MovieChat Forums > Don't Breathe (2016) Discussion > Were we supposed to sympathise with the ...

Were we supposed to sympathise with the robbers?

posted 8 years ago by Karnivore (29)
5 replies | jump to latest

They gave Rocky a tragic backstory, and Alex was the 'good' bad guy (y'know, stealing is ok, but not cool if you bring a gun to the party...). Money was just a staight up POS. The premise is these three idiots look for a quick score, so they decide to rob an old, lonely army vet. If that's not bad enough they know he's blind AND lost his daughter under tragic circumstances, worst of all they decide to do it whilst he's sleeping in the house!

If it wasn't for the fact Jane Levy is so hot i'd have given up 10 minutes into the film. I persisted, and it just got stranger with the twist.

The blind guy they were robbing turns out to be a complete freak. He's locked up the girl who killed his daughter in a hit and run, which I can get, taking justice into his own hands etc... but getting her pregnant to give him another child? Errr, what?! He might have said he's not a rapist but that's no different, and how would you look at that child knowing what you did and what the mother did?

Really weird film.

[–] gcarras (2770) 8 years ago

Levy really is hot! I'm a smart ALEX but I gotta get MONEY to give to a ROCKY girl.

[–] AtomicReturns (1252) 8 years ago

I didn't like this movie, and one of the main reasons was because she gets away with it and doesn't deserve to (and her two friends were criminals as well deserving of no sympathy).

That's what really bothered me at the end. She gets away with the cash. How many homes did she rob? How many lives did she ruin herself? And at the end she had the gall to say "I hope you rot in prison" to the blind guy, when she should be thrown in there with him.

But even if I look past the characters, the movie gets really silly (the car trunk scene made me laugh) and I don't think it's all *that* clever (many reviewers are saying it is).

[–] LibHater (99) 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] missnat (1179) 7 years ago

They was unlikable so no i didn't sympathize with them.

[–] atd8vii (592) 7 years ago

No, every one in this film is a morally corrupt POS in the end despite their backgrounds. I'm not sure if I'm on the right track or not here but I think the essence of the film was to depict what people can be and are like in the real world. Almost everyone has a complicit nature in some way shape or form and in the end will commit deeds that will suit their own ends, even if its at the expense of someone else.

This movie is a more extreme and somewhat over the top depiction of that but I'm sure real life thieves have a way of justifying their actions, such as trying to get cash to give their little sister a better chance life on the California coast. Is it right? Of course not, but human beings are not renowned for being rational or compassionate for others.