What is the difference between, say, eh...
... a hypocrite, and the kind of hypocrite who for instance does something wrong while protesting against another person doing something wrong and someone who say was simply wrong and did wrong but had few redeeming qualities when they did something right? And if we mention film examples...
In the Quentin Tarantino's multiple-award-winning 90s classic "Pulp Fiction" (1994), is Samuel L.Jackson's character, who earlier killed people, but later stopped a robbery in the restaurant and found redemption, a hypocrite? Or is he, say, a bad man who later did some good and redeemed himself?
In the film "Straw Dogs" (1971) by Sam Peckinpah, sorry for the sensitive subjects, are those villagers hypocrites for doing that terrible deed to Susan George's character BUT later hunt down the "pervert" Henry Niles who also, by the way, earlier strangled a girl? (One reviewer on imdb in 2000 claimed that, yes, they were hypocrites.)
Is Alex DeLarge in Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange" (1971) a hypocrite in any way in his actions in the movie? (I would argue at least sometimes he is, yeah).
One of my controversially favorite sacred cow subjects in cinema. Are female characters who did say bad deeds to men also hypocritical, including any "double standard-oriented" scenarios? Is Glenn Close's character in "Fatal Attraction" (1987) one at all, come to think of it, is Michael Douglas'?
What about that man in the great New Zealand drama "Once Were Warriors" (1994) who beats up his wife and then later deservedly beats up a man who molested his daughter? Hypocrite or a redeemable figure?
Cheers, thanks.