|
|
Post by randallsnape7 on Mar 9, 2014 18:01:44 GMT -5
Hello.
I shall keep everything anonymous, for the respect and well-being of my fellow human beings everywhere, but I just wanted to cite that collectively, in the midst of a great deal of social discussions I have had about Randall over the weeks with various 'Monsters' fans, I have heard Randall called MANY negative names, such as:
-Sneaky -Ornery -Troublemaker -Evil -CHOSE to be evil -And more...
I've heard him trashed even further than this, to the point where I genuinely feel sorry for any and all fans that don't see anything more in Randall than just a mere villain.
Has anyone else on this forum had to deal with, or has been subjected to a 'Randall Roast'? (I just now coined the term out of the blue.) This thread will allow all Randall Boggs fans to discuss this particular issue that none of us really want to face, but probably WILL face... inevitably.
|
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Mar 9, 2014 19:44:34 GMT -5
ALL.THE.TIME.
ESPECIALLY on Tumblr, IMDb and Deviant Art. Before MU, it was "He was ALWAYS evil", "he CHOSE to be evil", "Randall was the one in charge and HE controlled poor old Waternoose, who only wanted to save his beloved company", "Randall wanted to kill Boo and thousands of other children and designed the Scream Extractor to kill human kids because he hated children", "Randall always wanted to kill Sulley", "Randall was just jealous for no good reason", "Randall built the Scream Extractor so he could get more points than Sulley and be first to break the All-Time Scream Record", "Randall never cared about anyone but himself", "Randall just LOOKED mean", "Randall is a REPTILE, so he HAS to be bad", "Randall was plotting to kill Waternoose, too", "Randall FORCED Waternoose to go along with his plan","Randall was planning to TAKE OVER THE MONSTER WORLD" and of course, "Randall was a CHEATER" and "even if he was good at one point, he was beyond redemption".
AFTER MU, I figured things would be better, but instead we get, "Randall dumped poor Mike to be one of the 'Cool Kids'", "Randall abandoned his best friend", "Randall was just an elitist snob who thought he was too good for Mike and had been planning to dump Mike all along once somebody else came along", "Randall was just a stupid social climber", "Randall brought all his trouble on himself by joining ROR and deserved what he got", and who can forget the ever-popular, OH-so-original(NOT!), "remember when the Randall fans all said that Randall's back-story in MU would be 'tragic as f***, only it turned out that he was just a d***/a**hole/jerk/douche-bag all along?" One dimwit on IMDb even said that even if Randall HADN'T done anything wrong, he still deserved to die and should have been killed because of his ability to turn invisible, because that gave him a "super power" over other monsters that meant he had the POTENTIAL to commit crime after crime and never get caught! I reminded this "gentleman" that if he himself possessed a male organ that meant HE had the POTENTIAL to be a serial rapist and therefore, by his own logic, deserved to die or at least be jailed or castrated, and that shut him up pretty quick, needless to say.
Disney didn't help, since it seemed that everything Disney put out in conjunction with MI forced that garbage of Randall being "evil", "slimy", etc., which reinforced what I read on a Pixarian's blog that it was Disney who insisted that MI have a "villain" and that it be Randall, something that the Pixar scripts had NOT included. That is interesting in light of MU, now, because it's DISNEY who has been doing the most "damage control" and really, honestly trying to change Randall's image. Not ONE MU-related thing I've seen that Disney has put out has been critical of Randall or had anything but good things to say about him, but you also have to consider who is in charge now of Disney Feature Animation: Pixar's John Lasseter! Back when MI came out, in theaters and on DVD, Michael Eisner was CEO at Disney and he and Steve Jobs were at odds, to say the least. Disney owned 100% of the Pixar characters and could promote them and market them as Eisner saw fit, and like I'd said in an earlier post it was HIS decision, NOT Pixar's, to have a "villain" in MI and to make Randall that "villain", so naturally everything written by Disney at that point, with a couple of exceptions, were highly negative when it came to Randall. NOW that one of Pixar's own is in charge of DFA and therefore over the marketing of their own characters and what is written about them in books, etc., it's like Pixar is trying to change how Randall is perceived, backing down from that whole, "HE IS EVIIIIL" schtick and showing him as lonely, flawed individual who just wants to be accepted and does not want to "rock the boat". Right before the movie Cars went into wide release, I had the great pleasure of being one of 75 people who got to attend a special screening of that movie, held at the Lowe's Motor Speedway in Concord, NC, the headquarters of NASCAR, and I got to hear John Lasseter speak right after the movie was shown. He personally stated that HE was a big believer in redemption, which is why the main character in Cars, a movie Lasseter wrote and directed, started out as an arrogant jerk and learns how to become a friend, redeeming himself in the process. I thought then that I wish that Lasseter would write or direct a sequel to MI, or at least have some influence over it, and I hope that with him being in charge of DFA , and with Dan Scanlon taking over the direction of the "Monsters" franchise hopefully, we will yet get to see redemption for Randall and really be able to say to all the Randall haters, "I TOLD YOU SO"!
pitbulllady
|
|
|
|
Post by randallsnape7 on Mar 9, 2014 20:14:51 GMT -5
Amen.
|
|
|
|
Post by conteremo on Mar 10, 2014 14:43:29 GMT -5
First of all, this is my first time posting here, so hi! A quick rundown of me: I tend to love antagonists and villains, right now I have a penchant for collecting merchandise that has to do with Randall and Oogie Boogie, and I've loved Monsters Inc and Randall since I was 9.
On topic: I'm a lurker, so I've never been involved in any disputes about Randall. At this point I just never bother trying to sway random Internet users who have strong opinions, so I just shrug and ignore them. If I strongly disagree with something someone posts, I just laugh and move on. No biggie. HOWEVER, in the past I have been in fandoms where I would post generalized arguments in defense of characters (see, I'm really drawn towards controversial characters). I've seen flamewars about characters like Inspector Javert from Les Miserables, for instance, so this whole "Randall debate" type situation is nothing new to me, and in fact it seems pretty tame compared to some of the Javert ones. Looking back, the passion and vitriol of the "Javert-haters" versus the "Javert-apologists" just makes me chuckle and do a facepalm. In my opinion both had flaws in their arguments, and both were too extreme.
The Randall debate reminds me of that a bit, though it's not as bad. I'll come out and say that I don't really understand the hardcore "villainous Randall fans," because in my opinion, if you look at Randall for solely his villainous/evil qualities, he leaves a lot to be desired...Look, his less savory moments are done VERY well in my opinion, like when he's strangling Sulley and when Sulley is hanging suspended before him and Randall just snaps and reveals his bitterness towards Sulley, stomping on Sulley's hand. But if you take him just as a "villain," he's really got nothing on a lot of more diabolical characters. Take, for instance, the fact that he's marketed in the Disney Infinity pack with Davy Jones and Syndrome. In my opinion he'd be out of place there even as an adult in MI, much less as Randy in MU! Davy Jones' darkness in particular completely overshadows Randall's. Randall imo doesn't fit as well into the villainous role as those two, which is good...he's not cliche and he's not a straightforward evil like, say, Sauron or Maleficent.
Now on to my opinion of Randall in the movies. I watched MU for the first time not too long ago, and at that point I hadn't seen MI since ten years ago. I only remembered the basics of the movie, and that I liked Randall, and how sometimes adults would chuckle about it and say, "But he's mean!" So, in my memory Randall was pretty mean and had a lot of unsavory qualities in MI. I finally watched MI with my family yesterday and I was surprised to find that Randall was nowhere near as bad as I thought he would be.
A) He comes across as one of those nerd-types that tugs at your heartstrings. He's pretty awkward. He's a bit feisty and he's really snappish in his words, but most of the time his words don't seem genuinely threatening. They're more humorous and are a product of exasperation. I think his characterization in MU and MI is fairly consistent: He's still Randy, but he's stressed out, got some internal bitterness/darkness on his shoulders, and he's ambitious. Kind of the "life has beaten me down" attitude. I also think he's desperate.
B) I saw that some people interpret the scene where Randall is invisible and scares Mike as him bullying Mike. I saw it as a mixture of him showing off in front of a former friend and as a way of humoring himself. It's a joke. My brother does stuff like that to me. Then Randall talks to them and it's so funny and awkward, and geeky...Mike and Sulley's faces are priceless. The fact that Randall was quoting an inspirational poster makes it even better. He's great. He'd fit under the "likable jerk" or "funny jerk" category at times, though I honestly don't think he's that much of a jerk. Maybe my standards are high (or low?), I don't know.
C) Yep, he was willing to obey Waternoose when Waternoose told him to kill Sulley. He even almost succeeded. No excuses for him there, and I quite like that scene (not because I don't like Sulley, Sulley is my favorite character along with Randall). I don't excuse him because he still had a choice whether to obey Waternoose or not, but you can look at the reasons he tried to do it and I find them passable 1) the CEO ordered him to do it (obviously) 2) Sulley just destroyed the scream extractor that Randall had been working on for who knows how long, and Randall was undoubtedly pissed 3) Sulley also took Boo 4) As mentioned before, at this point Randall is ambitious and desperate. Sulley is ruining his dreams for the future...again 5) after MU, we see that Sulley embodies some pain and injustices Randall has been dealing with for a long time. 6) I feel the need to note that it's obvious that Waternoose is in control here, not Randall...he's the one shouting out orders to Randall. Where did the idea that Randall manipulated Waternoose and wanted to kill him come from anyway? Randall was complacent in the plan but I didn't see him as being in control, and canon doesn't confirm how much he did contribute to the plan anyway. None of the scenes show him as having any sort of upperhand over Waternoose, as Waternoose insults him and bosses him around. Logically I would assume the CEO crafted the plan, blackmailed Randall and Fungus into it, supplied Randall and Fungus money and parts for it, and Randall used this secret plan to his own advantage and adapted himself into it. Fungus seems to know less than Randall about it, though. I don't think Fungus even knew Waternoose was in on the plan(even Roz didn't know it went up to Waternoose), which would explain why he told Mike it was Randall's evil plot. I doubt Waternoose wanted more people to know he was in on it than necessary, and that goes in line with why we never see Waternoose talking with Fungus, only Randall, and why it's just Randall who gets scolded for not being secretive enough.
D) To be honest, Randall's exasperation with Mike and Fungus are understandable. It helps that he's already characterized as being snarky before those moments. His voice didn't sound very threatening when he snapped at Fungus...at all. Yeah, he was impatient. Okay. The shredder threat was very obviously empty. In one scene he told Fungus not to worry about Boo, that he'd take care of her while he deals with the machine, fair enough. Didn't sound mean to me. Snapping at Fungus to get over there and help him is fair enough (I didn't think that sounded mean either, my mom always had the same tone of voice if I'm just dallying around while she needs help). Also, who can blame Randall for trying to shush Fungus up while he was being too loud (On that note, I don't think Fungus was purposely trying to annoy Randall, though some do think that. Fungus comes across as unthinking and socially awkward, also nervous. But not going out of his way to irritate Randall, if anything he seems like he wants to please people)? A lot of the times Randall's snapping is played for laughs.
1) On the note of his snarky personality and snappish words, I think he adapted this personality after MU as an attempt to protect himself. That personality says, "Don't mess with me, I'll stand up for myself!" He never stood up for himself in MU and, in fact, was weak-willed and easily manipulated. By MI he's probably had it with all that, though it seems he's still the same geeky, easily manipulated Randy given how easily Waternoose manipulated him. At least people who don't hold a lot of power over him don't try anything with him now, though, since his co-workers seem to leave him alone.
E) Has anyone noticed that Randall hardly talks to Sulley? He usually talks to Mike and will tease him a bit, but he doesn't try to hurt Mike, whereas he hardly talks to Sulley and actually does try to harm Sulley. In Mike's case I don't really count the scream extractor scene as Randall trying to harm him...sure, it hadn't been tested yet, but as some people mentioned, Randall put the settings on low, was using it to get Mike to talk, and when Sulley put the settings on 100% on Fungus, Fungus ended up alright once Randall turned it off (although, it might not have ended up so good if he was there any longer...). On top of that, as others have mentioned, it'd be dumb to make a scream machine that would kill off and/or seriously harm the energy source, so it's not supposed to do that. Though, the process of scream extracting doesn't seem pleasant, so there's that. Randall was trying to scare information out of Mike, but I doubt the machine would've actually caused serious harm.
F) I do think the banishment was really wrong. It was illegal, and Mike and Sulley were smiling as they did it. They obviously weren't scared of Randall or threatened by him at that point. Look how many times that woman hit Randy in the head with that shovel! My big brother saw that scene and said, "Poor Randy!" My brother didn't think Randall was that bad either, so it's not just me (and yes, he's seen MU). On an optimistic note, though, the banishment makes it more likely for Randall to show up in other Monsters movies than if he was just rotting in jail with Waternoose. Rotting in jail would be boring, but banishment is interesting. He's still out there, and there's still a sliver of a chance that he got free of that violent woman and her son. Maybe he managed to blend in and escape. If "Lost in Scaradise" is anything to go by, the creators never did intend to kill Randall off. So while the banishment scene was awful, there's also a plus to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by randallsnape7 on Mar 10, 2014 16:39:08 GMT -5
In the words of George Lucas from 'The Empire Strikes Back' VHS interview: "In the first act, you introduce everyone, in the second act, you put them in the worst position they could possibly get into in their lives. You have them, you know... they're trapped in a black hole, and not able to get out, and in the third act, they get out. And again, that's... drama."
So, yes... the way I deal with the banishment scene near the end of MI is, even when it's hard, I think to myself... 'Okay, that's just the end of the second act... but the biggest surprises are ALWAYS reserved for the third and final film in any trilogy. So, there's hope."
In fact, the last time I saw the banishment scene, I responded emotionally like when Snape killed Dumbledore at the end of 'Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince'. I could even hear those fateful minor keys sounding in the background as Dumbledore falls and Harry ruthlessly pursues Snape. Once you REALIZE that Randall is a hero (or anti-hero) on the rise, to see them blatantly cast off can be heart-wrenching, just like Snape. It's all to UNprepare us for the pivotal role Randall must play in 'Monsters 3'. I was like: 'Hang in there, Randall. The mere fact that you're ignored, underappreciated, humiliated, and banished means you're gonna be the most important of all in the end. Your time will come... it just hasn't come YET.'
|
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Mar 10, 2014 17:07:24 GMT -5
That was a VERY well-thought and enjoyable read, Conteremo! Welcome to the Bogg's Board; I love it that we have people joining who actually love DISCUSSION, and thinking about the topic at hand!
I absolutely 100% agree with everything you've said, with one exception, which I'll get to a moment. I am going to elaborate a bit on some of the points you've made, though, to tie in with some of my own thoughts.
First, that scene where Randall scares Mike in the locker room-no, I have never thought of that as "bullying", not at all. It was a JOKE, plain and simple. I have played similar jokes on co-workers and had them played on me, no hard feelings or anything like that. It all helped to relieve the stress of our job and lighten things up a bit. It is rather disturbing that so many people take every little slight, every prank, every insult, ever opposing viewpoint as "bullying" because it really takes away from REAL incidents of bullying; to paraphrase Syndrome, "if everyone is a bully, then no one is!" Even as an adult, Randall does still have a lot of nerdy, geeky qualities, as we see displayed with his "kung fu" moves, and he's still got a lot of kid behavior in him, as well.
Now, Randall's attitude, especially his snarky/snappy attitude-originally, Pixar had NOT written Randall to be the antagonist, let alone a "villain". That was done under orders from Disney and likely directly from Michael Eisner, then-CEO, himself, because he felt that MI needed a classic villain that everyone would "love to hate". Randall's role was that of someone who was impatient and snarky and who made hollow threats that no one ever took seriously, rather like Jackie Gleason's "Ralph Kramden" character in the iconic tv series, "The Honeymooners", but Randall was actually originally part of a trio that included himself, Mike and Sulley, who save the day and learn how to work together in the process, and a lot of that original personality shows through in the character we now see in MI, and ties in really nicely with the character's portrayal in MU. I guess you've probably had a chance to read my post in which I shared a Psychologist's analysis of the MI characters, which she wrote mostly prior to MU's release. After seening MU, she described Randall's behavior as the result of what's known as an "Avoidant Personality Disorder", which develops during young adulthood as the result of repeated and often emotionally-traumatic social rejections and public humiliations, which is exactly what we see happen to Randall in MU. The disorder manifests by avoiding social situations, which cause the sufferer to feel uncomfortable, and often with what can best be characterized as acting like a jerk, especially with those who get too close. The person has no real control over this behavior, not without being aware of their condition and receiving help on how to deal with it. That behavior is a defense mechanism, designed to keep others at a distance, because the sufferer fears being rejected and humiliated again, more than anything, and they cannot handle the pain that this brings, so they reject others first, and the closer others get to them, the more that negative behavior is going to be directed at them. This is probably why Randall directs most of his snarkiness and angry words at Fungus and at Mike-Fungus because he's Randall's assistant, who reminds Randall too much of himself, and Mike because he is one of the people who'd rejected Randall in the past, and Randall probably still has lingering attachment to Mike as someone with whom he'd really wanted to be friends. For most of MI, Randall avoids any direct contact and confrontation with Sulley.
The ONLY point I disagree with in your post is that Randall had a choice whether or not to obey Waternoose when ordered to kill Sulley. I really do not think that he did, or if that WAS the case, he was between a rock and hard place. That same Psychologist explained that Randall's behavior, at that moment when Sulley destroys the Scream Extractor(which we KNOW he'd been working on for at least 2 1/2 years, according to Roz), is highly indicative of him going into a state of psychosis. He literally "just snapped", temporarily losing all contact with reality and sanity. During a psychotic state, the part of the brain that is responsible for making choices, especially based on logic, ethics or morals, is completely "off-line", shut down if you will, and the primitive, instinctual part of the brain has completely taken over due to being flooded with the stress hormones of Cortisol and Adrenalin. The individual is literally in a "fight/flight" mode. ALL of us, at some point, will experience a psychotic episode to some degree, and during those times, we are not capable of making real choices. If ever there was a case for "not guilty by reason of temporary insanity", it would be Randall! To a casual observer, it might appear that the individual experiencing such an episode is fully in control of their actions, but they aren't, nor will they be able to remember much of what they did or what transpired, either, because that part of the brain is shut down, too. That whole time frame, however long it lasts, will be largely a blank to them once they recover. Now, even if Randall had NOT gone into a state of psychosis, what WERE his choices, or rather, what were the consequences of his choices? A)He could obey Waternoose's orders and go after Mike and Sulley, where he would either succeed in disposing of them somehow, or he'd be defeated by them, and either way he'd likely get caught and punished by the authorities, probably turned in by Waternoose himself, so that Randall would shoulder all the blame for the whole mess. B)He could refuse, and THEN what? Knowing how Waternoose dealt with those who crossed him, how do you suppose the CEO would have reacted to Randall's act of insubordination, especially with Randall knowing so much about his involvement? Randall had a very good reason to fear Waternoose's reaction, let's put it that way! If he followed those orders and succeeded in carrying them out, there MIGHT be a chance he could get away with it, for awhile at least, but if he refused, severe and swift punishment would be a certainty.
As for that supposition that Randall was in charge or that he was planning to kill Waternoose, that stems from ONE source: TVTropes.org. One of the entries on MI claims that Randall's statement to Waternoose, "there WON'T be", when Waternoose says to him, "there CAN'T be any witnesses", thereby giving Randall orders to dispose of Mike, Sulley AND Boo, somehow indicates that Randall planned to eliminate WATERNOOSE as a witness, as well! Yeah, talk about "fuzzy logic"!
I want desperately to believe that Randall survived, somehow, that awful beating, but the fact that MI director Peter Docter did have that scene take place specifically in Louisiana, with that kid speaking in a obvious Cajun accent, strongly hints that HE, at least, meant for the more savvy audience members to understand that Randall was killed and eaten. Now, of course, miracles DO happen, and now that MU has come out, I'm more of the impression that Pixar has changed their tune on killing off Randall. The Circle 7 Studios' Lost In Scaradise script DID show that Randall was alive, at least, and did feature him redeeming himself eventually, which is especially interesting given that this was NOT written by anyone at Pixar or connected to Pixar, and was in fact written by a studio formed by the very person who'd insisted that Randall be turned into a "villain everyone would love to hate" in the first place, Michael Eisner! Other than the writers themselves feeling the same way that WE do about what happened to Randall in MI, the only thing I can credit for that is they, and Disney, were well-aware of Randall's popularity and the fact that most of his fans did not believe that he was evil and wanted to see him alive and see him given a second chance. I can only hope now that someone at Pixar will take up that torch and run with it, whether or not they base this on the Circle 7 script or not.
pitbulllady
|
|
|
|
Post by pitvipersnake on Mar 10, 2014 17:22:57 GMT -5
Hello Conteremo. I just read your post and I think you talk a lot of sense.
On the subject. This is the only chat board I write on so any discussions I have about Randall are face to face with friends or family. The response I most often get is "Who are you talking about?" This isn't just at the beginning of the conversation the first time I mention liking Randall to that person but every time I talk to them, often several times per conversation. Most people's attitude is "It's a cartoon. Nothing in it matters." Only one friend takes me seriously and she agrees with me.
The person I mainly talk to about Randall is my Mum. She sees Randall as the villain but when I try to explain why he isn't she just agrees because she doesn't care enough about an animated character to argue, or even pretend to look interested.
|
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Mar 10, 2014 17:39:50 GMT -5
Hello Conteremo. I just read your post and I think you talk a lot of sense. On the subject. This is the only chat board I write on so any discussions I have about Randall are face to face with friends or family. The response I most often get is "Who are you talking about?" This isn't just at the beginning of the conversation the first time I mention liking Randall to that person but every time I talk to them, often several times per conversation. Most people's attitude is "It's a cartoon. Nothing in it matters." Only one friend takes me seriously and she agrees with me. The person I mainly talk to about Randall is my Mum. She sees Randall as the villain but when I try to explain why he isn't she just agrees because she doesn't care enough about an animated character to argue, or even pretend to look interested. I really loathe that attitude, that because something is animated, that it's "just for kids" or it's "not worth discussing", as though the medium in which a story is told determines if the story and its characters/plot/setting, etc. determines whether the story is good or bad, worthy of discussion or not worthy. To me, it makes no difference if it's animated, live-action, or a book. I have seen many a live-action movie or tv program which were just plain STUPID, poorly-written, little if any character development, no recognizable plot, etc., yet these were marketed for adults. There is a huge difference in something that is intended and created to appeal to ALL age groups and something intended only for children! Pixar's writing is actually pretty sophisticated, and their movies have plenty for adults to relate to and enjoy. pitbulllady |
|
|
|
Post by conteremo on Mar 10, 2014 21:34:57 GMT -5
That was a VERY well-thought and enjoyable read, Conteremo! Welcome to the Bogg's Board; I love it that we have people joining who actually love DISCUSSION, and thinking about the topic at hand! pitbulllady Thank you! I'm a writer, so as a fair warning, most posts I make that have to do with media/fandom tend to get reeeally long. I also love analyzing books and movies. Now, Randall's attitude, especially his snarky/snappy attitude-originally, Pixar had NOT written Randall to be the antagonist, let alone a "villain". That was done under orders from Disney and likely directly from Michael Eisner, then-CEO, himself, because he felt that MI needed a classic villain that everyone would "love to hate". Randall's role was that of someone who was impatient and snarky and who made hollow threats that no one ever took seriously, rather like Jackie Gleason's "Ralph Kramden" character in the iconic tv series, "The Honeymooners", but Randall was actually originally part of a trio that included himself, Mike and Sulley, who save the day and learn how to work together in the process, and a lot of that original personality shows through in the character we now see in MI, and ties in really nicely with the character's portrayal in MU. I guess you've probably had a chance to read my post in which I shared a Psychologist's analysis of the MI characters, which she wrote mostly prior to MU's release. After seening MU, she described Randall's behavior as the result of what's known as an "Avoidant Personality Disorder", which develops during young adulthood as the result of repeated and often emotionally-traumatic social rejections and public humiliations, which is exactly what we see happen to Randall in MU. The disorder manifests by avoiding social situations, which cause the sufferer to feel uncomfortable, and often with what can best be characterized as acting like a jerk, especially with those who get too close. The person has no real control over this behavior, not without being aware of their condition and receiving help on how to deal with it. That behavior is a defense mechanism, designed to keep others at a distance, because the sufferer fears being rejected and humiliated again, more than anything, and they cannot handle the pain that this brings, so they reject others first, and the closer others get to them, the more that negative behavior is going to be directed at them. This is probably why Randall directs most of his snarkiness and angry words at Fungus and at Mike-Fungus because he's Randall's assistant, who reminds Randall too much of himself, and Mike because he is one of the people who'd rejected Randall in the past, and Randall probably still has lingering attachment to Mike as someone with whom he'd really wanted to be friends. For most of MI, Randall avoids any direct contact and confrontation with Sulley. pitbulllady This is great information, it's fascinating learning about what the creators originally intended for the characters. I wonder how Pixar felt about Disney changing their character like that, as I'm sure Randall was like their baby. I don't think they succeeded in making him a classic villain at all (thankfully). In my opinion, the last thing Disney needs is another classic villain! Most of Disney animation's villains are rather straightforward and flat: Evil Queen, Maleficent, Jafar, Frollo, Hopper, Mother Gothel, etc. Not that these are bad characters or that these types of antagonists shouldn't be created, but it's just too much. Redemption and switching from "white" to "gray" to "black," so to speak, isn't common it seems. Like in Toy Story 3, hardly anyone I know expected Lotso to turn around and save the other toys at the end and most of us were exasperated by that fact. The "almost redemption/heel face turn" or "false heel face turn" is just...pretty common. The movie Stardust comes to mind just off the top of my head (non-Disney example). Disney has amped up the villainy of other characters not created by them too. Take Claude Frollo from The Hunchback of Notre Dame; in the book, Frollo begins as an innocent and isolated character who raises his little brother after their parents die. He loves his brother so much he spoils him and will trust him over and over again despite the fact that he disappoints him every time. Yet he still gives his brother chances to change for the better. In the book, Frollo finds Quasimodo and takes him in because he feels sorry for him and looking at him makes him think of what would happen to his little brother if he died. Frollo loves Quasimodo. He takes care of him and patiently teaches him to speak and educates him. Frollo legitimately tries to do the right thing and be a good person even while slowly losing his sanity throughout the story, and he expresses regret over the fact that he's a coward and his actions have hurt both Esmeralda and Quasimodo. The Disney movie makes him prejudiced against Roma, and within a few minutes of screentime he kills a woman and tries to throw a baby down a well, he manipulates and is cruel to Quasimodo, and he tries to burn people alive. I don't think Disney gave him any good qualities at all, actually, aside from a nice singing voice. Now back to Randall. When I watched Monsters Inc the other day (for the first time in years), I started thinking that Randall trying to kill Sulley like that just seemed...out of place. The fact that he was originally supposed to be a third protagonist and just a feisty/likable jerk type character explains a lot. Randall's own words confirm that he didn't want to kill Sulley; he said he wanted Sulley to work for him. The psychologist's explanation for this dilemma makes sense at least. In a way, though, this change from "third protagonist" to supposed villain ended up making him a more nuanced character than the stereotypical Disney villain. Now, he's a smart-and-geeky, good-at-heart guy with an inferiority complex that life has crushed underfoot and who ended up making poor choices because of it. He's had a bad past with Sulley and used to be a good friend to Mike, who never returned the friendship. An antagonist and interesting character, sympathetic and relatable. I think if/when they do a sequel, they could do something awesome with him. After MU, his story in MI just becomes way more potent. A third movie is necessary as far as I'm concerned, especially since Randall has such a disturbing end in MI...even as a kid his banishment gave me the chills. I think a part of Randall does still want to be friends with Mike. Why else would he regularly initiate contact with Mike, but hardly look at Sulley and (usually) only talk to him when Sulley talks to him first? When Sulley says "May the best monster win," Randall doesn't even look at him. After how bad a friend Mike had been to Randall, though, it's beyond me why Randall even tries. Part of it might be Randall trying to get back at Mike just for that, just in little ways like he's saying "See what you're missing?," trying to make his resentment clear. It wouldn't surprise me if part of Randall's resentment of Sulley has to do with the fact that Mike wanted to be friends with him but not Randy (and I'm speculating that Mike's neglect may have been what triggered Randall to search for other friends and ultimately accept Johnny's invitation to ROR). And at the end Randall called Sulley a "stupid, pathetic waste," yowch (did I mention I like that scene? It fits MU's events perfectly if you look at what happens to Randy carefully. It makes sense that Randall would think that of Sulley and take out all his past pain on him). Seeing two characters I like at odds like that is just fun, oh pleasant agony! It's extremely one-sided on Randy's end though. I do think Sulley would make a good friend to Randy if they ever got to know one another better and, you know, patch up their horrible past. The ONLY point I disagree with in your post is that Randall had a choice whether or not to obey Waternoose when ordered to kill Sulley. I really do not think that he did, or if that WAS the case, he was between a rock and hard place. That same Psychologist explained that Randall's behavior, at that moment when Sulley destroys the Scream Extractor(which we KNOW he'd been working on for at least 2 1/2 years, according to Roz), is highly indicative of him going into a state of psychosis. He literally "just snapped", temporarily losing all contact with reality and sanity. During a psychotic state, the part of the brain that is responsible for making choices, especially based on logic, ethics or morals, is completely "off-line", shut down if you will, and the primitive, instinctual part of the brain has completely taken over due to being flooded with the stress hormones of Cortisol and Adrenalin. The individual is literally in a "fight/flight" mode. ALL of us, at some point, will experience a psychotic episode to some degree, and during those times, we are not capable of making real choices. If ever there was a case for "not guilty by reason of temporary insanity", it would be Randall! To a casual observer, it might appear that the individual experiencing such an episode is fully in control of their actions, but they aren't, nor will they be able to remember much of what they did or what transpired, either, because that part of the brain is shut down, too. That whole time frame, however long it lasts, will be largely a blank to them once they recover. Now, even if Randall had NOT gone into a state of psychosis, what WERE his choices, or rather, what were the consequences of his choices? A)He could obey Waternoose's orders and go after Mike and Sulley, where he would either succeed in disposing of them somehow, or he'd be defeated by them, and either way he'd likely get caught and punished by the authorities, probably turned in by Waternoose himself, so that Randall would shoulder all the blame for the whole mess. B)He could refuse, and THEN what? Knowing how Waternoose dealt with those who crossed him, how do you suppose the CEO would have reacted to Randall's act of insubordination, especially with Randall knowing so much about his involvement? Randall had a very good reason to fear Waternoose's reaction, let's put it that way! If he followed those orders and succeeded in carrying them out, there MIGHT be a chance he could get away with it, for awhile at least, but if he refused, severe and swift punishment would be a certainty. pitbulllady True enough, it's certainly understandable that Randall obeyed Waternoose, given that he basically only had the choice between something bad happening and something worse happening. He still did have a choice though....HOWEVER, I actually accept your explanation that he was in "flight/fight" and psychotic breakdown mode. As I mentioned earlier, his trying to strangle Sulley to death like that seems out of character to me, especially given that he wanted Sulley alive to work under him so that Sulley would acknowledge he's not such a hotshot. To Randall that would be the best way to overcome his bad past with him, being in a position that everyone "knows he's better." In the strangling scene, he's just so quiet and mechanical about it, no talking and no emotion, no snide remarks, nothing about Randy is there. Definitely not right. Compare that with how he acts when he's in the door and Sulley is hanging down below him. He's still obviously mentally unwell there, but the strangling scene was worse. As for that supposition that Randall was in charge or that he was planning to kill Waternoose, that stems from ONE source: TVTropes.org. One of the entries on MI claims that Randall's statement to Waternoose, "there WON'T be", when Waternoose says to him, "there CAN'T be any witnesses", thereby giving Randall orders to dispose of Mike, Sulley AND Boo, somehow indicates that Randall planned to eliminate WATERNOOSE as a witness, as well! Yeah, talk about "fuzzy logic"! pitbulllady Really? That one line is just too little to go on in my opinion. I don't see how someone could 100% take that as canon because of it. It's an interpretation, but not canon. People can interpret that as Randall wanting to take down Waternoose if they want, but they shouldn't disparage someone who interprets it differently. In my opinion, the more logical interpretation is that Waternoose was in control and the mastermind of the plan (Roz and Waternoose seem to admit as much), and that Waternoose probably promised Randall a higher position. That line was just an irritated Randall asserting that he will kill Mike and Sulley (not sure about Boo, wasn't he just bringing her to Waternoose?), and he's probably mad that Waternoose is even telling him that since Randall thinks it's an obvious conclusion. "There won't be," came across more like, "Yeah, I know, you don't need to tell me." He has the utmost confidence in his capabilities and it annoys him that Waternoose would doubt him. He seems to mostly want to kill Sulley though. I don't remember him actually trying to attack Mike at all. Anyway, Randall never said he was going to be CEO...he just said he would revolutionize the scaring industry and that Sulley would be working beneath him. I'm curious as to exactly what position he was talking about, though. Hello Conteremo. I just read your post and I think you talk a lot of sense. On the subject. This is the only chat board I write on so any discussions I have about Randall are face to face with friends or family. The response I most often get is "Who are you talking about?" This isn't just at the beginning of the conversation the first time I mention liking Randall to that person but every time I talk to them, often several times per conversation. Most people's attitude is "It's a cartoon. Nothing in it matters." Only one friend takes me seriously and she agrees with me. The person I mainly talk to about Randall is my Mum. She sees Randall as the villain but when I try to explain why he isn't she just agrees because she doesn't care enough about an animated character to argue, or even pretend to look interested. I really loathe that attitude, that because something is animated, that it's "just for kids" or it's "not worth discussing", as though the medium in which a story is told determines if the story and its characters/plot/setting, etc. determines whether the story is good or bad, worthy of discussion or not worthy. To me, it makes no difference if it's animated, live-action, or a book. I have seen many a live-action movie or tv program which were just plain STUPID, poorly-written, little if any character development, no recognizable plot, etc., yet these were marketed for adults. There is a huge difference in something that is intended and created to appeal to ALL age groups and something intended only for children! Pixar's writing is actually pretty sophisticated, and their movies have plenty for adults to relate to and enjoy. pitbulllady I agree, I wonder what Disney/Pixar thinks about people who think that their work is trivial just because it's animated. People do analyze, interpret, and discuss anime and comics (like Attack on Titan, papermoon2 is a big-name fan who has well-thought-out posts on that manga and has been told by anons that he/she's overanalyzing it) and Disney works. Western animation seems to be more stigmatized than Eastern animation, though, I noticed. Probably because people think that because our culture's attitudes toward animation is that it's superficial and for kids, it means that Western animators must follow that rule too. It's a really dumb way to view animation, though. Yes, there is some animation that is trivial and not very intellectual or worthy of analysis, but that's just as true for live-action shows/movies and books. |
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Mar 10, 2014 23:03:41 GMT -5
I DO think a lot of Randall's "targeting" of Mike, while largely trying to ignore Sulley, was due to Mike having been the first person who didn't either ridicule Randall or his hang-ups, or directly threaten him, and therefore Randall mistook that for an intent of friendship. Randall has obviously had very limited social interactions, either by the time we see him in MU and probably even less by the time we see him in MI, so he does not know how to "read" cues when it comes to how others see HIM. I get that impression, based on his nervousness and even his outwardly fearful reaction to a loud noise behind him like that box being dropped in the hallway, that he's been the recipient of some very unpleasant and aggressive behavior from others at some point. When Mike opens the door to the dorm, revealing his roommate for the first time(MUCH to the surprise of many movie-goers, lol), Randall just stands there, his body rigid and tense, as if he's assessing the threat level from whoever opened that door. You almost can hear his sigh of relief to see that it's just another little dude like himself, rather than some big hulking jock with an attitude! Randall has no clue how to go about getting someone to like him, though, either as a friend or, as we see in his earnest but failed attempt to gain the attention of the two Goth girls from HSS, Sonia and Nadya, perhaps a bit more, and when his efforts fail him, he's a bit like a little kid who acts out to get attention and even seems to act aggressively at times towards the person he's trying to impress. Mike's rejection of Randall's overtures of friendship have a LOT to do with him taking up Johnny's invitation to join ROR, and a lot to do with Johnny even asking him to join in the first place. Johnny is watching Mike and Randall like a hawk on that day of exams as Mike and Randall are approaching the steps to the Scare building, and Randall is once-more helping Mike by calling out test questions for him. If this had been a traditional, strictly-comedic movie, you probably would have seen a great big light bulb pop on over Johnny's head, lol. He has realized that he needs to make an example of Mike, who has repeatedly shown up a ROR member(Sulley), thereby embarrassing the entire frat, and who has stood up to Johnny himself, something NOBODY did. He cannot let that stand, otherwise other people will start to get the idea that they can challenge Johnny's "Big Monster On Campus" Alpha Dog status, too, and get away with it, and now Johnny has a means of accomplishing that without resorting to anything so crass as physical violence(which he's certainly capable of should he choose that). He can take away the only person on campus still willing to associate with Mike, and use him against Mike, and in the event that Sulley does not pass his exam(we all know how THAT ended), ROR has a replacement team member for the Scare Games who meets the two main requirements of being a Scare Major and making excellent grades. I think a combination of threats to kick Randall out of ROR later, combined with promises of how popular he'll be if he stays in, AND then seeing that Mike is now apparently friends with the very person who'd gotten him kicked out of the Scare Program in the first place was what persuaded Randall to participate so willingly in that party prank. Randall is desperate to stay in ROR, because it's with them that he's experienced the first success insofar as being noticed and appreciated, he's scared of Johnny but also in awe of him, and he's hurt by Mike's rejection, a situation that has been no doubt magnified in scope by his ROR "brothers", so it would be easy to get him to go along with that, the scene in MU which earned Randall the most hate.
As for what Randall intended to do with Boo after retrieving her in the Door Vault, I honestly don't know. The Scream Extractor was virtually destroyed. It might have been reparable, but even so, that would take several more weeks at the least, and it would not make sense for anyone to try to keep her alive in that factory until then, especially not with the CDA swarming all over the place like flies on a dead possum. I can't imagine Waternoose being too pleased if Randall had shown up with "the kid" in tow, expecting the CEO to keep her and take care of her until that machine could be fixed! Randall obviously did NOT mean to harm her, otherwise he could have just dropped her to her death. Some have suggested that he still was so delusional he thought he could get that machine up and running again soon, and was planning on keeping her around until then, and that might have been true given his state of mind at the time, but it also could mean that he was going to put her back into her room in the meantime and avoid all that hassle of keeping up with a human toddler completely. His face is very hard to read at that point, and his eyes seem to hold so much conflict there.
pitbulllady
|
|
|
|
Post by conteremo on Mar 11, 2014 12:39:27 GMT -5
I speculate that Randy was a victim of bullying by peers growing up, partly because of his blending ability given what he tells Mike when he first meets him, that he hopes he doesn't change color in class or else he'll be a joke or a freak. Then right after that a loud noise scares him into going invisible, which isn't normal behavior at all. I think it's observant of you to point out that it's always the big guy monsters he's scared around. Which probably means he was bullied by monsters like that at some point, whether in high school or middle school or what. With Mike, he's not like that at all, but in the football game he's cowering and around Johnny he's really on guard (though I personally don't think Johnny would beat him up or anything, Johnny tends to use other tactics to punish people, tactics that require thought and observation. Johnny's a pretty smart guy like that). And during the Rush Party it's girls he chooses to try and befriend rather than the big males that are all around. So monsters like Mike and those two HSS girls he felt more comfortable approaching (though, Rosie he might have been too intimidated to try talking too). In my headcanon Randy had a nice family though, and was probably sheltered (like my cousins, for instance, their parents are great and loving but they were homeschooled and raised in a highly conservative/religious household, so they're really innocent despite their ages and plus they use outdated language like "Oh, rats!")
Well, Randall definitely seems to be trying to get Mike's attention at the beginning of MI, that's for sure, even if it means annoying him and being obnoxious. The way Mike mocks "winds of change" is just too funny, btw. Mike is really competitive with him. No, but the part that made me snort was when Mike said "One of these days I'll...get SULLEY to get back at you," or something along those lines. Completely in character, but sadly accurate, given what they do to Randall at the end...I do not doubt that it was Mike's idea to banish Randall because of that line at the beginning, plus Mike was the one directing Sulley when to throw him in. So he wasn't just teasing or making an empty threat when he said that he'll make Sulley do something to Randall. I still don't like to think that Mike knew where they were throwing Randall...I really hope he didn't, since following him in MU and MI is so enjoyable...
Randall may have been in denial about the scream extractor's destruction. I guess he didn't want to accept that his and Waternoose's plan was ruined, and that 2.5 years of hard work on his part was destroyed in a matter of seconds. Plus, Randall probably thought of the scream extractor as being the final chance he has of getting happiness and being accepted (and getting back at Sulley).
Yeah, he might have thought in the heat of the moment that he'd hold on to Boo for as long as it took him and Fungus to rebuild the machine...but that's not the best of ideas. Yes, he definitely didn't want to kill her (at the time, at least), because he made sure she didn't fall down, he even clutches her tighter in one scene. Maybe he took her to get back at Sulley, or to bring her to Waternoose to see what Waternoose wanted to do with her, I don't know. To me, the best thing to do if I were in their place would be to find her door, put her back in, and shred it so no monster could get to her anymore. So kill Sulley, put the kid back and shred her door, and...Well, Waternoose wanted Randall to kill Mike too, but Randall never even tried to hurt HIM. Could be A) he never got a chance to hurt Mike since Randall was always far behind in pursuit of them, but only Sulley approached him B) He never wanted to hurt Mike, maybe because of their past.
BUT, when Randall had Boo in his possession he was trying to get away from Mike and Sulley, and didn't try to kill Sulley again until Sulley confronted HIM...so I don't know what was going on there. So while he was SUPPOSED to kill them, it seems like Boo was his goal all along. He sneaked up on them and stole Boo without even trying to knock them off the door, so if he wanted to he could've stayed invisible and shaken the door or lunged at them to try to get them to fall to their deaths. EDIT: Oh, nevermind, I just remembered that Randall did knock them both down at one point and they managed to get in a door at the last second. So that makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Mar 11, 2014 13:37:45 GMT -5
In the Door Vault scene, Boo slips from Sulley's grasp and Randall, who was invisible, actually catches her, preventing her from falling the first time. I watched that scene very carefully and she does not appear to be snatched out of Sulley's grasp; he just loses his grip on her and she slips and is caught by Randall in the nick of time. Randall then cuts loose the door on which Mike and Sulley are riding, letting it fall, and he sees them climb inside that door before it's shattered, so he knows that aren't dead. They are able to access another door immediately from the Human World to return, because all of the doors in the Door Vault are activated due to Boo's laughter and shrieks. The only reason why Mike was included was due to his proximity to Sulley. It was impossible to deal with one without dealing with the other, even though Sulley was the primary target.
I DO think that Mike knew where that door led, though. Mike is a stickler for details, as we see especially in MU. Mike can remember little bits of info that most would overlook, which is how he knew how to get himself and Sulley back from the Human World in MU, by recalling that a sufficient volume of Scream could power up a door from the Human World side even if it WAS deactivated on the Monster World side. I'd wager that the door was to one of Sulley's assigned Scares, so Mike knew all the details on it, who was inside, where it was located, what that kid was afraid of and what he WASN'T afraid of. Even if Mike had picked that door at random, it led to a one-room trailer, so he would have been able to see that there were humans inside, including an adult, and that they were awake. He also couldn't miss seeing that bloody butcher knife hanging on the wall, or that big meat chopping block with a meat cleaver, and he actually looks right at those things and SMILES, so he HAD to have known what those items meant with regards to Randall's fate once he was thrown inside. Mike was fully aware that those people would likely wind up using that knife and meat cleaver soon enough, and this thought was very pleasing to him. That's why, when I watched MU for the first time, I got chills when Johnny bestowed that nickname on Mike: Killer. Johnny had no idea just how accurate that really was, did he? Mike DID say, at the beginning of MI, "What a CREEP! One of these days, I'm half a mind to...let you teach that guy a lesson!" Mike is highly competitive, and Randall is the only one even coming close to breaking the All-Time Scare Record other than Sulley. He's their nearest competition, so to Mike, that makes him a threat. People assume, after watching MU, that Mike finally gave up on his lifelong obsession with becoming "The Greatest Scarer the World Has Ever Known", but in fact he just switched gears a bit. He is still living out that dream "by proxy", as it were, through his partnership with Sulley. If THEY break the All-Time Scare Record, that means he's accomplished his life's goal, but if Randall breaks it, that means that everything everyone has said about Mike since childhood has been validated, that neither he nor his team is the Greatest Scarer The World Has Ever Known. Consider this, as well: Mike KNOWS that even a "banished" monster can return to the Monster World IF they try hard enough. He and Sulley did that in MU when they got trapped at the campground, and did it to get back from the Himalayas, and I'd be willing to bet the REASON Mike knew so much about how to return is because of RANDALL'S tutoring in MU, so Mike also knew that Randall had this information, that Randall knew how to return, so if they wanted to be rid of Randall forever, they had to make sure he was incapable of returning. They're throwing him into the Human World, and were planning to put BOO back into the Human World, so if they thought that Randall was such a threat to her, that would not make sense, because it would mean that there would be a chance of him encountering Boo again. However, if he was dead, that would not be a possibility, nor would it be possible for him to figure out how to return to the Monster World. That competition has been eliminated, permanently.
pitbulllady
|
|
|
|
Post by randallsnape7 on Mar 11, 2014 22:03:40 GMT -5
WHATEVER their intentions, they MUST fail and Randall MUST survive... I refuse to even ponder the notion that Randall might be dead! All of my discussions shall remain in the 'Miraculous Somethings' category, no matter HOW unlikely or how slim the wire is, until Randall has finally been redeemed in 'Monsters 3'!
If I must, I'll just quote Han Solo: "Never tell me the odds!" |
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Mar 11, 2014 22:54:19 GMT -5
WHATEVER their intentions, they MUST fail and Randall MUST survive... I refuse to even ponder the notion that Randall might be dead! All of my discussions shall remain in the 'Miraculous Somethings' category, no matter HOW unlikely or how slim the wire is, until Randall has finally been redeemed in 'Monsters 3'!
If I must, I'll just quote Han Solo: "Never tell me the odds!" LOL, forgot all about that Han Solo quote! I don't want Randall to be dead, either, and want more than anything to see him redeemed, because in that process, it's not just HIM who gets redeemed, but to a certain extent, Mike and Sulley as well. All three did some horrible things and all three need to openly acknowledge that and move on, but all that is in limbo until I at least see something from Pixar confirming its likelihood. pitbulllady |
|
|
|
Post by randallsnape7 on Mar 12, 2014 0:23:30 GMT -5
Can more Randall Boggs redemption petitions and/or more Randall Boggs fan sites be created? You said there USED to be a 'Redeem Randall Boggs' petition back when soon after 'Monsters, Inc.' came out. Can't another one just be started so the signature/fan statistics could still be out there? We must've done something right if it is indeed Randall's popularity that lead to his inclusion in 'Monsters University'. Right?
|
|
