Chris Pine's character could not have been more obnoxious. I would have taken the first opportunity available to pick up a gun (or heavy object) and rid the world of that sadistic, uncaring, selfish A-hole!!! Same goes for his girlfriend, Bobby for not speaking up when he decided to just take off and desert the little girl and her father... Guess Karma caught up w/that bimbo too though when he decided to boot her infected ass out on the side of the road!
first: if you think you can honestly say how you would react in a situation like this - you are delusional and/or a liar.
second: he was doing everything he could to save what family he had left. family. not some random man and daughter who are already likely doomed. the world is over the least he can do is try and save the few bits of humanity (family) he has left.
he was the farthest thing from selfish and uncaring there could of been. he gave up his innocence and humanity to save his brother. he did the nasty dirty things that are necessary for survival, to save his family from having to.
this is all explained/alluded to in the movie. you should have watched it before reviewing.
Cris Pine's character was selfish. His girlfriend gets sick so he abandons her. He gets sick so he does everything he can to live, despite knowing he has no chance, and risks infecting his brother for no reason at all.
Yeah, he did stuff to try and save them all, but he was also unnecessarily stupid and obnoxious while doing it. I kept thinking, "If I got stuck in a post-apocalyptic world with such a stuck-in-testosterone-addled-adolescence jerk, I'd shoot him myself just on principle."
But the thing that bugged me the most about both Bobby and Brian was how they tried to stick around even after they knew they were infected. Suddenly the people they supposedly cared about didn't matter so much after all. They should have walked away. The infected are already dead, right?
Dont blame the actor, blame the writer and the script, he's just doing what they tell him to do.
Pine's a damn good actor and pulled off this role very well. Not every movie needs a good guy main character. His character had some ounces of good in him sprinkled with an ego, selfishness and attitude, but being in a life and death situation such as this it's easy to speak on what his actions should be from the sidelines.
He gets sick so he does everything he can to live, despite knowing he has no chance, and risks infecting his brother for no reason at all.
What I got out of that was that he wanted his brother to shoot him. He didn't want to left alone to die slowly over weeks so he forced his brother to shoot him. That's why he said "I taught you everything you know" or something right before. He know he would shoot him.
reply share
Chris Pine's character was not exactly an a-hole, but he was what we call in this country 'a bit of a dick'. Not hateful so much as...being a dick. His first two lines, especially the one about warm beer, were delivered terribly by Mr Pine, which didn't make for a good start.
I actually thought Bobby was the only somewhat likable character. Yes, she didn't speak up against leaving the girl and her father, but I think that might have been due to her still being in shock after getting blood coughed in her face. I guess she was just terrified and ready to lose the girl at that point, which I at least think is somewhat understandable, she was obivously shaken. The rest of them I had absolutely no symapathy for. If anything I disliked the rich blonde girl the most, she struck me as JUST as selfish and heartless as Brian. She never took a moral stance against any of the horrible things Brian did. Notice how she didn't even flinch when he shot and killed those two poor women, she just immediately began to take their gas. She even told the younger guy 'they would have never given it to us', like she was justifying the fact that he murdered them in cold blood to get their gas. I was thoroughly disappointed that she made it and never got what was coming to her. She if anyone deserved karma.
It was both sad and satisfying to see Brian's reaction to getting abandoned. Honestly, I can't understand how anyone could bear to do a such a thing to a loved one, to leave them alone to die a painful, slow death all alone. I understand by staying with them you might be risking your own life, but how one could abandon someone they claim to LOVE is beyond me. I can say positively, with no doubt in my mind that I would NEVER do that to my brother. I love my little brother more than I love anyone else in my life, and I would honestly rather die with him than abandon him to die alone. And don't anyone try to tell me there is no way I can know how I would react in a situation like that, because you don't know me or what my brother means to me. To me it is unthinkable to treat the few people I sincerely love the way the characters in this movie treated each other.
Kate wasn't "like" she was justifying it. She was justifying it because it was the logical thing to do. Not moral, mind you, but logical.
Bobby got what she deserved. In a fairly literal sense.
And no, you can never say that you know you will never abandon your brother. That is just stupid. You are stupid. However, I entirely believe that there are people like that in the world and you may be one of them. Fair enough. But you can't say that you know, you just feel quite strongly, that is all.
You don't know me. I love my little brother as if he were my own child. I've taken care of him since he were a baby. Most mothers would NEVER abandon their child in a situation like that. Did you see the father of that daughter abandon her as soon as she got sick?
Don't try to tell me I wouldn't know how I'd react. I KNOW. You're the stupid one who tries to project your cowardness and selfishness on everyone else. Just because you doubt whether or not you'd have the spine to stick by your own kin or if you'd abandon them by the road to die on their own, doesn't mean I don't know what I'd do in that situation. I KNOW there are certain people I would NEVER abandon, because I'd rather die alongside them than go on living and remembering how I abandoned them and left them to die a SLOW, PAINFUL death all by themselves. The idea of my little brother having to face such a horrific death on his own is more than I could bear. That's the truth. You are in no positition to try to tell me differently. Just speak for yourself and shut the hell up about me.
As I said, you can be extremely confident, and that is fine. And clearly, we know for a fact that in real life, numerous individuals have done exactly what you think you will do.
But nonetheless, it is stupid of you to say that it is a absolute uncertainty. It is just plain disrespectable to say that. I am in every position to tell you (not try to, but flat out tell you) differently. Because guess what? I am a better person than you (in this strictly limited aspect).
Ok, to use a extreme analogy/example to get my point across, are you a man of science? Do you believe in science? If you do, do you understand the doctrine of fallibility (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallibility)? If you do and you agree with it, then explain why are you so special that you are exempt?
Augustus - there is merit in your argument, but must you be such a dick about it?
There is nothing "stupid" about believing - even knowing- that you won't abandon someone you love should an event like this one occur. Maybe the relationships in your life are rather expendable, who knows? I would rather have bite me (unfortunate screen name and all) for a brother than you. You think you're being practical with that mindset, but living your life by that doctrine you're so fond of alludes to someone with extremely low expectations and an ever-present welcome wagon for failure.
Does the possibility exist that something could change in the interim to change a strongly held belief? Sure. But the possibility also exists that nothing will change to significantly impact that singular belief. I immediately thought of my mother when I considered this kind of scenario, and I know with absolute certainty that I would not leave her alone to die in such a manner. The only thing - and I mean the ONLY thing that could even potentially make me waver is if she tried to convince me to leave her, and even then I wouldn't do it. It would be my honor to give my life ensuring that she does not leave this life alone. That probably makes me stupid. That's fine. I'll take stupid over evolved, or whatever you consider yourself.
I am not being a dick about it. I only got as aggressive as I did only when Bite me was being even more stupid.
You seem to think that I am claiming moral superiority or some such. Let me tell you I am not. In fact, there is even a certain nobility in your stand (not in Bite me's stand, since he is stupid and stupidity doesn't play well with nobility). I can entirely understand your position.
What I am merely saying is that we are not allowed to honestly claim absolute certainty in our thinking(with minor exceptions like logical and mathematical doctrines), since by the very nature of things, science does not permit such absolute belief. We must always be willing to challenge our thinking in response to new ideas. [I presume you believe in science]
You seem to be willing to do that, albeit reluntantly. So, that is fine. You are not stupid. You just think differently from me, which is entirely legitimate. Bite me on the other hand is stupid, since he proclaims absolute certainty. Hence, my glee in denouncing his stupidity.
This is reinforced when you call bite-me stupid yet again in your last post.
You *may* be technically correct , but the point you are trying to make is so irrelevent, so minor , so intangible that you are not 'morally' correct
I am a 'man of science' . I can see the small distinction you are trying to make - and then gettting all shouty like a kid having a tantrum when no one acknowledges it.
I've even been to that wiki page to check what you are blathering about First off its not hard science its a "philosophical principle" The gist of which is " absolute certainty about knowledge is impossible."
I'm not sure i agree with that: 2+2 will always be four, i think . But I accept various 'beliefs' and even scientific principles and "facts" have been found to be wrong . but many havent . I'm pretty sure the world is round.
This is crap along the lines of "God exists because you cant prove he dosent"
Bite me is talking about feelings and family bonds and you're pi$5ing all over it with philosophical bull$hit . In an incredibly agressive way!
I'm going to work tomorrow - I'm 99.9% sure. I realise my car may break or i might get hit by a meteor. But to all intents and purposes its a fact. I know it. I dont need some nerdy kid shouting philosophical constucts at me. (Bite me even specified that back in his/her first post) You must be like Sheldon from The Big Bang Theory, but with with all that agression mixed in - therfore probably totally unable to grasp Bite-me's point.
Look. Why can’t we be more mature about this? I am not being a dick about this (unless you mean that I am being rude and aggressive) since I am just being honest and calling a spade a spade. I mean, let’s be fair. Bite-me is stupid, right? It seems rather unjust of you to denounce me for being a dick when I am merely calling out Bite-me’s stupidity, and not being particularly mean when doing so!
As you noted, I am right, completely and absolutely. And Bite-me is wrong. And that is what is important. I am not interested in letting him down easy when he is the one who proclaimed absolute knowledge (please note that he did so in his initial post. I did not gloat him into this).
“I can say positively, with no doubt in my mind that I would NEVER do that to my brother.” “And don't anyone try to tell me there is no way I can know how I would react in a situation like that”
You cannot very well then claim that we should not use such an absolute standard when he is the very one who brought it up to begin with. Hardly seems reasonable, does it?
Plus, do try not to resort to strawmen arguments. I specifically stated “with minor exceptions like logical and mathematical doctrines”. Thus, 2+2 will indeed be 4.
So, basically, let us all calm down and just have a gentlemen’s agreement that Bite-me is stupid. It is the right thing to do (and I think you know it, but are just reluctant because it “feels” wrong).
alrighty then. lets all chill and have a beer. I came back to delete my post cos i'm not in the habit of raggin on people online, but seeing as you've replied I'll leave it
Actually the brother was a bigger jerk. He spend all the movie all high and mighty, 'how could you do that', and then he goes and does the same. At least Kate wasn't related or even attatched to any of the others. I do hope that dog got him infected (he got as much blood in him as Bobby did from the little girl, so).
He should have go on his own and fend for himself if he was that bothered, or STFU.
Yeah, how dare Daniel to act like the very sheltered young man he was instead of throwing away his good nature and morals in favor of going full-commando-take-no-prisoners mode the moment the pandemic broke! *facepalm*
I don't know if you were too busy droling over Chris Pine's abs to notice, but Danny is easily the most affected by the events going on at the beginning of / during the movie. The doctor choosing eutanasia for the group of sick but very healthy looking kids, Brian ditching Frank and his dying daughter in a ghost town, the cold blooded murder of two women for some gas, etc... All logical and necessary course of actions to ensure their survival, sure, but he isn't as desensitised as his older brother yet (nor has given up hope as Kate had by that point), has very likely not seen too many corpses to be so, and still refuses to abandon all hope and give in to the kind of world Brian's alredady living in. He isn't "all talk", he's desperately clinging to life prior pandemic; Daniel invariably tries to do the "right" (law-abiding, compasionate) thing - his primary instinct-, until there is not longer an alternative (he may be sensitive, but not stupid).
As the film becomes more and more dark, so does Danny. Bobby's getting infected is a hard wake up call, yet he doesn't totally give up and go "survival of the fittest" until he losses Brian to the disease and is confronted with his brother hipocricy - Brian has no issues leaving their parents to root WITHOUT TELLING HIM (look at Danny's utterly shocked face in that scene; is Brian who desperately wants to believe Danniel "knew" and would have done the same thing to survive), abandoning a child AND Bobby to die alone, yet he's ready to risk his own brother's life without so much as a second thought because the rules don't apply to him. Is also very selfish of Brian to force Daniel to kill him; one could argue he was trying to prepare Danny for life without him but, as a result, Daniel loses the only thing worth saving - himself, as the beach scene so blatanty puts it. He and Kate survive, but a what cost?
Yes you are right he had morale's probably more than his brother ever had but he was no longer in a world that run by them or the law. He had to be tougher to survive and that is exactly what his brother was trying to do protect him and to toughen him up. For a world that no longer cared except for themselves and those closest to them.
As for their parents brian says that he had to go up to their parents roo he had to do the dirty work to protect his little brother for the horrors that is the disease.
HUMANITY HAS ALWAYS FEARED THAT WHICH IS DIFFERENT
I don't get all these negative comments about the character. He tries very hard to keep everyone safe and resorts to different means to help them survive. You notice that no one majorly objects when he does things such as leaving the bloke and his daughter and leaving Bobbi. I certainly would in his position, what would be the point in keeping someone with you who is going to possibly endanger the rest of you? Compassion asides, it would endanger his brother who he is protecting as well as he can.
The film sort of falls apart a bit when Brian shoots the two women in the car, I can see why he does it but it stretches his character from being ruthless to being a flat out killer. As soon as he fired those bullets I knew his character was doomed. However, I think if there were two angry guys in the car who he shot no one would be as bothered about it half as much. Wasn't very Christian of those women though!
In reality I think he would have survived more than anyone. At the end he is asking for his brother to kill him, which is fair. I saw a few posts wondering why as soon as people were infected they seemed to stop thinking logically, I would imagine this is due to the fever symptoms of the virus.
what would be the point in keeping someone with you who is going to possibly endanger the rest of you?
Love.
Like the surviving brother Danny says at the end, "I'm all alone now". I take that to mean more than just being physically alone (and he had companionship with the woman anyway), he's alone with what he's done and totally empty.
If Brian had stayed with Bobby he still would have died anyway, but at least they would have had each other. At least they would have died in peace. At least they wouldn't have compromised their souls. Instead they just kept leaving each other when one became a burden, and got nothing out of it. Just more and more emptiness. I think this is what the story Brian relates at the end alludes to as well, the one about burying all the people who weren't dead yet.
reply share
No Brian and Bobbi are stupid. It's after the apocalypse. There are no more doctors, hospitals, cops, paramedics, firefighters, tow-truck companies, or mechanics. So what do we see Brian doing? Drinking and driving, driving like an idiot, driving the golf-cart like and idiot, standing over a stagnant pool that even if it didn't have a rotting corpse in it is full of bacteria - perfect for infections off all kind.
Bobbi isn't any better. Slugging Brian so hard (while driving) that he looses control of the vehicle and almost kills them and doing other stupid things that she should know better.
Evidently they both fail to understand that living in a post-apocalyptic world requires you to be more careful. Read some basic survival literature. One of the things that I have never forgotten from my Army training (and that wasn't very comprehensive) is do not walk on obstacles. They can shift and you can end up with a broken leg or ankle. Avoid stagnant water. Bacteria lives in stagnant water and if you have any cuts (very likely) you could be in some trouble. Move carefully and try to think out your moves. Brian and Bobbi were just swinging through like it was a party. Idiots.
The rich girl is something of a bitch, but she's better suited for survival in that brave new world.