -
spookyrat1 — 12 years ago(November 28, 2013 04:58 AM)
I really thought he was really good in here
I do too.
His wasn't a black and white character by any means.. He gave the government what it wanted after clearly warning them they might not like the form of medicine he dished out.
Even at the end when he arguably could have shot it out with the FBI, his saner head prevailed.
That's why Willis probably took the support role; because the character of Deveraux is multi-faceted. -
Wuchakk — 10 years ago(October 28, 2015 02:29 AM)
this racist propaganda movie.
How exactly is it a "racist propaganda movie" when less than three years later 9/11 occurred? More like a prophetic movie about the Arab whack-jobs in our midst who enjoy blowing themselves up with as many innocents as possible so they can go home to Allah and 72 virgins (or whatever).
The truth hurts; I understand. So just keep telling yourself the movie's "racist propaganda" when it's more accurate to say that it reflects the obvious truth.
My 150 (or so) favorite movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/ -
fit_ov_fury — 10 years ago(September 11, 2015 11:30 AM)
I thought Yank soldiers swear an oath to uphold the US constitution not an oath of allegiance to the president. Therefore he wasn't following orders, he was breaking his oath and denying a US citizen of his constitutional rights. Terrorist or no.
-
BandicootBurn — 9 years ago(December 27, 2016 08:32 AM)
It is just my opinion but I hated the ending to this movie, I don't think it was thought out well enough.. I mean the terrorists destroyed a whole FBI Building which had many innocent law enforcers inside even killing Anthony Hubbard's friends and colleagues yet he was more interested in the 'unlawful' death of Tariq? Who for all we know may have not been innocent at all? They never tell you the truth about that and the ending just seemed really unsatisfying.
-
TruthXSeeker — 9 years ago(January 19, 2017 08:45 PM)
Willis' character was a puppet. The true villains were the terrorists and the president for declaring martial law when swore an oath to DEFEND and PROTECT the US Constitution. It would have been cool if they had shown a news reporter talking about impeachment charges on the president.