Lon Scott's obsession *possible spoiler*
Is Lon Scott's father O'Brien? It would definitely explain his unhealthy obsession with Swagger. I've never read the book so I don't know if this is covered in it.
shareI've not read it the book but from what I read online there was a backstory. Here is an excerpt from the book's wikipedia page: Art accidentally shot his son, crippling Lon from the waist down. He then proceeded to take his own life, with the same rifle.
Personally I would have preferred them to give Lon a brief backstory that would have explained his bitterness and competitive nature. Truly good writers would have used this to give the character additional layers but I guess they wanted him to be more enigmatic. This way we didn't even get to know why he is missing that leg (or did I miss a scene?). Anyways his final scene was indeed amazing and ironic in a grotesque way. Also the sniper VS marksman dialogue was nice.
I guess this is one of those shows that features both good and lazy writing.
Personally I would have preferred them to give Lon a brief backstory that would have explained his bitterness and competitive nature. Truly good writers would have used this to give the character additional layers
How much time would you have liked for the writers to take to script this completely unnecessary back story? We know Lon Scott is rich, inherited his money, was crippled before he was old enough to serve in the military, cares about no one but himself, is stimulated by violence, doesn't care if his decision lead to the death of his employees or anyone else, and has made it his life mission to prove he's a better man than Bob Lee Swagger. I think that's a lot to know. The writers did a great job working that into the story without waylaying the plot.
Who cares why he lost his leg?
It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it.
RIP Roger Ebert
share
How much time would you have liked for the writers to take to script this completely unnecessary back story?
Not much, maybe a few sentences. And it wouldn't have been unnecessary. The writers themselves teased this backstoy in episode 8. Just remember the sniper VS marksman dialogue. Bob Lee says that "fathers have their way of screwing up their sons" to which Lon reacts: "They sure do".
Who cares why he lost his leg?
The audience cares because that too is referenced in the same scene. He talks about his "accident" and we never get to find out what that accident was. Maybe I'm overthinking it but when you have a crippled character with a leg missing the minimum is that you explain why that leg is gone. If they didn't intend to give an explanation then why bother portraying him with one leg? He could have just been a healthy guy.
Anyways I get your point too. Sometimes simplicity is good but I'm not sure that in this case it helped. Sure there was some elementary excitement to the rivalry between him and Swagger but I just wished that there was a bit more to this character than professional envy.
The irony of the final confrontation and the sniper VS marksman dynamics made it enjoyable but I kinda missed something.
share
The back story about Bob Lee's father is book two in the source material novels and I am assuming will be the plot of Season 2...thus the remark.
I agree that it would have been just as easy to make Lon a two footed man. I know in the movie his equivalent character is a man in a wheel chair. However, except for the handicap and that they were both the real shooter, there's hardly anything else in common. I didn't read the novel, so maybe the answer is there. Between the movie and the series the character of Lon Scott goes in a totally different direction and the series greatly improved the drama.
The only way to get a definitive answer as to why Lon had a prosthetic leg is to hope the show creator, John Hlavin, who sometimes comments here will reply.
But I think the background we got on Lon was more than sufficient. We learned everything I stated in my earlier comment and that's quite a bit. He's not the main character. We certainly know much more about him than Agent Memphis.
It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it.
RIP Roger Ebert
I'm glad that you found it sufficient and that I could convince you that he could have been two footed.
I think I liked the idea of the character and the imagery surrounding him more than his actual character development which was kinda lacking. The prostethic metal legs and the blown up face (with the skull clearly visible)reminded me of the Terminator which is always good.
I understand that he was this overly competitive guy with good instincts (he even sensed that Bob Lee is scoping them outside his mansion) but I missed the explaination about that leg. Heck, they even used CGI to make it look realistic.