>> I think one of my key issues with Nick Fury isn't HIS actions, though: as Ysabet pointed out, other people don't do much to call him on it when he goes too far. <<
Agreed. When people are not held accountable for their actions, they have no outside reason to behave decently; and for some people, inside reasons are not sufficient.
>> Hill's comment was so understated as to be tepid, and honestly, if she's high enough rank and has worked with Fury long enough, she'd be the one (surviving) person to openly call Fury on his BS. <<
Ideally, yes.
>> Yet, she didn't do more than make a mildly snarky comment. Just imagine the scene if she'd said, "If you play it this way, it'll probably blow up in your face... Sir." Still following enough protocol, still citing her objection, but doing so in much stronger ways. <<
It would have been much better. On the other hoof, it would also have derailed the movie plot. On the third hoof, Hill is very astute and very subtle. Like Phil, she can say a great deal, with very little of it out loud. To her that may have been a pointed warning, simply because she said it aloud when normally she does not contradict her senior officer. Then too, Hill likely suspects that something is wrong with Fury, which makes her more inclined to use covert rather than overt means of damage control.
>> Then again, I have this problem with the majority of mainstream entertainment. <<
I agree. It's a key reason why I watch less and less of that.
>> Cop shows/detective shows/crime dramas all include at least a couple MAJOR violations of innocent persons' rights, which are either utterly ignored or blown off with victim blaming, to the tune of: "innocent people shouldn't mind---" <<
Typically yes.
>> when the blank is filled with anything from random locker searches in schools to TSA agents manhandling people with impunity. <<
Understand that much of this material is intended to numb people to the unthinkable so that they become too jaded to fight back effectively. But violations to people's agency do more damage than just the obvious. You wind up with a populace who think it's okay to violate others any way they please, so long as they have the power to do so. This is exactly what sets the scene for pitchforks and torches when that populace turns on its leaders.
I prefer more rational means of problem-solving.
>> Sigh. The world needs more Phil Coulsons and Steve Rogers in it. <<
Re: Why I love Phil--
Date: 2014-04-13 10:28 pm (UTC)Agreed. When people are not held accountable for their actions, they have no outside reason to behave decently; and for some people, inside reasons are not sufficient.
>> Hill's comment was so understated as to be tepid, and honestly, if she's high enough rank and has worked with Fury long enough, she'd be the one (surviving) person to openly call Fury on his BS. <<
Ideally, yes.
>> Yet, she didn't do more than make a mildly snarky comment. Just imagine the scene if she'd said, "If you play it this way, it'll probably blow up in your face... Sir." Still following enough protocol, still citing her objection, but doing so in much stronger ways. <<
It would have been much better. On the other hoof, it would also have derailed the movie plot. On the third hoof, Hill is very astute and very subtle. Like Phil, she can say a great deal, with very little of it out loud. To her that may have been a pointed warning, simply because she said it aloud when normally she does not contradict her senior officer. Then too, Hill likely suspects that something is wrong with Fury, which makes her more inclined to use covert rather than overt means of damage control.
>> Then again, I have this problem with the majority of mainstream entertainment. <<
I agree. It's a key reason why I watch less and less of that.
>> Cop shows/detective shows/crime dramas all include at least a couple MAJOR violations of innocent persons' rights, which are either utterly ignored or blown off with victim blaming, to the tune of: "innocent people shouldn't mind---" <<
Typically yes.
>> when the blank is filled with anything from random locker searches in schools to TSA agents manhandling people with impunity. <<
Understand that much of this material is intended to numb people to the unthinkable so that they become too jaded to fight back effectively. But violations to people's agency do more damage than just the obvious. You wind up with a populace who think it's okay to violate others any way they please, so long as they have the power to do so. This is exactly what sets the scene for pitchforks and torches when that populace turns on its leaders.
I prefer more rational means of problem-solving.
>> Sigh. The world needs more Phil Coulsons and Steve Rogers in it. <<
Yea, verily.
And that's why I write some of the things I do.