Did Sulley and Mike do the right thing to Randall?

Pixar's Feature Films Monsters, Inc. / University
#81

Most claims go to Louisiana. Supposedly that’s the best choice, not only, but a choice still the same. As for what they’d call him…oooh boy, sure there are terms. Heck, even Dungeons and Dragons people would have a name for him. grins A uhh…particular monster in their collection bears a striking resemblance to a more monsterous version of some species similiar to him.

claps hands Any hoosier with an ear can tell hoosier talk.
blinks…What? This is the first time I’ve said hoosier 0_0 I dunno if I’m being politically correct here 0_0
Moving on…

Supposedly you’d have the image of say…some furry animal tied up and about to blasted to smitherins by a hunter with a shotgun. Would probably be better to untie the little guy huh?
Ok maybe not a furry animal. Uhh…how about a fox or a raccon? One of the more mischevious of animals?
…Oui…I just saw Furry Vengence…these explainations are crossing 0_0

Ahh here we go.
Kidnap innocent children. Now this conflicts with several things. One, how most monsters view Humans. Seeing as how they are belived to be toxic…who knows what else they’d think. They’d even think of them as animals. (why not? Most kids just shreek and yell when they come through the door).
And the “children”…actually it was just one child, for the test phase. And funny enough how Randall chose one of his own…actually who knows if it was his choice at all. Anyways. As for knowing…yes probably did. But as said the ides behind monster views of humanity are unclear.

Being thrown into a room full of humans, possibly known they were there (which IS quite possible), and it’s pretty much a death. But yes…still alive.

#82

Oh yes, very much so, I live within the south Texas region which is basically the Gulf of Mexico type of territory. Yep, I was born and bred and still living here as well. :mrgreen:

#83

Nexas has a very, very good point. Randall never kidnapped any ‘innocent children’. He never did anything particularly morally wrong (though it was wrong in the eyes of the Monster Law- wrong not for the sake of the children, but for the sake of the Monsters. The reason why Monsters aren’t allowed to bring human children into the Monster World is because humans are dangerous and are able to kill Monsters easily. Hence bringing such a threat into the Monster World is illegal.)

I know what I’m saying is counter-intuitive, because we, the audience, see this cute little girl who wouldn’t hurt a fly, and she says funny words and does a little dance when she needs to go to the toilet. All very adorable!

But the Monsters see a “killing machine”, (as Mike, I believe, says), something to be fearful of, something even to hate and resent. Isn’t that the whole point of the film, Monsters, Inc.? That the roles are reversed?

So when Randall ‘kidnaps’ Boo, he’s not kidnapping the adorable little thing we see. He’s kidnapping something that’s a threat to all Monsters if let loose, something worthy of massive media coverage and mass panic if one escapes. It’s the equivalent of a grizzly bear roaming around a city. Even if it doesn’t actually get a chance to hurt anyone, everyone’s fearful of being mauled, and no-one would complain if it had to be, as a last resort, shot dead. I wouldn’t be surprised if Boo would have awaited an equally disturbing fate if left in the hands of the CDA for too long.

Thing is (and yes, I’m slowly getting on topic here…:laughing:) Sulley sees Boo from the point of view of us, the audience. That’s why he’s such an endearing guy. It takes Mike a little longer to warm up to her and to stop seeing her as a ‘thing’, but he gets there relatively quickly if you think about how the Monsters would have been educated to be fearful of humans from a young age. They’re obviously two very empathetic guys.

Well, not empathetic enough to understand things from Randall’s point of view, but empathetic enough to understand things from a “grizzly bear’s” point of view. So they banish Randall, having completely abandoned the point of view of all Monster civilization! They’re going back on all that they’ve been taught through school, all of the things they’ve been trained as a Scarer and a Scarer’s Assistant, and end up falling in love with this little girl. In a single night.

Aaanyway, in summation:

  • Mike and Sulley adopt audience’s point of view
  • So we like them
  • Randall sticks to Monsters’ point of view
  • So we dislike him
  • Mike and Sulley are effectively human at the time they banish Randall because they view his acts in the same way that we would view his acts
  • Randall had only just realised Sulley and Boo’s connection anyway, so if I were him sitting in the swamp, I’d think that Mike and Sulley had banished me as an act of revenge for themselves and not for Boo

And there’s the fundemental flaw of Monsters, Inc.. Don’t get me wrong, I love the film, and I completely understand why Pixar had to do this with Mike and Sulley, and I even partially understand why they chose for them to banish Randall- it’s more succint, there’s a definitive ‘overcoming the baddie’ moment, all of that. But it doesn’t make what Mike and Sulley did right.

#84

Good point, lizardgirl. I find it interesting how morally-complex and questionable some Pixar heroes and villains are. Just to go a little off-topic, Mr Incredible, for example, committed manslaughter (but not direct murder) to defeat Syndrome. If we were to believe in Shelby Forthright’s concern about Earth being unsustainable for human habitation, regardless of incidental evidence that proves otherwise, then AUTO didn’t do anything wrong.

So if were to follow Monster law, Randall was right in abducting a ‘dangerous creature’, though his intentions were less than noble. It’s like poaching a bear from the wild and harvesting its bile for Chinese medicine- the bear may be a dangerous creature, but bringing it into civilisation and using it for personal gains doesn’t make you any more of a hero.

Now that I think of it, Mike and Sulley were actually doing the right thing, trying to return the ‘dangerous creature’ to its former habitat. But the fact that they effectively banished Randall in a ‘tit-for-tat’ measure, instead of handing him over to the authorities, doesn’t make them any better heroes.

#85

When Lizardgirl note “morally wrong” she means in this instance, of kidnapping.
Of coures the fall of “letting a human child loose” is actually placed on Sullivan. He could have simply not have been so cautious around Randall when he was poking around and just asked him about the trouble he got into. While some might think Randall would revel in the chance of seeing Sulley in the hands of the C.D.A., he would had to cover his own tail (which would have simply been that he was “working late”, which isn’t wrong, or cheating at all) and would “not tell anybody” about Sullivan’s trouble.

Actually I think he did say that…even if he didn’t, I certainly remember “I always wanted a pet…THAT COULD KILL ME!”. Even joke wise, the “pet” comment informs many monsters think of humans as virtual animals.

I’m not sure if Mr. Incredible committed the act of manslaughter…BUT…I DO blame him for other things. Such as destroying Buddy’s dream which LED to him becoming Syndrome. And the fact that instead of “talking him down” when they first re-met, he takes the offensive.
As for Auto, he was a machine following orders. He was unable to do otherwise.

Randall was actually the one who took Boo from the “kidappers” (albiet not intentional ones), and was rushing to get this whole Extractor incident over with. He DOES say he was up all night looking for him, so he’d probably had avoided Waternoose at the time. And with the C.D.A. and Waternoose breathing down his neck, he had to get her back and end it all.

#86

Although i wish Sully and Mike didn’t banish Randall, i really don’t care no more, it happened, we cant change that, but i do hope that if he is in the sequel, Pixar gives him another chance, and we could see the good side of him. :smiley:

#87

I know this is off-topic, but I can’t resist posting this video I found yesterday:

youtube.com/watch?v=FAYWPV3F41Y

This kid’s gonna grow up to Public Enemy Number One in Monstropolis.

#88

I always lookes at the scene where they throw Randall through the door to be something like this- Mike and Sulley had been repeatedly attacked and chased by Randall. They knew that even after beating him in a fight, he could always come after them later and interfere while they try to deal with Waternoose. So they put him through a door so that if he did try to come after them again, the time he’d spend looking for another door would give them the oppurtunity to get away and work on getting Boo home.

After having run in and out of so many wardrobe doors, I’m sure Mike and Sulley were aware that it would be pretty easy for Randall to get back. I kind of doubt that they anticipated there being an angry woman with a shovel at the other end.

I don’t think the action was entirely revenge-based. They certainly enjoyed it, and I can’t really blame them for that. Randall had been quite mean-spirited to them for a long time, and he had tried to strangle Sulley and let Mike and Sulley fall to what could have been a painful demise. However, revenge doesn’t justify their actions- but I don’t see this as pure revenge.

Earlier on Mike and Sulley had gone into a door which had then smashed- they had learnt well that it is fairly easy to reach another door. So I think they just wanted to slow Randall down while they dealt with Boo/ Waternoose, and just happened to enjoy it at the same time.

#89

When looking at it from this perspective, this does make better sense of the events that happened and did occur, a little of what you said in relation to what happened I do believe and agree with myself…

EDIT- Please don’t quote the whole post that’s directly above yours, especially if it’s a long one. Thanks!

-lizardgirl

#90

While your first paragraph explains why they did it, it doesn’t really help the fact that they did do it even when there were other options and the “cool down” period as well.

It’s still uncertain if they did or didn’t know about the humans in there. And besides, if they had picked a random door, there is still a percentage of danger. And besides, the one they chose apparently was in a trailer, less room than you’d imagine. If they truely thought about him getting back, then they would have seen if it was a safe place, at least in terms of him being “out of action” for awhile.

Good work Nausicaa. It’s not exactly revenge…
For Wazowski, he enjoyed it. He never really liked Randall at all, for his own personal reasons. He’d probably never think about the repercussions (good for him, cause apparently there were none).
As for Sullivan he was in “father/cub” mode, and his senses had left him. But this “mode” can prove rather dangerous for him. In all the time it took to get from the door on the rail to one of the platforms (and changing hands) he STILL did not think of an alternative.

#91

Yeah, to be honest the scene is a little vague in terms of timing. I just always thought of it in that sort of way. My theory’s probably full of holes

Maybe the door thing was the easiest to do with the tools at hand? It’d be faster to get a hold of a door than to find something to tie him up (I’m assuming, I’d have to rewatch the scene).

I like to see it as half-revenge. Throwing him through the door fufilled the practical purpose of getting him out of the way, but was also the method that would give them more enjoyment. Personally I think that they didn’t know what was behind the door, but that’s up to debate really.

I’m likely quite biased towards Mike and Sulley because I like them more than Randall.

#92

Regardless, to make holes you need points ^_- And you had a few.

Hmm…rope probably isn’t around…heh heh…and can’t imagine them using a cowboy rope from a child’s toy chest heh. But in terms of tools, doors ARE what they mostly hand.
Still…unfortunately that doesn’t change that there WAS time. What we see from them in the room to the platform is seconds, but the time that DID transpire were at least several minutes. In that time, they could have simply handed him over to the C.D.A. Heck, Randall might have even singled out that Waternoose was behind it all, surprising both of them, and all three would place the blame (rightful as it was) on the crab.

Yes, as said, who knows if they knew the door or not. It was ironic tossing him into a swamp area…folds arms As we see, Randall wouldn’t have been the best choice for such a scareing. Wazowski’s no scarer…Sullivan on the other hand…
The point of the above is if this door fits with any of their “scare profiles”. If so, then perhaps, being a very good assistant, Wazowski could have picked the door out if, in fact, it was actually one Sullivan used.
Still, what I think can bug someone is…there…didn’t appear to be a child in the trailer. Just a probable teenager and his mom. And unsure if a father in this picture would take to caring for a young one when they could just stay home. Even more so if it’s nighttime.

That’s alright, you are thinking some-what fairly in the matter. Kudos to you for that Nausicaa.

#93

Thanks!

I was wondering about the lack of kids… maybe they picked up a door that was out of current use, but was being saved in case future children lived there. Or maybe the kid was just quiet/ out of the house.

#94

Your welcome :smiley:

Oh in such a confined space, doubt a kid would sit still or be quite when their mother is beating on a monster.
But you do make a point though…there were many doors stacked on one another…if they were broken, Sullivan and Wazowski wouldn’t have been able to get out of one. If they were to be shredded, it would have already been done given how quickly it was ordered for one TO be shredded.
Perhaps they are new doors. And this would leave even a greater possibility that the door may have been random. Doubt they would have plucked a door from the railings if there was a stack just sitting on the platform.

#95

Yeah, it would make sense to pick a door from the platform. I kind of figured it was. If it was a new door, then Mike wouldn’t know where it would lead (unless they specifically looked through a stack). So maybe it was random, like you said.

Ahh, there’s so many possibilities with this scene!

#96

There are various legal differences between countries in the end, while there is no denying that the monster world HAS one and one which uses juries and hence trials things differ between countries. Heck for Americans on the board certain things differ for them from state to state.

However the thing is what they did wasn’t very smart unless they knew at least a little about where they were throwing him or about the door vault. I mean whose to say that if they didn’t know something would slow him down that he would appear from a door right beside Boos? I mean seriously. When going a few doors across can mean you go between Japan and FRANCE it’s kind of illogical how they arrange the doors in any case. But it’s still possible.

It just isn’t very smart of them. They’ve been going through doors for a while in the chase. Surely they see how easy it is for Randall to get back unless something can slow him down, and it’s possible any door her got back from had he not been stopped, as being very close to Boo’s door in the door vault. It’s a risky thing if so not just for Randall’s safety but for their own, and not very bright at all. Plus they did have a few minutes to think on that at least. Why did neither of them realise that was pretty stupid?!

Possibly they knew the area at least was something where the next door to get through but be pretty dang hard to get to even if they didn’t account for humans. (We don’t see any other trailers or places of residence).

Speaking morally surrounding the issue though I guess an analogy would be… wait hold on.

Say’s there’s this person A. They really have to do something. Unfortunatly for them they are being pursued by Person B who is making things more than a LITTLE bit difficult for them (understatement). Person B is attacking A. Eventually however Person A had B in their power. Now as this takes place they are at a hill, it doesn’t maybe even look all that dangerous or steep and aftera few minutes of contemplation person A throws person B down it.

Person B might result in getting some scrapes (like Randall could get a knocked head it he hit the other end of the trailer and there were no people in it) but overall nothing too bad should happen from THAT action.

Except there are cannibals or dangerous animals in the area and down where the hill is, but A never noticed. Thing is person A should have know there was a RISK of that and that those people/creatures were a very high possibility because it is in a place they inhabit and have been sighted. Sure it’s possible sure animals will leave them alone (if they’ve already eaten or freeze up/run away) but there’s a possibility they won’t and attack. Person A at the very least could get into trouble for gross negligence or in layman’s terms simply being pretty stupid. Plus of course there was the possibility that throwing them down the hill wouldn’t have even slown them down enough had said cannibals/dangerous animals not appeared. They could possibly get their bearings quite quickly and get to you quite easily unless you knew something else on the area.

Basically endangerment charges and a lot of people would be like ‘Why didn’t you tie that person up to that tree or knock them out or something’? Seriously that’s not the best way to deal with someone either logically or ethically speaking. Which is it person A? Is it heck, both?’

And if he B dies, while you are not guilty of murder you do get manslaughter to contend with in the end. (If not legally speaking, still morally and technically speaking. If Randall died, they committed manslaughter).

However in the end I think the problems stem from the fact we never see Randall get out so it’s safe to say he’s probably still there. We never see Sulley or Mike question this either. Or anyone. And even if you didn’t like the guy it would be pretty weird that no-one would be even the slightest bit curious about that. About how it seems he didn’t get out.

Of course Sulley (and Mike) could have started off with that idea all the same, and let’s face it while not stupid they’re not always the smartest tacks on the cork board, but they’d still probably get into some trouble for it if it was made public if it wasn’t for the CDA clearing the mess up.

It makes you wonder what happens if Randall really never did show up though in many ways. Not just to him, but how it affects things in the monster world and when Waternoose is charged etc.

#97

^This, hopefully Randall can turn over a new leaf and make things right with everyone if he returns in the sequel.

#98

Well for me, I’d say yes. Look at how evil he was, kidnapping children and extracting their screams using a machine. If he’d just been handed to the CDA, they’d be a possibility of him escaping. However, now that they’ve banished him, it’ll be harder for him to get back since the caravan seems to be in the middle of nowhere.

#99

Geoff, as an adult, and not a young adult at that, I’ve learned that people are NOT born evil, nor good. Same would apply to monsters. “Evil” implies that there is something inherently wrong with someone; they are sociopaths or psychopaths and incapable of making what most of us would consider a proper moral decision. Now, I also have learned that companies carefully screen workers for any indication that the applicant might be trouble down the line, especially for those applying for high-risk positions, such as Scarers. IF Randall was “evil”, as you say, he never would have made it pas the first round of background checks, psyhological/mental evaluation tests and interviews that job applicants are subject to.

As for the “kidnapping” part, you’re seeing it from a human perspective, and making the incorrect assumption that the monsters would see human children the same way that WE do, when obviously they didn’t. “Kidnapping” applies only to taking someone who is your own species against their will. For a monster to take a human child, from THEIR perspective, would be analogous to a human taking a puppy away from its mother, or in this case, for a human scientist to take a baby lab rat away from its mother, since that’s how the monsters clearly saw human children, as nothing more than lower animals, and dangerous ones at that. I’ll bet you have not even considered that the CDA’s protocol was to blow up and KILL any human children they encountered, have you? And yet, I’d bet you’ve never, ever, ever considered the CDA to be “evil”. The thought probably has never once crossed your youthful mind. I’d also bet a paycheck that you have never, EVER once thought of Mike Wazowski as “evil” for wanting to toss Boo out in the woods somewhere to starve/freeze/be eaten by animals, or to leave her loose in the factory for the CDA to find and kill, or to launch over the city by means of a giant catapult. All of those things, had they been carried out, would have been absolutely 100% lethal to a human child, yet there is no evidence whatsoever that the Scream Extractor would have been. In fact, it would have been pointless and self-defeating if it had been. So, I have to ask-WHY the heck is Randall “evil” for wanting to use human children to test the machine, while Mike and the CDA aren’t “evil” at all for wanting to KILL a human child?

But back to the original question: perhaps in the UK vigilante “justice” and lynching are acceptable means of dealing with those you feel have wronged you. If so, I never want to visit there at all, because it sounds like a really dangerous and chaotic situation. Here in the US those things are illegal, and it is NEVER acceptable for people to take the law into their own hands and decide on the “punishment” of another person. Those things are forbidden in every state. There is no evidence that Monstropolis was such a lawless, anarchic place, either, where anyone had the right to “punish” anyone else they felt had done them wrong, using any means necessary.

pitbulllady

#100

I see what you mean. You make alot of good points. What I said before is just the way I see it. I agree with you on most parts though, like human children only being like animals to the monsters.