He is a villain, just not a very good one. If you had to put him as hero or villain, it's a villain. But being the protaganist and all, I can't see him as an effective villain. I'd leave him, Corleone, and anyone else who is ambiguous off the list. If it isn't clear, then it isn't a good hero/villian.

Now that isn't to say it isn't a good character. But they could have just made a list of the best characters then and divided them into good and bad categories.

Travis refuses sex from an underage girl.
Travis kills pimp & his gang backup to free underage girl.
Travis gives lotta money so underage girl can go back home.
Travis doesn't take advantage of chick he had the hots for who now seems to want to get laid by him.

Yeah, he's a villian in a Hollywood liberal's mind!

Travis takes his date to a porno.
Travis stalks said date.
Travis plans to kill presidential candidate.
Travis quite deliberately starts bloody shootout that could have easily have ended with underage girl's brains on the floor. (And Travis's too, which is arguably why he did it in the first place.)

Yup, that's everyone's idea of a hero ....

I'll steer clear of the underage-sex thing, but are you saying Travis is a hero for killing a bunch of people to free an 'innocent' girl?

Well, if my daughter was the one in the movie and the out come was the same. I wouldn't want Travis to go to jail for killing the people who were pimping my daughter.
I don't have liberal views, so I don't have the "this is a free country and my daughter is mature enough to make her own mind up and nobody should violate her civil rights" additude.

I hope you don't think I'm picking on you, but I just think this is an odd attitude. If it was Travis' daughter and he did what he did, maybe I could understand. Even if its not his daughter, if he just kidnapped her, fine - but he killed at least 3 people if I recall (Its been a while since I saw it) and I just can't justify that. And neither does the film - it clearly shows that Travis slowly getting mentally unhinged.

At any rate, if anyone truly believes that Travis is 'right' morally, then I assume you're out killing pimps and rescuing girls, because they are all someone's daughters.

The U.S.A. just got rid of Saddam because he killed his own people. And they found the thousands of bodies to prove it.
But I know not every American was in favor of this as the protesters disrupted the city streets.
My views are of the 70% of this country.

Bickle a hero, antihero, or villain? Depends on what definition you go by.

hero:
A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life: soldiers and nurses who were heroes in an unpopular war.
Not a hero. Although in the twisted world of the movie his act is considered a noble risk, this was meant as irony.

The principal male character in a novel, poem, or dramatic presentation.
Hero fits here.

antihero:
protagonist who lacks the characteristics that would make him a hero (or her a heroine)
This is an exact fit.

villain:
A wicked or evil person; a scoundrel.
By this definition, Bickle may be a villain.

A dramatic or fictional character who is typically at odds with the hero.
Not a villain by this definition, because there is no real hero for him to be at odds with.

One of my favorite movies, a true classic.

In my estimation , Travis is definitely not a villain , by any means.

In my book , a hero.

Not an antihero , Not a racist - A hero , pure and simple.




Just one man's honest opinion

wm lopez is a hero.

He's the hero DVDtalk needs, but not the one we deserve.

He wasn't a villain, but definitely not a hero. He was mentally ill and if he really wanted to save Jodie Foster's character he wouldn't have massacred those people in front of her.

As for Michael Corleone's character being mentioned on the first page, GF1 he's the "good guy" for most of the film, but once he goes on the offensive towards the end he becomes a villain.

In GFII he's a villain through and through, but because the odds are stacked against him we root for him.

I would give anything, ANYTHING, to have wm lopez back here.

He brought the heat, man. This place is a polar bear's nutsack. In February.

The basic definition of anti-hero. Even though they are criminals like Billy the Kid, Bonnie and Clyde or Butch and Sundance, you take their side over law enforcement to the point you actually dislike the good guys.

A good recent example of anti-heroes are Vin Diesel and his gang in the original Fast and Furious.
They are criminals out hijacking trucks but the audience doesn't want them caught. Who does the audience see as a villain? The poor guy defending his truck with a shotgun.

I was going to post this, but realized that someone beat me to it by 14 years.

Walked into this thread like:

You know who else was not a villain? William Murdoch, gosh darn it.

I guess that comes down to if monsters are really villains. Were the horrors Murdoch committed just according to his nature?

Cybill Shepherd was unbelievably good in this movie. Did she get a lot of praise back then? Because I think she deserved it, if she did, or deserved more praise if she didn't get praise.

But, um, yeah. Travis Bickle is not a hero.

Isn't there more to it than just rooting for the main character?
An anti-hero from wikipedia, is "a character who lacks conventional heroic traits, that may do the right thing, but not because it's driven by moral convictions."

Wikipedia: "The villain usually is the antagonist (though can be the protagonist), the character who tends to have a negative effect on other characters.

Michael in Godfather II is pretty much a villain, IMO. It's only because he's the main character, the star, and because he's portrayed in a cool manner by Al Pacino that we see him as something other than a villain. If the movie is titled "The Godfather's Wife" and the main character is Kay, Michael's same actions make him look like the villain.

Michael kills his previously mentally challenged brother, has a prostitute murdered just to frame a crooked politician, and he holds Pentagali's brother hostage.

I get that usually the "good guys" in these types of films are made to look worse than the bad guys. That happened in Al Pacino's other movie Scarface.
The one cop we see more than once and he's crooked and on Frank's payroll. The Columbian drug lord is willing to kill children but not Tony. Therefore he's a "good guy" or anti-hero, even though he corrupts his sister, he murders his best friend, tries to steal his bosses girlfriend, was going to assassinate a reporter, helped destroy the community in Miami with his drug dealing, etc etc.

That's how real life is. As long as you can identify or admire someone bad, and as long as you can rationalize there are even worse people out there, then that bad person doesn't seem so bad anymore.

It's a problem with the way we think.

Where's Buttmunker when we need him?

There has to be some kind of conflict, protagonist/antagonist in hero/villain stories.

With anti-heroes the good guy/bad guy roles are reversed. Or, you favor one bad guy over another bad guy.

In Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid the roles are reversed. They are traditional villians, outlaws who rob banks and trains. The traditional heroes would be the posse led by the Texas Ranger in the white hat and Bolivian army. However the audience views Butch and Sundance as the good guys and law enforcement, especially the guy in the white hat as villains.

The Godfather has no good guys. The conflict is The Corleone family against everybody else and the audience always roots for the Corleones. We take their side in the war between the families. We even side with them against the movie producer Wooltz who comes across as a bigger asshole than they are. The crooked cop deserved to get shot by Michael, etc.

In Godfather II we still want Michael to prevail against his enemies. The senator they frame and the senate committee come off as bad guys. We want to see Michael come out on top, even if it's evil. If you're looking forward to what Michael is going to dish out to his enemies you're rooting for him.
It's like when the teenagers are so stupid and obnoxious in a slasher movie you root for them to get killed.

The Wild Bunch has both. They are pretty low life characters with no redeeming values. We want them to prevail over the good guys(the posse), and another bunch of bad guys(the Mexican general and his troops).



Scarface is more of a character study than good vs evil story.