Is John McClane Knightly?

[Thorsteinn]

I've noticed that John McClane, for all his whining, is rather knightly. He steps up, he fights bad guys, he protects the innocent, and he kills who needs killing, while leading by example.

Nobody's Hero scene from Live Free or Die Hard

... and later in the same film
John McClane: Hey, thanks for saving my daughter's life.
Matt Farrell: [shrugs] What was I going to do?
John McClane: That's what makes you "that guy."
Matt Farrell: [smiles] Yeah.

[Sir William]

McClane's not just knightly, he's Paladin-class.

[Jon Blair]

I'm not sure. There are the points you address to his favor, but on the other hand, he uses deceit to overcome his enemies (the gun taped to his back in Die Hard as an example, which arguably he needed to use to get the drop on the bad guys), shows no mercy (of course, that's Hollywood for you), and is very much the everyman in archetype. So, I'd argue that he has more in common with a yeoman in the vein of the Robin Hood than a knight, doing that which he feels is right, but not always in a way that is an exemplar of knighthood.

[Sir William]

I suppose it depends on which definition of 'knightly' you subscribe to- the ideal, or the actual men who were supposed to hold themselves up to that ideal?  I see McClane as a knightly figure- I mean what everyman you know of would actually undertake such an operation to rescue a large number of people he basically didn't know (with the exception of his wife) against a cadre of well-armed and well-trained mercenaries?  But then that begs the question- were knights really tasked with protecting the populace?  The French would disagree w/regard to their English cousins razing the French countryside during The Hundred Years' war; the indigenous populations of Outreljourdain may not agree with you w/regard to their Templar oppressors; so maybe knighthood was less about protecting those who couldn't protect themselves and simply a means of advancement up into the social strata?

We of the Order uphold the Marshal as the standard of knighthood but even he had his detractors.  Who can say?  I think it meant different things for different people back then, depending on one's social standing et al.  Even as it does now, though the more romantic vision of knights-errant seems to be the prevailing opinion of modern times.  Most of the stories I grew up on, which formed my early views on knighthood were largely just that, stories- usually fantastical, certainly entertaining...but true?  Definitely not all of them, that's for sure.

[Lord Dane]

This topic is best summed up as "Yippee Kai-Yeaaaaa, mother-f*#$er!!!" 

[Thorsteinn]

Also think about McClane after reading this little post.

http://destinyeclipsed.tumblr.com/post/136346722194/rabbittiddy-steamchef-roane72-okay-but

"Okay, but the funny part here (aside from Lilian), is that Cap does this ALL THE TIME in the comics. Like, this exchange. Even in the little bit I read, I saw it two or three times:

Villain: You won’t do the thing, you’re Captain America.

Cap: Nope. *indicates less morally upright companion* They will.

Which kind of suggests that Cap is less about moral uprightness and more about plausible deniability.

He’s still just a paladin in a mixed-alignment party. “I can’t kill that orc, because it’s unarmed, and I’m a paladin of justice. My ranger buddy, however, can totally do that. So go ahead, ranger buddy.�

Paladin America knows the benefit of utilitarian good.

[Jon Blair]

Standing back and letting evil happen is just as bad as doing the evil itself. John Stuart Mill once said, "Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing." There is another evil though, one recognized by Georges Bernanos: "The first sign of corruption in a society that is still alive is that the end justifies the means." By knowingly allowing the "ranger buddy" to kill the unarmed orc or allowing Black Widow to push the Hydra guy Whatshisface off the roof (something that might have killed him even with Falcon saving him - heart attack anyone?), both the paladin and Captain America have become accomplices to the evil committed by those less moral than they would like to believe themselves to be. John McClane suffers from a similar issue, in that his actions are justified in the end; only circumstance (and the scriptwriter) paints him in a heroic role in that no innocents died due to the actions he committed. And since property damage doesn't seem to matter in a film like Die Hard and its sequels or Captain America: Winter Soldier, we tend to think them heroes because they saved lives. That's all that matters, right? Whatshisface had it coming (so what if he dies) and so did the orc and Sheriff Hans Gruber of Nottingham. Tell that to the fictional woman whose only means of transportation was wrecked (leaving her stranded in New York City) or the small business owner whose imaginary store is destroyed by the actions of the hero stealing (ahem, borrowing without asking) the fictional woman's car and driving it through the storefront to escape the bad guys.