To a first approximation, a character in a movie is interesting to the degree their motive is strong without being legible. Think Ahab or Tyler Durden, Phil Connors in Groundhog Day, Andy Dufrese. If there’s a clear motive, it tends to be nominal (whale, anarchy, girl, escape)
The stylization point holds, but the motive opacity is just tactical misdirection, not illegibility. A truly illegible villain of that type is the Joker in The Dark Knight... seems to be a thief, but then burns the money and claims to just “do things”
-
-
Hmm. This points to an interesting discussion: “weakly illegible,” because information was withheld; and “strongly illegible,” even with all information available, because there is a kernel of motivation that feels consistent but cannot be articulated.
-
Exactly. We get a sense of the Joker’s motivation as some sort of cosmic order-chaos thing, but its manifestation in his behavior is unpredictable without being inconsistent. The Jokerly resolution to a situation feels right whether he wins or not
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.