So I turn on movies even if I am not watching them so that I can hear the voices in the next room. As I have said, the distance between my office where my desk is and the big screen in the living room is fifteen feet, maybe, give or take, depending on my math skills for the day.
So today I am sorting through DVD's, trying to pick out the one I will listen to, as these last few months, yeah, I generally turn on repeats with one theme. What can I say ... I like the voice. Mellow and easy to listen to. Very soothing.
So today I am going through them -- the DVDs -- and I end up holding two, and I look at them in my hands. In the left, "Sand"; in the right, "Red Canyon." I actually stopped and paused and thought about the difference in the two characters portrayed in the two parts.
In "Sand" there was Jack, the loving big brother who adored his sister, Sandy; and who would do anything for her, to protect her and keep her safe, make her happy. When she wanted a relationship, Jack saw her needs and kept his apprehension to himself. He was really cool and the type of big brother any girl would want.
In "Red Canyon ... and this is where is gets interesting ... Mr. Reedus plays the exact character that Jack in "Sand" fought against. If anything, Mac, in "Red Canyon" was even worse then the villains of "Sand" as I don't remember them actually hitting or kicking any chicks. They just used psychological torture, though I don't think the beating part would have been passed them.
"Sand" came out in 2000.
"Red Canyon" came out in 2008.
Eight year difference. Look at the two different looks in these two faces. Same actor, though you can barely tell by these faces. That's amazingly good.
I liked both movies and both gave me an uncomfortable feeling of wanting to look over my shoulder.
In "Sand", read over the "Red Canyon" post and the theory of "self defense" might scream through. In "Sand" the one and only thing that bothered me with the plot was if the good guys happen do have a run in with the bad guys, and the good guys get the upper hand ... Take the guns!! That way the bad guys can't come back and use them again later. But it was okay ... good guys still prevailed and there was a happily ever after ending in that movie.
I think this actually might be one of the most interesting comparisons you can make in the Reedus catalog. I know there is a rep there to play ... not villains ... I have always argued that point ... but there have been a lot of the anti-heroes. I think I read a quote just recently where Mr. Reedus said he has killed someone in just about every part he played. I can argue this point, too, and not just because I like to argue and be difficult
. I have merely just recently seen all the films back to back and can line them up and there are some it was close, but no, Mr. Reedus did not cause all the demises. "Bad Seed" was the most confusing and then I realize "Oh, yeah ... that counts ..."