LogFAQs > #933106721

I want to try and inject a serious post for spudger or whoever to respond to

The film depicts the failure of the city to care for its disabled (mentally or otherwise) as a serious issue, and Arthur partially takes this out on wealthy people who did what they wanted to. I don't believe the intent of the film was for us to root for Arthur at all; it was intended (partially) as a cautionary tale on what happens if

A: You neglect people who need help, in this case, funding social programs (Arthur goes well off the deep end once he loses any/all support he had)

B: You don't care for people. There's a ton of stuff in the film demonstrating the importance of caring for others and plenty of ways Arthur's life wouldn't have gone completely off the rails had people simply not been so hostile or cruel.

Wayne is definitely something of an antagonist I don't necessarily disagree with Trump parallels, especially since (if memory serves) Phillips said they'd be some "commentary" in the film about it. I don't think he's really the exact thesis of the movie though

But yes, it's pretty liberal. Rich people in the film are depicted with a bit more disdain, Arthur is somewhat sympathetic in spots, and the ways to help him, by the film's logic, involve being more empathetic towards others and supporting programs that can help mentally ill people.

---

Enjoy movies and television? Check out my blog! I do reviews and analyses.
http://fictionrantreview.wordpress.com/ (The Force Awakens spoiler review up!)