Travis Bickle is NOT a Villain!!!!!!
 

Did those people at AFI even see Taxi Driver??

I don't know exactly what you're referring to, but it's absolutely true that he's not a villain. He's an antihero.

I agree with you. Same with Michael Corleone. Labeling them as "Villains" is trivializing and not particularly accurate, but I guess they didn't want to exclude those characters.

you beat me to it, word for word. :up: But to clarify he's referring to AFI's 100 years of heroes and villains list.

Well, he's not exactly a hero either. He doesn't fit comfortably into either category. Who cares? It's just a list.

Hold on you two! Travis Bickle is both an antihero *and* a villain.

Mmmmm, good villain!

When I hear villain I think antagonist, and Travis Bickel was definitely not the antagonist. Antihero seems more suited.

I agree with the Travis Bickle thing...I thought the same thing, but Michael Corleone was nominated for The Godfather Part II - I think in that one (but not in the other two films), he is clearly a villian.

Not quite ... Antagonist is the opposite of protagonist, and villain is the opposite of hero. But it's not always the case that the protagonist is a hero and the antagonist is a villain.

Take Hannibal Lecter in Hannibal. He's the protagonist of the movie, but he's also a villain.

You sure about that? Definately debatable.

I wonder if the time will come when we have to make a list of the best anti-heros in film history? Seems to be the way society is heading.

Harry Lime's not a villain either then. :)

Travis is a villain. The point of Taxi Driver is that there is no hero, we're given only a bad guy to identify with, so we begin to see him as (if not the hero) the protagonist. Rest assured he is a bad dude.

If he's not a villain then what is he. The fact of the matter is that anti-heros are villains only we like them

No... he just doesn't like cuckoo clocks.

Quote:

---

Travis is a villain.

---

I disagree. In the context of the mean streets (sorry) of NY, Travis is not a villain, at least not in my book. I can relate to his alienation.

and I can relate to Captain Hook (I mean he lost a hand to that stupid crocidile). Just because you can relate doesn't make them a hero.

The horror of Taxi Driver is that Scorsese sticks us with this nasty guy who we begin to understand because we're given no one else, no life ring, to identify with.

If he's not a villain then what is he...a hero?

Of course all this arguing is stupid. The point of the film was to rip down all the H'wood notions of white hat/black hat, good guy/bad guy. We're supposed to have trouble categorizing this guy.

That's not true at all. An anti-hero is defined by heroic acts performed by a person lacking traditional heroic qualities (courage, valour, compassion). Ash, John McClaine, Harry Stamper, Irwin Fletcher - they are all anti-heroes. AN antihero always ends up fighting on the side of good.

Travis Bickle, Alex, the entire cast of Starship Troopers, Tyler Durden - they may be protagonists, we may empathize with them, but in no way do they fall into the category of anti-hero.

Well now you're just wrong. John McClaine and Harry Stamper are both heros. They may be unlikely heros, but they are as prototypically "heroic" as any character in any movie...ever.

They are not prototypical heroes ... Hollywood just has a preference for anti-heroes and always has. It is actually quite difficult to quickly think of a movie where a true hero exists. Perhaps you need to revisit some classic literature to redefine your view of a hero rather than base it solely on what Hollywood has to show you.

If you mean some kind of pure of heart , perfect in every way, handed down from the gods, aryan superman hero, then you're right there aren't too many in Hollywood.

Just because a hero is an "unlikely" hero doesn't mean he's an anti-hero. Harry Lime is an anti-hero. He's a racqueteer and responsible for the deaths of children. Harry Stamper and John McClaine are good men. They're not immoral or decadent. They're family men brought into a situation that demands them to be heroic. If Harry Stamper and John McClaine aren't heros then no one on the AFI list is a hero.

By your criteria Indiana Jones, James Bond, Han Solo, and Clarise Starling aren't heros because they all have dark sides or are not likely in the hero department.

Given your criteria there's only one character on the list: Superman

They put butch cassidy and the sundance kid as heros.

Travis is a villain, it's just that he ended up killing someone worse than himself. It's clear early in the film that Travis is going to kill someone, and it very nearly was the political candidate. He decides to become a killer, trains for it and kills. It was a premeditated act. Who he killed wasn't that important.

Now Bonnie & Clyde, I'll argue in the context of the movie they were not villains.

So, if Travis is considered the villain then who is the hero? New York's mean streets? Harvey Keitel? There is always a hero and a villain in every movie, there cannot be one without the other. That is not debatable. Travis is an anti-hero. This is like calling Vin Diesel's character in Pitch Black a villain or Seth Gecko in From Dusk Till Dawn. This shouldn't even be debatable for Taxi Driver as Travis follows the basic formula of a hero by:

Bullpucky. Who is the hero in My Dinner With Andre. Who is the villain?

Yeah, there are a bunch of movies without villains, heroes, or both. THAT's not debatable.

Who's the hero in Unforgiven?

Again, there's a difference between the protagonist -- the main character, the guy who drives the action forward -- and a hero.

What do you think of this?

Mr. Blonde: Villain
Mr. Pink: Villain
Mr. Orange: Hero
Mr. White: Anti-Hero

Then again, Mr. Orange, did shoot that pregnant lady...

Pregnant lady who shot Mr. Orange: Hero?