History StrawmanHasAPoint / LiveActionFilms

** The film portrays Don as a DirtyCoward for abandoning his wife Alice when she runs back into a house being overrun by zombies to save a little boy, but it's later established that the boy died anyway (along with everybody else who was hiding in that house at the time, with Alice only surviving because she's immune to the infection). Don was the only other person in the house who survived the outbreak, and it's ''explicitly because'' he ran. To say nothing of the fact that his only real alternative at the time was to engage around fifty infected in what amounts to hand-to-hand combat.

* ''Film/TheWizardOfOz'': Miss Gulch is understandably annoyed that Dorothy continually walks home past her house, with Toto "one or twice a week" running into her yard and chasing her beloved pet cat. Miss Gulch is also right to be angry about Toto biting her. While Miss Gulch ''does'' go wrong in demanding that Toto be destroyed, in one of the most famous cases of DisproportionateRetribution in film which has forever earned the enmity of generations of children, the movie tries to treat her complaints as entirely unjustified as Dorothy ''really'' should have put her dog on a leash after the first or second time. Not helping is Dorothy's refusal to even ''try'' and reason with her, instead threatening to bite her too.

-->'''Ebert''': As the students puzzle their way through, I don't know, the passive pluperfect subjunctive or whatever, I must say I sided with them. Despite the best efforts of dedicated and gifted nuns, I never learned to diagram a sentence, something they believed was of paramount importance. Yet I have made my living by writing and speaking. You learn a language by listening and speaking. You learn how to write by reading. It's not an abstraction. Do you think the people who first used the imperfect tense felt the need to name it?

* ''Film/TheBigLebowski'': The titular character is an unpleasant jerk, [[spoiler: unrepentant thief, mythomaniac and emotionally abusive husband]], but he is absolutely correct in his assertions that he was in no way responsible for the pee stains on the Dude's rug, and does not owe him a new one.

** In a greater scope, humanity in general. Klaatu arrives with zero warning, shuts down all power on Earth (with the exception of hospitals and in-flight airplanes) -- which still potentially causes thousands of deaths -- all to deliver a message of complete annihilation if they do anything remotely "threatening" to a planet they didn't even know existed solely because Earth has the ''theoretical'' capability to attack them, not because of any action Earth intentionally or unintentionally made against them. This makes Klaatu's planet look extremely hostile and xenophobic, ruining the film's intended message.

* In ''Film/OneHundredAndOneDalmatians1996'', the evil fashion exec Cruella Deville is dismissive of the idea that Anita, her employee, should leave her job in the event of marriage. This is meant to show Deville as callous and cynical, but her observation that marriage tends to deal a massive blow to a woman's career is unfortunately true -- or at least, as at the time period.

* In ''Film/OneHundredAndOneDalmatians1996'', the evil fashion exec Cruella Deville is dismissive of the idea that Anita, her employee, should leave her job in the event of marriage. This is meant to show Deville as callous and cynical, but her observation that marriage tends to deal a massive blow to a woman's career is unfortunately true -- or at least, [[SocietyMarchesOn was at the time period]].

* At the end of ''Film/GodsNotDead'', despite Josh getting Radisson to admit he hates God, Radisson tells Josh that this doesn't prove anything and Josh hasn't proven God exists. Radisson is correct; Josh hasn't proven anything. Everything Josh has stated over the course of the lecture has not given any actual proof. One could say he simply sought to put on a good case for God's existence, a.k.a. the God-in-Gap Defense [[note]] [[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps Essentially science can't be sure, therefore God]] [[/note]], which was arguably his actual intent. But this is negated as they treat it as fact that God does exist (which is a logical fallacy called "BeggingTheQuestion" -- essentially, Josh is assuming that his premise of God's existence has already been proven, when it hasn't). Radisson also makes a fair point by noting that free will can't explain natural evil (e.g. disasters caused by weather events), a standard counterargument to this, which goes unanswered by Josh.

* In ''Film/CatchingFaith'', John Taylor gets caught drinking alcohol while underage at a party. His family pressures him to accept responsibility by confessing, even though that meant that he could not play any more games during the rest of the football season. Later, his coach talks to John on this issue. John, while still resentful, does bring up the point in that many other people, especially members of the same football team, engaged in underage consumption of alcohol, yet they appeared to be getting scot-free. The coach instead doubles down on the "take responsibility of your actions" moral. Indeed, not only the film never touches upon what exactly has happened to everyone else at that party, but, also, all of the other football players did not get the punishment that John got. [[BrokenAesop So, it's only wrong if you do it?]]

* In ''Film/TheDayTheEarthStoodStill2008'' various characters from the government and military are depicted as being callous, paranoid, and inhumane when they immediately imprison the injured alien visitor and attempt to interrogate him about what he's doing on Earth. Even though the viewers are supposed to be disgusted with their behavior, there's one minor problem; Klaatu is indeed planning to destroy the entire human race, taking all of a day and a couple interviews to verify it as the right course. [[ProperlyParanoid The "inhumane" government officials were completely correct to treat him as an enemy.]]

* The closest thing that ''Film/TwoThousandTwelve'' has to a villain is Oliver Platt's heartless presidential adviser, who's an obvious TakeThat to UsefulNotes/GeorgeWBush and Dick Cheney -- note that his name is Anheuser, presumably after Anheuser-''Busch'' breweries. However, after the fifth or sixth argument where his level-headed pragmatism is contrasted with the HonorBeforeReason [[ChronicHeroSyndrome Save Everyone]] bleeding-heart attitude of the rest of the cast, you kind of have to wonder if maybe the writers did not secretly agree with him. Some examples:

* ''Film/AmericanBeauty'' makes the uptight Carolyn seem like another one of Lester's problems we are to sympathize with him for having. Yet she is absolutely right when she criticizes him for abruptly quitting his job and putting the burden of supporting the hhold on her; later, when the two seem about to reconcile and have afternoon sex on the living room couch, she stops when she realizes he's holding an open beer bottle. Would it have been too much to ask for him to put it down so they don't spill it over expensive upholstery, which would require some extensive cleaning to get the smell out?

* In the dystopian film ''[[Film/TheCondemned The Condemned]]'', main villain Ian Breckel has a surprisingly convincing argument against ThinkOfTheChildren. Of course, since he's the villain, he's in the wrong (although he loses points for taking it [[Main/MurderDotCom too far the other way]]).

* ''Film/DeadPoetsSociety'': [[https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/02/-em-dead-poets-society-em-is-a-terrible-defense-of-the-humanities/283853/ This essay by a literature PHD]] sympathizes more with the rigid administration than heroic BlitheSpirit Keating. Keatings tells the class to ignore actual literary study and just enjoy the feeling of the poems, basically telling them to act as ''fans'' instead of ''scholars'', which kind of defeats the purpose of a literature class. Also, he quotes a number of poems out of context [[MisaimedFandom in ways that completely change the message of the poem]], and all his talk about learning to think for yourself really means learning to think like he does, and his classes really are disruptive to the school.

* In ''Film/TheDevilWearsPrada'', Miranda Priestly delivers a TheReasonYouSuckSpeech to her poor, put-upon assistant Andrea, who just wants to be a writer and doesn't understand why everybody looks down on her for not being a fashionista. The problem is that she works for the editor of a ''fashion'' magazine. Miranda's speech shows quite nicely that problematic though it is, the industry influences everyone and is ignored at one's own peril. Moreover, thinking that you're "above" the field you work in is not a professional attitude or one you should display in front of your boss and coworkers, who have slaved and sacrificed to succeed in an intensely cutthroat line of work.

* In ''Film/{{Dragonslayer}}'', King Casiodorus is presented as a villain whose great crime is creating the lottery by which innocent virgins are sacrificed to the dragon Vermithrax. The thing is, though, the lottery ''worked''. Casiodorus tells the story of how his brother Gazerick, a brave warrior king, went out to try and slay the dragon. Vermithrax killed Gazerick and all his men, then laid waste to whole towns in retaliation. The point is underscored when [[spoiler:Galen's first bungled effort at dragon-slaying provokes a slaughter]]. Casiodorus's solution of pacifying the dragon with a handful of sacrifices was far better. Even though Casiodorus is later shown to be a hypocrite who [[spoiler:accepts bribes to keep rich ladies out of the lottery, then jettisons the whole scheme when his own daughter offers herself up]], no one ever presents a compelling answer to his argument: better a few should die so that many may live.
* A frequent problem in CowboyCop type movies, particularly ''Film/DirtyHarry'', where the wishy-washy liberal superiors chastise Harry for his flagrant abuse of the rights of the suspect and ignorance of police procedure. But the thing is, they are right, and Harry would be a terrifyingly dangerous person in real life. This whole issue was deliberately acknowledged in the first film, ''Film/DirtyHarry'', where [[UnbuiltTrope the superior turns out to be completely right: it's not good to be a loose cannon]]. Its sequel ''Film/MagnumForce'' acknowledged this with the primary antagonists being a group of loose-cannon cops who crossed lines Harry wouldn't. It is instructive to note that despite all the other rules he breaks, Harry never actually killed anyone outside standard law enforcement rules of engagement.

* Edward Rooney in ''Film/FerrisBuellersDayOff''. It's his job to prevent truancy among his students and ensure attendance. While he clearly oversteps his authority by the end of the film, and although Ferris had a parentally excused absence, that doesn't change the fact that Ferris was skipping school, has done so at least nine times prior (he hacks into the school computer to change the records), does so by blatantly exploiting the good will of everyone, including his parents (he tricked them into excusing him from school, so even though he's excused it's just more proof of Rooney's accusations), and was also taking other students out of school while they were under Rooney's care. And Ferris's sister Jeane is also treated as a villain who just wants to catch Ferris out of spite, even though she never does anything immoral -- rather she counters several of Ferris' immoral acts.

*** Forget has a point. The straw man is wrong because he was too easy on Venkman! Venkman manipulates the test, so the study's entire validity is gone, he shocks people in an experiment that almost certainly would never clear an ethics panel, he shocks the nerdy man when he gets it right, he does while clearly enjoying himself, and he manipulates the experiment to try to convince an attractive test subject that she has psychic powers in order to sleep with her. At this point, the University is protecting the public from a dangerous man who has no business being in the sciences. Merely firing Venkman is going way too easy on him; criminal charges likely would be warranted, stripping him of his doctorate is certainly reasonable, and any academic body he belongs to should be censuring and blacklisting him at the least.

* In ''Film/{{JFK}}'', the opposing argument to Jim Garrison's conspiracy scenario is laid out nicely by Bill Broussard (played by Creator/MichaelRooker). While yes, Broussard was [[spoiler:secretly working with the FBI against Garrison]], he nonetheless raises an excellent point when he criticizes Garrison's scenario regarding the assassination of [[UsefulNotes/JohnFKennedy President Kennedy]] -- which, according to Garrison, involves the CIA, FBI, anti-Castro Cubans, the Mafia, the Dallas Police, right-wing oil billionaires, and the military-industrial complex to name just a few. Broussard lays out the best argument for lone gunman proponents when he says that such a conspiracy would be impossible to successfully pull off and keep a secret, owing to how complicated such a conspiracy would be and how many people would have to be involved (something real people have also argued). True, Broussard's own theory isn't great either, but his criticism of Garrison unintentionally undermines the film's pro-conspiracy message. Given that Garrison is mostly a mouthpiece for Creator/OliverStone to voice his own views, and that the person whom Broussard was based upon was claimed by the real Garrison to have undermined his case from day one (and Stone largely believed whatever Garrison said), Broussard is treated as a villain while Garrison is portrayed as in the right, regardless of the at best dubious and at worst nonsensical nature of his entire premise.

* In the Creator/RolandEmmerich ''Film/{{Godzilla|1998}}'', Mayor Ebert is already intended to be a character the audience should hate [[TakeThatCritics because he's clearly based on]] Creator/RogerEbert, who criticized some of Emmerich's previous films. Therefore, he's set up as a whiny moron who constantly badgers the military and makes terrible decisions in light of a mass panic. However, most of them are dead on -- at one point he chastises the commander for doing more damage than the lizard himself (at which point he is comically thrown a bag of chocolates because HE'S FAT). He's ''dead right'' though -- at the time he shouts that line, the military's blundering, clumsy efforts and lack of regard for life and property in containing Godzilla have caused far more on-camera casualties than Godzilla himself has. One of the highlights being the military's destruction of the Chrysler building when they miss Godzilla... No doubt there were still people inside given how many people were still trapped inside the city (and not to mention a building of that size going down would cause a lot of collateral damage...), which prompted the outburst in the first place.

* ''Film/JohnnyEnglish'': Very similar to the James Bond example above, we have Pegasus, the M stand in for the film and clearly designed to be either an ObstructiveBureaucrat or just blind to what is in front of him. Johnny is obviously right about Sauvage from the word go. The problem is that his evidence is entirely circumstantial. The fact that two of his employees turned out to be assassins for example is no more an example of Sauvage being behind anything than the head of any other company would be if two people working for him turned out to be criminals. And then of course we have the obvious: an aged James Bond is still James Bond, whereas Johnny English in his prime is an agent of dubious competence with an obvious dislike of the French who only got the job because there was no one else left. It is not unfair for Pegasus to subject him to higher scrutiny than he might have done to anyone else.

* ''Film/AmericanBeauty'' makes the uptight Carolyn seem like another one of Lester's problems we are to sympathize with him for having. Yet she is absolutely right when she criticizes him for abruptly quitting his job and putting the burden of supporting the household on her; later, when the two seem about to reconcile and have afternoon sex on the living room couch, she stops when she realizes he's holding an open beer bottle. Would it have been too much to ask for him to put it down so they don't spill it over expensive upholstery, which would require some extensive cleaning to get the smell out?

* ''Film/{{Night of the Living Dead|1968}}: 30th Anniversary Edition'': Reverend Hicks miraculously survives being bitten by a zombie, and at the end goes on a deranged rant that the zombies are demons from hell. He is supposed to come across as TheFundamentalist, but his fanatical belief that the zombie plague is supernatural in origin isn't really any more preposterous than it simply being some sort of virus.
** First, he is in fact spared, which does come across as miraculous, and second, it takes WillingSuspensionOfDisbelief for HollywoodScience to explain movie zombies with a virus; even undergraduate level biology would reveal it's a scientifically silly (if fun) idea. Science-based zombie explanations are invariably TechnoBabble, but magic or divine intervention has no such constraint.

** Dr. Adrian complains that "only rich people" are being let onto the Arks, to which Anheuser responds that the money they spent buying tickets is what funded the Arks in the first place. That and [[DeadpanSnarker snarking]] "Oh, you mean life ''isn't fair?!''" No one seems to point out that those "rich people" won't be rich after the catastrophe. Even if they could take all their money with them, it'll be worthless in a world without an economy to back it up. They'll have to work just like everyone else, and will find it significantly harder than those who have developed skills that might actually apply in rebuilding society, such as construction, science, logistics, or agriculture. Also, it's not like any debt accumulated from building them would actually ''matter'' when the world ends. The countries could have spent themselves into bankruptcy ten times over.

* In ''Film/TheLostWorldJurassicPark'' the villains, [=InGen=] corporation, are portrayed as evil because they want to recapture the dinosaurs from Isla Sorna to recoup their losses from the first film. While they were pretty ruthless, [[VillainyFreeVillain as well as dicks with the exception of two]] (hunter Roland Tembo and his buddy Ajay), their argument that the dinosaurs are their rightful property does have merit. When the heroes call them out on destroying the island's "natural" environment, the CorruptCorporateExecutive points out that they created the dinosaurs and introduced them to the island in the first place, millions of years and thousands of miles from their actual long-gone natural habitat. The heroes have no counterargument to this other than Nick trying to start a fight. This is one of those cases where what's right legally may or may not be what's right morally, but it's certainly not as cut-and-dried as the film would like to present it.

** No one knows if the Chinese are actually willing to execute Bishop -- in diplomatese, such threat is often a call to the bidding table, to see how much the US are willing to sacrifice in order to get their man back. The fact that the CIA officials do not talk about any negotiations does not mean they are not happening. (Especially considering that the US and China are about to sign a major trade agreement; Bishop's capture is a good opportunity for the Chinese to negotiate some benefits in exchange for the spy.)

** Beatings and Chinese prison conditions notwithstanding, numerous Chinese prison guards were shot and in all probability killed to save a single captured person detained in lawful custody, not to mention the risk posed to the American soldiers themselves. From a utilitarian perspective, that's a lot of innocent or barely-complicit lives traded for one life.

* ''Film/StarTrekInsurrection'': This is a common criticism of the film, as Picard and his crew ''mutiny'' rather than remove people who aren't even native to a planet, number less than 1000, who're sitting on a literal fountain of youth that could save the lives of millions...all during the Dominion War, a conflict the Federation is badly losing at this point, where it could turn the tide in their favor. What's even worse, is that if the Federation and its allies ''lose'' the war, they predict that over a hundred billion people will ''die''. Of course, strawman villains are used to shore up Picard's side as being right -- the bad guys are [[KickTheDog dog-kickers]] who want revenge on the pacifist Baku (plus [[BeautyEqualsGoodness they're ugly]]), so by the movie's logic this makes it okay. Even many cast members (including the ''director'', Jonathan Frakes), felt that in this case removing the Baku would have been acceptable. The sad part is that this would have been easily avoided by having the reveal be that the slaving drug-dealing Dominion allies they were working with were ''lying'' about the benefits. This is never so much as suggested.

* ''Film/TheWizardOfOz'': Miss Gulch is understandably annoyed that Dorothy continually walks home past her house, with Toto "one or twice a week" running into her yard and chasing her beloved pet cat. Miss Gulch is also right to be angry about Toto biting her. While Miss Gulch ''does'' go wrong in demanding that Toto be destroyed, in one of the most famous cases of DisproportionateRetribution in film which has forever earned the enmity of generations of children, the movie tries to treat her complaints as entirely unjustified as Dorothy ''really'' should have put her dog on a leash after the first or second time.
* In the made-for-TV movie ''Film/{{Zenon}}: The [[{{Pun}} Zequel]]'', General Hammond ([[Franchise/StargateVerse no, not that one]]) arrives to decommission the station, which was still suffering the after-effects of the sabotage in the previous film. His actions are seen by the main characters as evil. Here's what he really does: decommission an unstable space station before it falls to Earth, doing untold damage, attempt to apprehend a girl who thinks it's okay to smuggle aboard a shuttle, chase after spaceship thieves, and other actions perfectly in line with what any good soldier or policeman would do.

* ''Film/{{Night of the Living Dead|1968}}: 30th Anniversary Edition'': Reverend Hicks miraculously survives being bitten by a zombie, and at the end goes on a deranged rant that the zombies are demons from hell. He is supposed to come across as TheFundamentalist, but his fanatical belief that the zombie plague is supernatural in origin isn't really any more preposterous than it simply being some sort of virus. In fact, one could argue that it makes even more sense because magical or paranormal elements in stories don't strain the WillingSuspensionOfDisbelief in the same way that HollywoodScience does.

*** Forget has a point. The straw man is wrong because he was too easy on Venkman! Venkman manipulates the test, so the study's entire validity is gone, he shocks people in an experiment that almost certainly would never clear an ethics panel, he shocks the nerdy man when he gets it right, he does while clearly enjoying himself, and he manipulates the experiment to try to convince an attractive test subject that she has psychic powers in order to sleep with her. At this point, the University is protecting the public for a dangerous man who has no business being in the sciences. Merely firing Venkman is going way too easy on him; criminal charges likely would be warranted, stripping him of his doctorate is certainly reasonable, and any academic body he belongs to should be censuring andd disbarring him at the least.

** Later on in the film, Kevin's mother slaps the hotel concierge for telling her not to go out looking for Kevin by herself, even though he points how huge and dangerous New York is, especially in the middle of the night, which is when she wants to go looking. Even Kevin's dad tries to tell her it's a bad idea, but she's insistent. We're supposed to take her side as a concerned parent, but she's needlessly putting herself in all kinds of danger just on the off-chance she might find out where Kevin is in a place as huge as New York City.

*** Forget has a point. The straw man is wrong because he was too easy on Venkman! Venkman manipulates the test, so the study's entire validity is gone, he shocks people in an experiment with no ethical oversight, he shocks the nerdy man when he gets it right, he does to clearly enjoying himself, and he manipulates the experiment to try to convince an attractive test subject that she has psychic powers in order to sleep with her. At this point, the University is protecting the public for a dangerous man who has no business being in the sciences. Merely firing Venkman is going way too easy on him; criminal charges likely would be warranted and any academic body he belongs to should be censuring him at the least.

* ''Film/BillyMadison'' has an instance where this is acknowledged in universe. Eric is a CorruptCorporateExecutive who merely wants to run Madison Hotels, but he ''is'' right when he points out that the company's fifty-thousand employees are not likely to have jobs for very long if the president makes his drunkard son (who only graduated because his father bribed his teachers) president of the company. Before Billy strikes a deal to graduate legitimately his father agrees, temporarily handing the reins over to Eric. After some CharacterDevelopment, even Billy himself concludes that he's not cut out for the management of a large company and turns it over to Carl, who is both competent and not a {{Jerkass}}. Even Billy's objection to his father turning the company over to Eric is because "he's a bad bad man," not because Billy personally wanted to do it.

* In ''Film/BillyMadison'', Eric is supposed to be a CorruptCorporateExecutive who merely wants to run Madison Hotels. However, he ''is'' right when he points out that the company's fifty-thousand employees are not likely to have jobs for very long if the president makes his drunkard son (who only graduated because his father bribed his teachers) president of the company. Notably, before Billy strikes a deal to graduate legitimately, this actually ''does'' temporarily convince Billy's father to hand the reins over to Eric. It's also noteworthy that, after some CharacterDevelopment, Billy himself concludes that he's not cut out for the management of a large company and turns it over to Carl, who is both competent and not a {{Jerkass}}.[[note]]Also perhaps worth noting that Billy's initial objection also seemed to be his father turning the company over to Eric because "he's a bad guy," not because he wanted to do it; it's suggested that Billy otherwise wouldn't have been too bothered.[[/note]] As for Eric losing his cool and drawing a gun in the climax, remember that he just lost the chemistry competition due to the judges accepting that Billy was able to freeze a ''boot''.
* In ''Film/Bruno2009'', Creator/{{Sacha Baron Cohen}}'s goal as the titular character is to "expose the undercurrent of homophobia in American society". But he does this by assuming the character of an outrageously, nauseatingly flamboyant caricature of the worst stereotypes of homosexual men (to say nothing of [[ThoseWackyNazis idolizing Hitler as Austria's greatest national character]] despite Hitler persecuting LGBT people), and then engaging in what is fundamentally sexual harassment of various men who cross his path. The "homosexual hate" he encounters, in a lot of cases, feels less like homophobia and more like a perfectly natural response to being accosted by such an unpleasant, highly offensive individual.

* In ''Film/TheClass'', a French teacher (François Bégaudeau) struggles to teach grammar to his often apathetic students. Though the students are fleshed out and late in the film the teacher is disrespectful and called out for it, thereby avoiding {{Straw Character}}s, the audience is expected to take his side about the necessity of grammar. Not all agreed with it, though.

* In ''Franchise/StarWars: Film/TheLastJedi'', there are a lot of questionable lessons imparted in the movie. The biggest one is that Poe's character development is supposed to be becoming less of a hot-head, but in the context of the universe and previous stories, his actions are actually ''right'', and Vice-Admiral Holdo [[LockedOutOfTheLoop refusing to tell anybody what the plan was]], or that there even ''was'' a plan, [[PoorCommunicationKills gets a number of people killed]]. If he also hadn't led the bombing run to destroy the cruiser (and the bombers all went forth on their own volition), the cruiser might well have destroyed their fleet as soon as the First Order tracked them through Hyperspace.