Just saw a heist movie. My question is should a writer end with the bad guys getting away with all the money or should a writer be moral and let the bad guys l0se in the end? I don't feel like using the spoiler button but I was wondering while watching this recent movie if they were going to get away with it and then who I thought was the MC got killed before the end and he was a big name actor. I thought good, he shouldn't have won. I'm in the middle of it so don't know ending yet.
Not writing, watching. Just watched a movie, "Triple Frontier". Wondering how it would end. Again, not wanting to use "spoilers" just yet.
Are the bad guys good bad guys or bad bad guys? Do they have a sympathetic reason for staging the heist, or is it all about greed? How bad are the people they're robbing? From an ethical standpoint I should say that it's wrong and no, they shouldn't get away with it. But when it comes to entertainment I have a flexible morality on some points.
Well in this movie they were ex-marines that just needed money for everyday life. They robbed bad guys, but stealing is stealing in the bible.
IMO people get a little too caught up in putting real life morality into fiction at times. I also am a Christian but I see nothing wrong with writing a book where the thieves get away in the end. But if you'd feel bad about doing that, aright, go ahead and let them get caught. Up to you.
This reminds me of a conversation I had with one of my friends in an RP. "Did you really think crime would pay?" "Well, to be honest I'm making a pretty good paycheck..." Don't think too much about it, connect the dots and let the plan reveal itself. The "bad guy" getting away with it is often a setup for a sequel
Crime is the initially easier path in most cases, and will be successful most of the time depending on how egregious the lawbreaking is. They will make a ton of money and be able to continue repeatedly. But it's like rolling a twenty sided die. Eventually, everyone rolls a one. Then all hell breaks loose.
Sometimes it does pay. I don't know what this whole "morality" thing is regarding writing. You're not writing an autobiography. If I write a thriller about a serial killer, it doesn't make me some crazy psychopath, it's just a novel. If they're just scum of the Earth antagonists with no sympathetic motivations, they can still win. Just write it well.
If you really care about morality, you wouldn't watch, read or write a crime novel - regardless of what ultimately happens to the characters, you're still normalizing immoral behavior by treating it as entertainment.
I have to totally disagree with that. Watching a crime movie doesn't mean you are normalizing immoral behavior. You could definitely be watching because you enjoy seeing bad guys get their just deserts. You really think every time someone watches an episode of CSI they are normalizing immoral behavior?? Come on, you're going just a little too far there.
With no disrespect to you, @EBohio, this raises the question of whether responding to a troll normalizes trolling. It may, or it may not, but it's certainly what the troll wanted you to do when they posted their bait.
I didn't say that it makes you want to commit crimes, but you are taking pleasure from something that depicts crime. The moral high ground would be rejecting all of it. That doesn't mean I disapprove of you enjoying crime drama, but if you recognize that it is just entertainment you should consider following through by allowing the author to do what they feel is right to make the best possible entertainment instead of imposing limitations that aren't about artistry.
You aren't saying @Fallow is a troll are you? Because I believe that he believes what he said is true.
Actually it is a sign of the times. In the old Hollwood days, movies had to end with the proper moral message. I'm sure there are some before it but the first movie I can remember with the crooks getting away with something is the first "Italian Job". I can also remember a teacher showing us much disapproval because we were cheering for Bonnie And Cylde to get away and jeered and laughed at the cops. (actually I'm surprised she could get away with showing us that film in school, the one with Warren Beatty).
Arguably, I am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang (1932) is probably one of the first showing the criminal getting away with his crimes, but with less enthusiasm than Italian Job.
Normally I prefer the moral ending - Heat. There are a few, especially comedies, when them getting away with it - Quick Change - suited the style of the story and made it less about glorifying the criminal or high escapist fantasy. I think it depends on style, tone, and what the writer hopes to achieve though. But I was never a big fan of heist films. They prey on your greed and usually don't offer a lot of insight into the subject.
Yeah, it is pretty much the heist films or comedies that I'll let the immoral ending pass. I mean you gotta pull for Sinatra and the boys in Oceans 11
Here's a cute list: https://www.imdb.com/list/ls006470652/ Robin Hood makes you think. What, on a technicality? Quoting a post about me with this doesn't qualify?
"Sting" deserves #1 but some of them I disagree with. For instance how can you say "Thelma & Louise" is a crime pays film if they die in the end? You can't.
They are neither caught nor punished. The "pay" is just that they kept their dignity and worldview to the end, which they chose.
But they would have been caught if they didn't drive off the cliff. The cops causing you to commit suicide is crime not paying. (The author just didn't let them go walking off into the sunset).
