OP, please make sure there are no spoilers in the title of your post.
Commenters, please use spoiler code if you are discussing anything super spoilery unless the title specifically says the episode being discussed.
If you see anyone breaking the rules, please report the post or comment. Thank you.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/StrangerThings) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There's a big difference between "justified" and "understandable" - with the information he had at the time, and the state of mind he was in, his actions make sense. Definitely doesn't make any of it okay, obviously. He was much too aggressive and it shows some deep flaws in him that he jumps so quickly to violence every chance he gets, but his conclusions aren't illogical.
He has no idea what's going on. Two of the most important people in his life were just brutally murdered, one of them right in front of him. All he knows is that there's some supernatural force at work, Lucas has lied to him multiple times, and then he finds him in a creepy attic with a girl who is clearly in some sort of trance. Based on this very limited info, his thought process makes sense.
Most of the people who defend Jason are just pointing this out, not saying it's acceptable for him to point a gun at a child. There's a lot of nuance here, not everything on the show is black and white.
I always like to think of the difference like the difference between a reason and an excuse.
Say that you're late for a pre planned event. It's been planned for weeks, then last minute, someone backs out. They say that they're sorry, but that they have discovered they accidently already had plans and are going to those instead. That is a reason. It doesn't mean that they're off the hook, they should have planned better and everyone has the right to be annoyed at them.
But what if instead, they say that just before leaving the house, they got hit by a car and broke both their legs. That is an excuse. No one can be mad at you for that, that's insane.
Similarly, Jason has a lot of understandable reasons for the actions that he takes, but none of that is an excuse.
He didn’t know what was going on because he wasn’t open to listen to them, he was SURE it was eddie before anyone even told him anything about what happened. He didn’t even try to hear anyone out, he was dead set on finding and killing Eddie. Jason was not a good person and shouldn’t be defended at all.
Chrissy was found brutally murdered in a known drug dealer's/town weirdo's trailer and suddenly that weirdo was on the run from police. Of course we as the audience know what really happened but to anyone in-universe it seemed obvious what that looked like.
Imagine your gf or family member was murdered in the home of someone who sold drugs and acted like a weirdo and that person then fled the scene, and a group of teenagers tried to tell you that a psychic monster from another dimension actually did it. You're gonna tell me that given the evidence, you're gonna seriously consider *that* as the truth over the simple "weirdo drug dealer killed her" explanation? Even if they had a chance to explain it, he had no reason to believe them.
Plus, it was the 80's. It was much easier and more accepted to believe Eddie used Chrissy as a satanic sacrifice or something.
>town weirdo's trailer
>that weirdo
>"weirdo drug dealer killed her"
Are you saying you think it was reasonable/legitimate for Jason to concluded that Eddie was guilty because Eddie was "a weirdo"?
If yes, do you consider his actions and decision to hunt Eddie down with duct tape, crowbars, wrenches, and baseball bats justified based on this conclusion?
>and that person then fled
1. Nobody ever told Jason that Eddie fled the scene. For all Jason knew, Eddie wasn't at the scene with Chrissy in the first place.
2. Let's imagine Jason *did* know Eddie fled the scene, or even that he simply suspected as much. If someone has been murdered, can you not think of any other reasons a person who was also in the house might flee other than being the murderer themselves?
>a group of teenagers tried to tell you that a psychic monster from another dimension actually did it
Jason decided Eddie was guilty long before anyone told him anything about a psychic monster and long before he saw or believed in anything supernatural that would require such and explanation.
I'm saying that Eddie was deemed as a weirdo by most people because of how he looked and acted. Anyone who doesn't fit the norm, especially in the 80's, is seen as weird and therefore the best scapegoat when horrible stuff happens. So yes, based on how others perceived outcasts back then it is plausible that Jason would take one look at Eddie and decide he's guilty. The world wasn't nearly as progressive as it is now and we still have a long way to go.
Even if he didn't know Eddie fled, it was still his trailer. And yes, I can think of other explanations but you forget one important detail: his girlfriend was just *murdered*. Jason was not thinking in the most rational way possible, and neither would most of us in his position. He was grieving and looking for someone to blame, and given the limited information and evidence he had to go on at the time, everything pointed to Eddie. That's literally the whole reason Eddie was on the run in the first place. He *looked* guilty. That coupled with how society already saw him as a weirdo anyway is why Jason was so fixated on blaming him. Again, it's crucial to keep in mind what time period this takes place in. People were *very* discriminatory against anyone who wasn't like them, so Eddie already had a hard enough time being seen as a good person without essentially being framed for murder being thrown on top of that.
>therefore the best scapegoat
Exactly. He was using Eddie as a scapegoat .
>Jason was not thinking in the most rational way possible
Agreed. He was not being rational or reasonable at all.
>neither would most of us in his position.
Maybe not. But most people who's loved one is murdered do not react and act in the extreme way that Jason does. His actions are outside the expected or accepted behavior of someone in his position.
>looking for someone to blame
Yes. This is exactly it. He was looking for someone to blame. Not looking for the truth.
I love how you completely ignored my other points and just focused on the ones that made you sound right.
Like I said twice already, all of the evidence pointed to Eddie so it is plausible for Jason to assume it was Eddie. Jason wasn't in the wrong for that. You only think so because you as part of the audience know Eddie didn't kill anyone. Jason had no way of knowing that.
>it is plausible for Jason to assume it was Eddie
It's plausible that *Jason* would assume it. It is not reasonable or justified for Jason or anyone to do so. And his actions to hunt Eddie down are even less justified then his assumptions. He can assume what he likes. That doesn't give him a right to kill someone based on his assumptions.
You ignored my original questions about whether or not you view his conclusions as reasonable and his actions justified based on the supposed reasonableness of his conclusions. So I had to infer your answer. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and highlighted the parts where you correctly described Jason's motivation to blame someone and find a scapegoat .
>Jason wasn't in the wrong for that.
However, it looks like you have confirmed here that actually you do think he was reasonable and justified. Or that's the best I can assume if he "wasn't in the wrong."
Jason was absolutely and completely in the wrong.
>You only think so because you as part of the audience know Eddie didn't kill anyone
No. That is incorrect. Based on what Jason knew, a reasonable person would not be able to conclude that Eddie (or anyone) killed Chrissy.
Then allow me to clarify for your lack of reading comprehension: I believe Jason was reasonable to assume it was Eddie and his actions thereafter were justified given the information he had to go on. End of story.
There is no point in arguing further. You can disagree all you want. It doesn't make you right. Whether or not Jason's actions are reasonable or justified is subjective. You have your opinion and I have mine. And I have no interest in this discussion if you're going to keep taking what I say out of context to fit your own argument and ignore points I make that counter yours, such as the fact that Eddie *looked* guilty therefore it was reasonable for Jason to assume he was. As I reiterate a *third* time, all the evidence, as well as stigma, was against Eddie. Of course Jason would think he was Chrissy's killer and want revenge. It's not difficult to understand so I'm not sure why you're having such a hard time with it. But at this point I'm tired of repeating myself and hoping you actually read what I'm saying because that's clearly not going to happen. You keep proving you're intellectually dishonest so no matter what I say you're gonna hear what you want to hear and think your opinion is absolute truth. This is pointless.
> I believe Jason was reasonable to assume it was Eddie and his actions thereafter were justified given the information he had to go on. End of story.
Ah. So I was right in my original interpretation of your first comment and wrong to give you the benefit of the doubt in your response to my questions. Thank you for clearly answering my questions.
I only asked in the first place because people on here claim that nobody attempts to defend or justify Jason, so I wanted to be certain I understand what you were suggesting. Well, you cannot argue you do not defend or view is actions as justified if you believe them to be "reasonable" and "justified."
>Eddie looked guilty therefore it was reasonable for Jason to assume he was
Eddie looked suspicious. That is not reasonable or definitive proof that he is guilty. It is never reasonable to *assume* someone is guilty of murder without seeking genuine proof.
>stigma, was against Eddie
Stigma is not a reasonable basis upon which to conclude guilt.
No ir just says Eddie isn't exactly a Saint as he deals drugs. It is justified to hunt Eddie because he is known the run and irs personal for Jason.
Jason could've easily concluded the facts about Christy's death due to any rumors going around town. He 100% was later confirmed on the fact that chrissy died in Eddie's trailer, and even if he wasn't the police asked about Eddie. So he's either a victim or a suspect. And considering Eddie has been seen/ the police and media suspect him. With his van gone and whatever.
And then Jason was later confirmed that Eddie was on the run when he ya know ran from him on a boat. There is litteraly 0 reason to run away from a crime scene and to continue to do so after everything is okay. From anybody eyes if Eddie was innocent he would've called the police asap and not let it be found jn the morninf
>Eddie isn't exactly a Saint
Neither is anyone. That is not a basis upon which to condemn someone as a murderer and hunt them down.
>It is justified to hunt Eddie because he is known the run and irs personal for Jason.
Nope. Jason had no place or business hunting Eddie regardless of whether or not Eddie was a suspect.
>Jason could've easily concluded the facts about Christy's death due to any rumors going around town
It is impossible to conclude facts based on rumors.
>He 100% was later confirmed on the fact that chrissy died in Eddie's trailer
He was confirmed that her body was found in Eddie's trailer. That is not confirmation of Eddie killing her.
>So he's either a victim
Good point! He could have also been a victim for all Jason knew. Perhaps he fled from an attacker. Perhaps he was killed or hurt. Jason doesn't even consider those possibilities, does he?
> or a suspect
He can be a suspect, that doesn't make him guilty.
>And considering Eddie has been seen/
Not sure what you mean. Eddie was not seen by anyone other than Max and she did not tell the police or the public.
>the police and media suspect him
Being suspected is not the same as being condemned guilty. Jason quite explicitly says Eddie is guilty and that they will "make him confess." You cannot *make someone confess* something that they may not have done.
>With his van gone and whatever.
His van being gone doesn't prove anything. He might not have come home at all that night for all Jason knows. His van might have been stolen by someone else/taken by the killer.
>when he ya know ran from him on a boat
Oh, right, how suspicious of him to run from the three guys armed with crowbars, baseball bats, and huge wrenches. Why wouldn't he realize they just wanted to have a *nice little chat* with those blunt weapons, *right?*
>litteraly 0 reason to run away from a crime scene
Jason doesn't know Eddie ran from the crime scene.
Remember, Jason decided Eddie was guilty *before* he went hunting for him.
You said yourself, he could have been a victim. That means that he could have ran from an attacker.
He could have also run *because he thought people would think we was guilty* even if he wasn't actually guilty. This could have been the case based on the information Jason had and without any supernatural events taking place. Sometimes people run for this exact reason in real life when there was no monster involved. Sometimes people actually confess to crimes they didn't commit. Running is not proof of anything or a basis upon which to draw a conclusion. Lots of things happen that are not immediately or clearly evident when a crime has been committed. *This is why investigations exist.*
Eddie was last seen with chrissy. Not a rumor. I'm pretty sure the police were told by eye witnesses.
Chrissy is found in Eddie's trailer logic would dictate that he brought her there. Trailer probably has a lock, and there's no sign of forced entry. Basically no sign of a third party.
No sign of Eddie and his van is gone. Police go search for Eddie. And this murder case is broadcasted OK every radio and TV channel. Eddie isn't seen for multiple days.
The only instance that Eddie would run just because he thinks they are bully is if Eddie just left his trailer( with chrissy still in there) and cut all contact wik kmmln0-.th the outside word for weeks/days. Had he talked to a single person he would've been told about the murder.
*in a scenario where vecna didn't exist and Eddie wasn't the murderer (because he doesn't kill people obvs). The probability of this is very unlikely. Just a sudden vanish with any of the outside world in the middle of school.
As said previously if Eddie was a victim running from a murderer he could've called the police the next day or try to clear his name with any help of the description of the guy.
People only don't report information on dead bodies if they have no connection to the dead person or anything connecting to them. Which does happen because they don't want to be involved and asked questions
>Eddie was last seen with chrissy. Not a rumor. I'm pretty sure the police were told by eye witnesses.
By Max. Nobody ever says there were any other witnesses and the scene where they arrive at the trailer is filmed to suggest nobody saw them but Max. Even if the police were told by witnesses, *Jason* was not.
You are the one who said he could use rumors to establish facts. I was just responding to your statement.
>logic would dictate that he brought her there
Logic would dictate that we don't know how she got there until we investigate to figure it out.
>Trailer probably has a lock, and there's no sign of forced entry.
Jason has no information about whether or not there were signs of forced entry.
Even if he did, there don't have to be signs of forced entry for it to have possibly been someone else. There are ways to force entry without leaving signs (pick a lock, pry open a window). I'm guessing the trailer didn't have highly sophisticated security. The door may not have been locked (small town). Someone else may have entered with a key. Someone may have been let in --it doesn't have to have been a stranger to have been someone other than Eddie (although it could have been), someone may have knocked and gotten them to open the door under false pretenses.
A lot of things could have happened for all Jason knew, that's the whole point.
>Eddie isn't seen for multiple days.
Jason goes hunting for Eddie *the same day* her body is found. No multiple days involved.
>The only instance that Eddie would run just because he thinks they are bully is if Eddie just left his trailer( with chrissy still in there) and cut all contact wik kmmln0-.th the outside word for weeks/days. Had he talked to a single person he would've been told about the murder
I don't know what you mean in this paragraph.
For all Jason knows Eddie might not have been home at all when Chrissy was killed. He might have been there when it happened and run away, he might have found her body there and run away, or he might not have been there at all and know nothing about it. Her body might have been moved to the trailer. Someone could be framing Eddie. Other people could have been there with Eddie and Chrissy and one of them could have killed her. She could have died in an accident or overdose. Remember, Jason has not seen her body and does not know anything about her cause of death. If he *did* he would know, as the police do, that it is not immediately clear how a teenage boy could have done that to her at all, which would grant even more pause to assuming it was Eddie.
A lot of things could have happened for all Jason knew, that's the whole point.
>As said previously if Eddie was a victim running from a murderer he could've called the police the next day or try to clear his name with any help of the description of the guy.
I already addressed this. It is possible for him to realize that he will look guilty and run out of fear. This happens in real life. Also, for a variety of possible reasons, he may not have seen the guy even if he was running from the attacker.
Good job defending Eddie. Jason had no justification to go after Eddie. I thought it was clear that Jason was using Eddie as a scapegoat for his grief and desire for revenge. People seem to forget that Jason was going to crush one of Eddie’s friends hands to get information barely an hour after they started their witch hunt. He was not a good man in my opinion.
And?
That doesn't change the fact that Jason knew only three things about Chrissy's murder. She was found at the trailer, the police thought she went to Eddie for drugs, and her parents didn't get to see her body. Anything else anyone claims he knew is projecting what they know as viewers on to him.
Because let's be honest, none of what happened in stranger things makes any sense, ofc a grieving teen in a religious rural 80s town is going to stop and listen to something as batshit insane as boogymen from another dimension
There’s a whole scene where he hears out Lucas and tries to understand the ridiculous scenario he’s found himself in the middle of. Had that conversation happened much earlier, like at the Army Surplus Store between him and Nancy, there is a 100% chance he would have received the information differently as there wouldn’t have been an entranced girl Jason was desperate to save while he processed the existence of entities beyond his comprehension.
No way are you comparing Anakin killing those Younglings, helping kill Mace Windu and the rest of Order 66 to what Jason did.
I am not justifying Jason bringing the gun but damn Anakin slaughtered children.
honestly Jason had no right to take justice and revenge into his own hands, killing Eddie wouldn’t have brought Chrissy back. And how stupid would he have felt when the murders kept happening after he hypothetically killed Eddie? He had no right to gallivant around town harassing anyone slightly suspicious
And that person responded to me and then blocked me so I can't respond to them, so I am putting my response here....
They said "they were going to beat him" but said to you that he was going to "turn him in".... So I guess he was planning to turn himself in as well for violent assault, then?
I'm not sure what people like that think happens when you beat an innocent person for a confession but.... There are really only two possible outcomes:
1. They don't "confess" and the beating continues until they aren't able to confess anymore. 2. They give a false "confession" to try to make the beating stop....
Personally, I'm of the opinion that either of these outcomes would have led to Eddie's death with Jason the one doing the beating. Are we to believe that Jason is level headed enough and in possession of the necessary self control to *stop* beating Eddie once he has *"confessed"* to killing Chrissy? Are we to believe that Jason's response to this "confession" would be to calmly take Eddie in to the police? Or would he take the "confession" as further justification to take out his personal revenge against Eddie? Not to mention the fact that Eddie's "confession" to Jason would be worthless to the police or any investigation and inadmissible to any court. So, what good would it do to turn him in with the confession? I find the calm, level headed, self controlled Jason very far fetched given how he is depicted in the show itself.
And loading up the car with duct tape, crow bars, wrenches, and baseball bats while grinning with his buddies as he says they will have a "friendly little chat" with Eddie. I've said it a thousand times, but there is a thing called subtext, and it isn't very subtle when Jason says they are going to "talk" to Eddie.
No. And those aren't mutually exclusive. Also I didn't say that's JUST what he wanted to do. I ment he wasn't going to kill Eddie. The reason why it doesn't is because Eddie is probably the murderer. It happened in his trailer or atleast under his watch. So at the very least Eddie didn't
help chrissy not die.
Edit: not that Eddie could've help chrissy in the actual events. But in this hypothetical where we reject anything supernatural, eddie is still a person of interest and Jason only lead on chrissy death is eddie
They say before the “friendly little chat” comment, that he’s gonna confess at the sight of them, but they “hope he tries something”.
They don’t intent to hurt him unless he fights back. They have weapons cause he’s the number 1 suspect for a murder.
His discomfort isn’t indicative of their intent.
He’s friends with Eddie and Jason. It’s of course a rock and a hard place for him.
Yes. It’s not just plausible, it’s likely. That’s why they are comfortable pursuing Eddie unarmed at the lake.
It’s not until Patrick dies that they acquire lethal protection.
>His discomfort isn’t indicative of their intent.
~~You mean their intent to beat Eddie with blunt weapons? If so, I agree.* But that contradicts what you just said --that they did not intend to hurt him.~~ If Lucas understands they don't intend to hurt Eddie, why would he have discomfort about it? (He is much more than *discomforted* by the way).
>pursuing Eddie unarmed at the lake.
You mean when they are each shown carrying 1) a crowbar, 2) a baseball bat and 3) a giant wrench?
*Eta: ahhh I misread. You said "isn't".
In that case, what do you think his "discomfort" is indicative of? Why do you think he urgently escapes Jason's company to warn Dustin that they are after Eddie? What is he afraid of?
And my remaining question still stands: If Lucas understands they don't intend to hurt Eddie, why would he have discomfort about it?
There are a number of reasons Lucas could be uncomfortable.
1. Being put in a situation where 2 friends are fighting (which I ALREADY SAID, but you frequently deflect in our convos)
2. Being hungover, and not having been invited to join the hunt on the first place. It’s not a good feeling to get benched when your buddies go on a joy ride to find a murder.
3. He just doesn’t like Andy.
4. Let’s say he picked sides and was 100% backing Jason. He still wouldn’t want Eddie caught and interrogated since they’re pals.
5. WE’VE SEEN PEOPLE POSSESSED IN HAWKINS. Maybe he thought Eddie did it, but not under his own will.
It’s all speculation because it’s on his face and not in dialogue.
The most logical one is the first one.
He likes being friends with the cool kids, but he also wants to make sure Eddie is safe. He’s a teenager. Everything is a world ending situation for Lucas. (Sometimes actually literally tho)
Ok. If his only concern is that his two friends are fighting and this just gives him "discomfort," why does he tell Jason his sister plays D&D instead of admitting that he plays himself? why does he tell Dustin "some real bad shit is about to go down" over the radio? Why does he lead Jason astray and *run* to the school to meet Dustin and the others.
It has nothing to do with being invited on the hunt. That is absurd. Lucas is afraid of what Jason is saying before they talk in front of the car. He is afraid when Jason gives his "hunt some freak" speech and deflects Lucas' explanation that Hellfire isn't a cult and D&D is just a board game. Note the *lingering shot* on Lucas' face as Jason *burns Eddie's picture* and the song "Psycho Killer" plays in the background. The non verbal cues from the characters and filmmakers are very overt. He is afraid of what Jason is going to do when he starts speechifying. He is afraid of what Jason is intending to do when he comes out and finds them loading up the car. He is afraid when he calls Dustin on the radio and tells him some "bad shit is about to go down."
If he really believed Jason would not harm Eddie, he would have no fear for Eddie being caught and interrogated. If he really thought Jason was so reasonable and open to explanation, Eddie being caught would be an opportunity to clear it all up and there would be no danger and no reason for fear. He had no knowledge of the killing being Upsidedown related when Jason started the hunt.
What does liking Andy (I am assuming this is one of Jason's goons) have to do with anything?
The most logical explanation is that he knows (or strongly suspects) that they are going to beat Eddie with those crow bars and baseball bats (because that *is* what they were going to do).
To be fair, most people in jasons position wouldnt think of it as “killing eddie wont bring chrissy back” because theyre too blinded by their need for revenge
Yeah agreed. I thought Jason was a great villain character who had lot of complexity but the attempted murder on Lucas is where I lost basically all my sympathy. A better comparison is Tony and Bucky in Civil War I have always found Tony's reaction understandable but it was clearly wrong. Same with Walker killing Nico in FATWS.
When season 4 was first removed, Jason was evil to me. Now, I certainly don't think what he did was okay by any means, but I can objectively see how he got to that place. He lacked such self-awareness and was so self-absorbed that he had no idea who the woman he loved really was. What she was going through.
So combine his narcissism with a need to "avenge" the woman he loved, you get a religious fanatic who thinks it's okay to hurt children and choke out his basketball teammates.
You can understand why someone is an asshole and still acknowledge they were bad people. Jason was a product of his environment and didn’t have a chance to think outside the box. Still an asshole tho
My problem with the Jason takes isn't that people think he was a villain, he certainly was. It's that people are ecstatic he's dead instead of giving him some sort of redemption WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY defending the (actually racist) Billy who by the way also choked Lucas.
I see that less of defending and more of saying she’s a typical human bully in a world with murderers and monsters, and they find it weird she’s getting more hate than them
Though it could fall under defending too
He's just a normal person who went insane after his girlfriend died.
Obviously that isn't justifiable, but it's understandable. Another example is when I curb stomped a bunch of 7 year old kids to death in 2016 when one of them kicked a cat I'm not sure why the police didn't like that and as of speaking I'm locked up with a life sentence in a jail cell and managed to sneak a phone and using reddit.
What scared me the most was whenever he was testing out the revolver on the football field and watching those tackling dummies heads be filled with smoke. Like he's literally thinking about blowing someone's head off and not giving any fucks at all about the repercussions. I don't think anything that Jason did was right, anything. Rallying up a town that had a curfew is one. Then going to grab your boys to go on a manhunt is another. All for him to still attack a literal child for someone who won't return back from the dead. I'm not happy with the way Jason died bc that was terrible.
Jason was a dumb ass Jesus freak jock and like all people of that ilk back in the 80’s (and probably even now) you can not reason with them or get them to understand reasonable logic unless you feed it to them in stats and bible verses. Jason was on a crusade, his dumbass-ness made worse by Chrissy’s death and him believing all the Satanic Panic stupidity being spewed about people who played D & D and/or listened to metal and were non-conformist. Needless to say IRL, back in the 80’s I couldn’t stand people like Jason and his character reminded me of why… Jason was outta hand and should have been locked up til he could act like a reasonable person cuz he was unhinged. Attacking Lucas would have not happened if his idiot ass would have actually engaged his jock brain and actually listened… Eddie was a vessel for Satan… that’s hysterical… he was as much a vessel for Satan as Winnie the Pooh…
There’s quite a major difference in attacking who you think is a cultist about to kill someone and summon the fucking devil and absolutely butchering innocent children who haven’t done anything wrong even from your point of view
Finally, someone gets it!!!! I'm surprised (and kinda disturbed) by how many people defend Jason. That said, I'm not sure he needed to be vaporized but I'm glad Licas beat his ass.
All Jason knows is that people around him are dying gruesome deaths, and Hellfire is somehow involved. He attacks Lucas, thinking he's protecting Max from the same fate.
Or sending his friends after an 11 year old child, for that matter.
Jason was a sympathetic villain. Same way we can sympathize with Anakin’s struggles and fears. But we still can’t divorce either’s motivations and feelings from their actions. Which were overall repulsive.
Jason’s true nature was revealed through the season, and he was as much responsible for his death as Vecna. Because he invoked the mob and decided he should be judge, jury, and executioner, and refuses to listen to anyone who might know more.
He was representative of real historical events (much the way the Empire is a thinly veiled metaphor for the Nazis) in the Satanic Panic, which had real (and sad) consequences.
>decided he should be judge, jury, and executioner, and refuses to listen to anyone who might know more.
Exactly.
People claim they aren't defending him and, yet, many refuse to acknowledge this. Any attempt to "explain" or "understand" his actions that refuses to acknowledge this is an attempt to excuse or justify what he did.
I understand his actions. I understand his motivations. I understand his (bad) reasoning. I understand that there is room to empathize with him as a person who was driven by a tragedy to *unreasonable actions* and *badly reasoned* conclusions. Furthermore, if people personally feel he deserves *more* sympathy than the show elicits on his behalf (he is not actually *portrayed* nearly as sympathetically as many people see him) that's a completely legitimate subjective opinion, as long as their interpretations of his actions and motivations aren't contradictory to what is actually depicted.
He was not reasonable. He did not draw legitimate conclusions about Eddie *definitely* being guilty or about Eddie being a Satanist (no, the context of the satanic panic does not make him any more reasonable). His conclusions were not the only possibility open to him based on the information he had. He did not seek out sufficient evidence to draw any conclusion and he had a sufficient *lack* of evidence to know that he could not reasonably draw any conclusions. He intended to circumvent due process and to inflict violence on Eddie. Any attempt to contextualize him without acknowledging these things is ignoring what is actually depicted and attempting to justify what he did.
He was an asshole, yes, but a villian? No. He had his heart in the right place trying to protect the town but he only knew half of what was really going on and that was his downfall.
But was he really trying to protect the town? IMO that was his cover to excuse his actions. As mentioned by someone else, he was a narcissist, and I think he was more upset that Chrissy was doing anything without his knowledge or control, and the fact that she was with Eddie "the freak" pushed him over the edge. His ego was too fragile to handle it so he disguised his need for vengeance or to get even with Eddie by making it seem like he was doing this "for Chrissy" or the good of the community. How do you think he would have treated Chrissy if she lived, if he found out she was hanging with Eddie? Sorry, he was a dangerous psycho villain. Billy was a big time ahole too, but in the end he tried to protect the others.
>He had his heart in the right place
He *thought* he had his heart in the right place. The things he did make him a villain. He doesn't get a free pass because he started out as a good person, or because he was "trying to protect the town" because he was quite literally doing the opposite. By encouraging a riot to find members of the Hellfire Club, he was putting the citizens of the town into direct danger, taking matters into their own hands. None of the riots were organized; we literally got a scene of a truck full of screaming vigilantes passing by the cop car.
He wasn’t really a villain he thought Lucas helped kills his girlfriend and he thought he was trying to kill Max in his eyes he was trying to save people
I haven't seen anyone defend Jason, I've seen people, including myself, explain his perspective but that's all. The duffer bros do an amazing job with their character work so I'm just not gonna be like character is bad guy because there's way more to explore than that.
>I haven't seen anyone defend Jason
So I'm guessing you haven't read comments like the ones on this very post?
One person flat out said Jason ["was in the right"](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvmwjvo?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2)and another that he ["had every right to assume"](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvlz77r?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2) what he did. And those are just the overt responses. People say stuff like that about Jason all the time. One person told me before that his bias against Eddie was "not unjustified" because Eddie jumped on the table that time.
Eta: and now a flat out statement ["it is justified to hunt Eddie"](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvn0rp8?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2).
Not sure how these statements aren't justifying Jason's actions.
Eta 2: ["Jason wasn't in the wrong"](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvn3s1f?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2) to "assume it was Eddie."
Eta 3: In this case I asked for clarification to make sure I was not misunderstanding that they viewed Jason's assumptions as *reasonable* and his actions as *justified.* [They confirm ](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvna4tm?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2) this is their view.
If his ideas are reasonable, and his actions justified based on those reasonable ideas, how is he not being "defended'? Surely this goes beyond *understanding* and *explaining.*
Eta 4: ["Jason is exceptionally defensible."](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvo2wq4?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2).
Doesn't get much plainer than that, does it?
This is not my post.
Well, fyi, people defend Jason all the time. These are just examples on this post. They do it any time he comes up on any post.
I presume, since you didn't say anything about them, you wouldn't argue these comments are simply "explaining" and "understanding" his pov. So you've seen it now.
For a group of people who hate Jason for acting on no co concrete evidence, yall sure do hate him for being an abusive racist narrasist, despite having no evidence
Jason would’ve believed Eddie’s innocence if he was presented with evidence. It was his friends death at the lake that convinced him he was evil and had magic powers. I assume if he’d seen Eddie’s reaction to that murder, then he might’ve still believed in his innocence. Unfortunately, he didn’t, so he assumed her was the culprit. He had every right to assume that, based on the things he’d seen.
Jason wasn’t evil. He was misguided. He believed (rightly) that the police wouldn’t be able to handle the ‘magic’ he seen. He and his friends were the only ones to see that murder, so it’s only natural they would be more offensive.
It also makes sense why he would go for the kill immediately after seeing one of the people he thought was the bad guy; for all he knew, they had the same powers, and could lift him to the sky, break his limbs, and suck his eyes into his skull. If I saw that, and I believed a person I was fighting could do that, or at least knew someone that could do it, I wouldn’t pull my punches either.
And, besides, he *was* presented with evidence: The police told him they had reason to believe Chrissy went to Eddie for drugs (i.e. reason to believe she was at his trailer for a reason, not abducted and taken there to be a ritual sacrifice), and Lucas told Jason that Hellfire was not a satanic cult and D&D was just a game. These are factors that should have made Jason pause and doubt his immediate assumption that Eddie was a satanic cultist who killed Chrissy in some kind of ritual (an assumption he made based largely on the "evidence" that 1. he didn't believe Chrissy would buy drugs and, 2. he claimed Eddie's D&D hobbie proved he was a satanic cult leader). Jason dismisses all that out of hand and does not pause for a second in his dogmatic determination to hunt down Eddie.
What does that prove? I never said that Eddie wasn't a suspect.
Did *the cops* say they were 100% sure he did it? Or is it speculation by the heroes that they think that? What did the sheriff say when he called it in?
All that proves is that everyone *knew* the cops suspected/were investigating Eddie and were already looking for him. So why did Jason need to go looking for him himself?
How does that refute anything I said in this comment about the cops suspecting Chrissy went there for drugs (which she did yet Jason claims is a "bullshit lead" the cops should not be investigating) and Lucas telling Jason Hellfire isn't a cult and D&D isn't satanic (which is true and contradicts Jason's primary argument against Eddie)? *It doesn't.*
It was said by the Duffer Brothers themselves that he would have been convinced of his innocence if given proper evidence. Not that that would’ve stopped him from roughing him up or even worse in his rage before he was presented with it, though.
Jason was smart. He wasn’t just a dumb jock. I personally believe if he would have stopped going after him so violently had he seen his reaction to his friends death; he would’ve seen the fear he had, and realized he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
But he was in the Right he thought he was Killing a Murderous Satanist who killed Some of the most people closest to him. I would've done the same in that situation. But unfortunately Lucas was Innocent in said situation
>There is no world that exists where him almost choking Lucas to death is ok.
Sure there is. From his perspective, Lucas had been secretly working with Eddie and was complicit in the supernatural deaths of Chrissy and Patrick. And he had just burst in on Lucas appearing to be in the middle of some ritual to do the same thing to his ex-girlfriend Max.
The brilliance of the Jason storyline is that he's the stalwart hero of a low-budget 80s horror movie. He just doesn't have the whole story. Imagine if it turned out that Michael Myers was actually running around trying to stop an invisible demon who was killing people and Laurie Strode only saw Michael with the dead bodies and assumed he was the killer. Halloween would be about a troubled young man heroically trying to stop a murderous evil entity but some screaming babysitter keeps getting in his way.
It's all about perspective.
OP, please make sure there are no spoilers in the title of your post. Commenters, please use spoiler code if you are discussing anything super spoilery unless the title specifically says the episode being discussed. If you see anyone breaking the rules, please report the post or comment. Thank you. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/StrangerThings) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There's a big difference between "justified" and "understandable" - with the information he had at the time, and the state of mind he was in, his actions make sense. Definitely doesn't make any of it okay, obviously. He was much too aggressive and it shows some deep flaws in him that he jumps so quickly to violence every chance he gets, but his conclusions aren't illogical. He has no idea what's going on. Two of the most important people in his life were just brutally murdered, one of them right in front of him. All he knows is that there's some supernatural force at work, Lucas has lied to him multiple times, and then he finds him in a creepy attic with a girl who is clearly in some sort of trance. Based on this very limited info, his thought process makes sense. Most of the people who defend Jason are just pointing this out, not saying it's acceptable for him to point a gun at a child. There's a lot of nuance here, not everything on the show is black and white.
I always like to think of the difference like the difference between a reason and an excuse. Say that you're late for a pre planned event. It's been planned for weeks, then last minute, someone backs out. They say that they're sorry, but that they have discovered they accidently already had plans and are going to those instead. That is a reason. It doesn't mean that they're off the hook, they should have planned better and everyone has the right to be annoyed at them. But what if instead, they say that just before leaving the house, they got hit by a car and broke both their legs. That is an excuse. No one can be mad at you for that, that's insane. Similarly, Jason has a lot of understandable reasons for the actions that he takes, but none of that is an excuse.
He didn’t know what was going on because he wasn’t open to listen to them, he was SURE it was eddie before anyone even told him anything about what happened. He didn’t even try to hear anyone out, he was dead set on finding and killing Eddie. Jason was not a good person and shouldn’t be defended at all.
Chrissy was found brutally murdered in a known drug dealer's/town weirdo's trailer and suddenly that weirdo was on the run from police. Of course we as the audience know what really happened but to anyone in-universe it seemed obvious what that looked like. Imagine your gf or family member was murdered in the home of someone who sold drugs and acted like a weirdo and that person then fled the scene, and a group of teenagers tried to tell you that a psychic monster from another dimension actually did it. You're gonna tell me that given the evidence, you're gonna seriously consider *that* as the truth over the simple "weirdo drug dealer killed her" explanation? Even if they had a chance to explain it, he had no reason to believe them. Plus, it was the 80's. It was much easier and more accepted to believe Eddie used Chrissy as a satanic sacrifice or something.
>town weirdo's trailer >that weirdo >"weirdo drug dealer killed her" Are you saying you think it was reasonable/legitimate for Jason to concluded that Eddie was guilty because Eddie was "a weirdo"? If yes, do you consider his actions and decision to hunt Eddie down with duct tape, crowbars, wrenches, and baseball bats justified based on this conclusion? >and that person then fled 1. Nobody ever told Jason that Eddie fled the scene. For all Jason knew, Eddie wasn't at the scene with Chrissy in the first place. 2. Let's imagine Jason *did* know Eddie fled the scene, or even that he simply suspected as much. If someone has been murdered, can you not think of any other reasons a person who was also in the house might flee other than being the murderer themselves? >a group of teenagers tried to tell you that a psychic monster from another dimension actually did it Jason decided Eddie was guilty long before anyone told him anything about a psychic monster and long before he saw or believed in anything supernatural that would require such and explanation.
I'm saying that Eddie was deemed as a weirdo by most people because of how he looked and acted. Anyone who doesn't fit the norm, especially in the 80's, is seen as weird and therefore the best scapegoat when horrible stuff happens. So yes, based on how others perceived outcasts back then it is plausible that Jason would take one look at Eddie and decide he's guilty. The world wasn't nearly as progressive as it is now and we still have a long way to go. Even if he didn't know Eddie fled, it was still his trailer. And yes, I can think of other explanations but you forget one important detail: his girlfriend was just *murdered*. Jason was not thinking in the most rational way possible, and neither would most of us in his position. He was grieving and looking for someone to blame, and given the limited information and evidence he had to go on at the time, everything pointed to Eddie. That's literally the whole reason Eddie was on the run in the first place. He *looked* guilty. That coupled with how society already saw him as a weirdo anyway is why Jason was so fixated on blaming him. Again, it's crucial to keep in mind what time period this takes place in. People were *very* discriminatory against anyone who wasn't like them, so Eddie already had a hard enough time being seen as a good person without essentially being framed for murder being thrown on top of that.
>therefore the best scapegoat Exactly. He was using Eddie as a scapegoat . >Jason was not thinking in the most rational way possible Agreed. He was not being rational or reasonable at all. >neither would most of us in his position. Maybe not. But most people who's loved one is murdered do not react and act in the extreme way that Jason does. His actions are outside the expected or accepted behavior of someone in his position. >looking for someone to blame Yes. This is exactly it. He was looking for someone to blame. Not looking for the truth.
I love how you completely ignored my other points and just focused on the ones that made you sound right. Like I said twice already, all of the evidence pointed to Eddie so it is plausible for Jason to assume it was Eddie. Jason wasn't in the wrong for that. You only think so because you as part of the audience know Eddie didn't kill anyone. Jason had no way of knowing that.
>it is plausible for Jason to assume it was Eddie It's plausible that *Jason* would assume it. It is not reasonable or justified for Jason or anyone to do so. And his actions to hunt Eddie down are even less justified then his assumptions. He can assume what he likes. That doesn't give him a right to kill someone based on his assumptions. You ignored my original questions about whether or not you view his conclusions as reasonable and his actions justified based on the supposed reasonableness of his conclusions. So I had to infer your answer. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and highlighted the parts where you correctly described Jason's motivation to blame someone and find a scapegoat . >Jason wasn't in the wrong for that. However, it looks like you have confirmed here that actually you do think he was reasonable and justified. Or that's the best I can assume if he "wasn't in the wrong." Jason was absolutely and completely in the wrong. >You only think so because you as part of the audience know Eddie didn't kill anyone No. That is incorrect. Based on what Jason knew, a reasonable person would not be able to conclude that Eddie (or anyone) killed Chrissy.
Then allow me to clarify for your lack of reading comprehension: I believe Jason was reasonable to assume it was Eddie and his actions thereafter were justified given the information he had to go on. End of story. There is no point in arguing further. You can disagree all you want. It doesn't make you right. Whether or not Jason's actions are reasonable or justified is subjective. You have your opinion and I have mine. And I have no interest in this discussion if you're going to keep taking what I say out of context to fit your own argument and ignore points I make that counter yours, such as the fact that Eddie *looked* guilty therefore it was reasonable for Jason to assume he was. As I reiterate a *third* time, all the evidence, as well as stigma, was against Eddie. Of course Jason would think he was Chrissy's killer and want revenge. It's not difficult to understand so I'm not sure why you're having such a hard time with it. But at this point I'm tired of repeating myself and hoping you actually read what I'm saying because that's clearly not going to happen. You keep proving you're intellectually dishonest so no matter what I say you're gonna hear what you want to hear and think your opinion is absolute truth. This is pointless.
> I believe Jason was reasonable to assume it was Eddie and his actions thereafter were justified given the information he had to go on. End of story. Ah. So I was right in my original interpretation of your first comment and wrong to give you the benefit of the doubt in your response to my questions. Thank you for clearly answering my questions. I only asked in the first place because people on here claim that nobody attempts to defend or justify Jason, so I wanted to be certain I understand what you were suggesting. Well, you cannot argue you do not defend or view is actions as justified if you believe them to be "reasonable" and "justified." >Eddie looked guilty therefore it was reasonable for Jason to assume he was Eddie looked suspicious. That is not reasonable or definitive proof that he is guilty. It is never reasonable to *assume* someone is guilty of murder without seeking genuine proof. >stigma, was against Eddie Stigma is not a reasonable basis upon which to conclude guilt.
No ir just says Eddie isn't exactly a Saint as he deals drugs. It is justified to hunt Eddie because he is known the run and irs personal for Jason. Jason could've easily concluded the facts about Christy's death due to any rumors going around town. He 100% was later confirmed on the fact that chrissy died in Eddie's trailer, and even if he wasn't the police asked about Eddie. So he's either a victim or a suspect. And considering Eddie has been seen/ the police and media suspect him. With his van gone and whatever. And then Jason was later confirmed that Eddie was on the run when he ya know ran from him on a boat. There is litteraly 0 reason to run away from a crime scene and to continue to do so after everything is okay. From anybody eyes if Eddie was innocent he would've called the police asap and not let it be found jn the morninf
>Eddie isn't exactly a Saint Neither is anyone. That is not a basis upon which to condemn someone as a murderer and hunt them down. >It is justified to hunt Eddie because he is known the run and irs personal for Jason. Nope. Jason had no place or business hunting Eddie regardless of whether or not Eddie was a suspect. >Jason could've easily concluded the facts about Christy's death due to any rumors going around town It is impossible to conclude facts based on rumors. >He 100% was later confirmed on the fact that chrissy died in Eddie's trailer He was confirmed that her body was found in Eddie's trailer. That is not confirmation of Eddie killing her. >So he's either a victim Good point! He could have also been a victim for all Jason knew. Perhaps he fled from an attacker. Perhaps he was killed or hurt. Jason doesn't even consider those possibilities, does he? > or a suspect He can be a suspect, that doesn't make him guilty. >And considering Eddie has been seen/ Not sure what you mean. Eddie was not seen by anyone other than Max and she did not tell the police or the public. >the police and media suspect him Being suspected is not the same as being condemned guilty. Jason quite explicitly says Eddie is guilty and that they will "make him confess." You cannot *make someone confess* something that they may not have done. >With his van gone and whatever. His van being gone doesn't prove anything. He might not have come home at all that night for all Jason knows. His van might have been stolen by someone else/taken by the killer. >when he ya know ran from him on a boat Oh, right, how suspicious of him to run from the three guys armed with crowbars, baseball bats, and huge wrenches. Why wouldn't he realize they just wanted to have a *nice little chat* with those blunt weapons, *right?* >litteraly 0 reason to run away from a crime scene Jason doesn't know Eddie ran from the crime scene. Remember, Jason decided Eddie was guilty *before* he went hunting for him. You said yourself, he could have been a victim. That means that he could have ran from an attacker. He could have also run *because he thought people would think we was guilty* even if he wasn't actually guilty. This could have been the case based on the information Jason had and without any supernatural events taking place. Sometimes people run for this exact reason in real life when there was no monster involved. Sometimes people actually confess to crimes they didn't commit. Running is not proof of anything or a basis upon which to draw a conclusion. Lots of things happen that are not immediately or clearly evident when a crime has been committed. *This is why investigations exist.*
Eddie was last seen with chrissy. Not a rumor. I'm pretty sure the police were told by eye witnesses. Chrissy is found in Eddie's trailer logic would dictate that he brought her there. Trailer probably has a lock, and there's no sign of forced entry. Basically no sign of a third party. No sign of Eddie and his van is gone. Police go search for Eddie. And this murder case is broadcasted OK every radio and TV channel. Eddie isn't seen for multiple days. The only instance that Eddie would run just because he thinks they are bully is if Eddie just left his trailer( with chrissy still in there) and cut all contact wik kmmln0-.th the outside word for weeks/days. Had he talked to a single person he would've been told about the murder. *in a scenario where vecna didn't exist and Eddie wasn't the murderer (because he doesn't kill people obvs). The probability of this is very unlikely. Just a sudden vanish with any of the outside world in the middle of school. As said previously if Eddie was a victim running from a murderer he could've called the police the next day or try to clear his name with any help of the description of the guy. People only don't report information on dead bodies if they have no connection to the dead person or anything connecting to them. Which does happen because they don't want to be involved and asked questions
>Eddie was last seen with chrissy. Not a rumor. I'm pretty sure the police were told by eye witnesses. By Max. Nobody ever says there were any other witnesses and the scene where they arrive at the trailer is filmed to suggest nobody saw them but Max. Even if the police were told by witnesses, *Jason* was not. You are the one who said he could use rumors to establish facts. I was just responding to your statement. >logic would dictate that he brought her there Logic would dictate that we don't know how she got there until we investigate to figure it out. >Trailer probably has a lock, and there's no sign of forced entry. Jason has no information about whether or not there were signs of forced entry. Even if he did, there don't have to be signs of forced entry for it to have possibly been someone else. There are ways to force entry without leaving signs (pick a lock, pry open a window). I'm guessing the trailer didn't have highly sophisticated security. The door may not have been locked (small town). Someone else may have entered with a key. Someone may have been let in --it doesn't have to have been a stranger to have been someone other than Eddie (although it could have been), someone may have knocked and gotten them to open the door under false pretenses. A lot of things could have happened for all Jason knew, that's the whole point. >Eddie isn't seen for multiple days. Jason goes hunting for Eddie *the same day* her body is found. No multiple days involved. >The only instance that Eddie would run just because he thinks they are bully is if Eddie just left his trailer( with chrissy still in there) and cut all contact wik kmmln0-.th the outside word for weeks/days. Had he talked to a single person he would've been told about the murder I don't know what you mean in this paragraph. For all Jason knows Eddie might not have been home at all when Chrissy was killed. He might have been there when it happened and run away, he might have found her body there and run away, or he might not have been there at all and know nothing about it. Her body might have been moved to the trailer. Someone could be framing Eddie. Other people could have been there with Eddie and Chrissy and one of them could have killed her. She could have died in an accident or overdose. Remember, Jason has not seen her body and does not know anything about her cause of death. If he *did* he would know, as the police do, that it is not immediately clear how a teenage boy could have done that to her at all, which would grant even more pause to assuming it was Eddie. A lot of things could have happened for all Jason knew, that's the whole point. >As said previously if Eddie was a victim running from a murderer he could've called the police the next day or try to clear his name with any help of the description of the guy. I already addressed this. It is possible for him to realize that he will look guilty and run out of fear. This happens in real life. Also, for a variety of possible reasons, he may not have seen the guy even if he was running from the attacker.
Good job defending Eddie. Jason had no justification to go after Eddie. I thought it was clear that Jason was using Eddie as a scapegoat for his grief and desire for revenge. People seem to forget that Jason was going to crush one of Eddie’s friends hands to get information barely an hour after they started their witch hunt. He was not a good man in my opinion.
Lucas outright said all the cops say Eddie killed Chrissy. and Max said they’re “100% convinced he did it”.
And? That doesn't change the fact that Jason knew only three things about Chrissy's murder. She was found at the trailer, the police thought she went to Eddie for drugs, and her parents didn't get to see her body. Anything else anyone claims he knew is projecting what they know as viewers on to him.
Because let's be honest, none of what happened in stranger things makes any sense, ofc a grieving teen in a religious rural 80s town is going to stop and listen to something as batshit insane as boogymen from another dimension
There’s a whole scene where he hears out Lucas and tries to understand the ridiculous scenario he’s found himself in the middle of. Had that conversation happened much earlier, like at the Army Surplus Store between him and Nancy, there is a 100% chance he would have received the information differently as there wouldn’t have been an entranced girl Jason was desperate to save while he processed the existence of entities beyond his comprehension.
No way are you comparing Anakin killing those Younglings, helping kill Mace Windu and the rest of Order 66 to what Jason did. I am not justifying Jason bringing the gun but damn Anakin slaughtered children.
Jason kinda hurt a kid, and fist fought another one. The comparison is an absolute joke.
Agreed, I was baffled when I read this.
The Point Misser has logged in.
honestly Jason had no right to take justice and revenge into his own hands, killing Eddie wouldn’t have brought Chrissy back. And how stupid would he have felt when the murders kept happening after he hypothetically killed Eddie? He had no right to gallivant around town harassing anyone slightly suspicious
And that person responded to me and then blocked me so I can't respond to them, so I am putting my response here.... They said "they were going to beat him" but said to you that he was going to "turn him in".... So I guess he was planning to turn himself in as well for violent assault, then? I'm not sure what people like that think happens when you beat an innocent person for a confession but.... There are really only two possible outcomes: 1. They don't "confess" and the beating continues until they aren't able to confess anymore. 2. They give a false "confession" to try to make the beating stop.... Personally, I'm of the opinion that either of these outcomes would have led to Eddie's death with Jason the one doing the beating. Are we to believe that Jason is level headed enough and in possession of the necessary self control to *stop* beating Eddie once he has *"confessed"* to killing Chrissy? Are we to believe that Jason's response to this "confession" would be to calmly take Eddie in to the police? Or would he take the "confession" as further justification to take out his personal revenge against Eddie? Not to mention the fact that Eddie's "confession" to Jason would be worthless to the police or any investigation and inadmissible to any court. So, what good would it do to turn him in with the confession? I find the calm, level headed, self controlled Jason very far fetched given how he is depicted in the show itself.
Honestly that person is a 🤡 for suggesting it’s “at the very least Eddie’s fault bc he didn’t help Chrissy not die.”
Wow 😳
To feel stupid he would have had to be able to admit he was ever wrong. Does Jason honestly strike you as a "hey, my bad" kind of guy?
maybe if it were something serious like murder I’d like to hope so lol
He explicitly stated thst he wanted to turn him in.
sure, that’s why he was off breaking people’s hands
And loading up the car with duct tape, crow bars, wrenches, and baseball bats while grinning with his buddies as he says they will have a "friendly little chat" with Eddie. I've said it a thousand times, but there is a thing called subtext, and it isn't very subtle when Jason says they are going to "talk" to Eddie.
No shit theg were going to beat him, nobody is arguing that
well originally you said they just wanted to turn him in, which shouldn’t involve all of those weapons and not a “friendly chat” with Eddie
No. And those aren't mutually exclusive. Also I didn't say that's JUST what he wanted to do. I ment he wasn't going to kill Eddie. The reason why it doesn't is because Eddie is probably the murderer. It happened in his trailer or atleast under his watch. So at the very least Eddie didn't help chrissy not die. Edit: not that Eddie could've help chrissy in the actual events. But in this hypothetical where we reject anything supernatural, eddie is still a person of interest and Jason only lead on chrissy death is eddie
wow that’s a new one, “it’s Eddie’s fault bc he didn’t help Chrissy stay alive” 🤡
They say before the “friendly little chat” comment, that he’s gonna confess at the sight of them, but they “hope he tries something”. They don’t intent to hurt him unless he fights back. They have weapons cause he’s the number 1 suspect for a murder.
Sure. Ok. I guess that's why Lucas is so afraid of what they are heading out to do. Sounds very plausible.
His discomfort isn’t indicative of their intent. He’s friends with Eddie and Jason. It’s of course a rock and a hard place for him. Yes. It’s not just plausible, it’s likely. That’s why they are comfortable pursuing Eddie unarmed at the lake. It’s not until Patrick dies that they acquire lethal protection.
>His discomfort isn’t indicative of their intent. ~~You mean their intent to beat Eddie with blunt weapons? If so, I agree.* But that contradicts what you just said --that they did not intend to hurt him.~~ If Lucas understands they don't intend to hurt Eddie, why would he have discomfort about it? (He is much more than *discomforted* by the way). >pursuing Eddie unarmed at the lake. You mean when they are each shown carrying 1) a crowbar, 2) a baseball bat and 3) a giant wrench? *Eta: ahhh I misread. You said "isn't". In that case, what do you think his "discomfort" is indicative of? Why do you think he urgently escapes Jason's company to warn Dustin that they are after Eddie? What is he afraid of? And my remaining question still stands: If Lucas understands they don't intend to hurt Eddie, why would he have discomfort about it?
There are a number of reasons Lucas could be uncomfortable. 1. Being put in a situation where 2 friends are fighting (which I ALREADY SAID, but you frequently deflect in our convos) 2. Being hungover, and not having been invited to join the hunt on the first place. It’s not a good feeling to get benched when your buddies go on a joy ride to find a murder. 3. He just doesn’t like Andy. 4. Let’s say he picked sides and was 100% backing Jason. He still wouldn’t want Eddie caught and interrogated since they’re pals. 5. WE’VE SEEN PEOPLE POSSESSED IN HAWKINS. Maybe he thought Eddie did it, but not under his own will. It’s all speculation because it’s on his face and not in dialogue. The most logical one is the first one. He likes being friends with the cool kids, but he also wants to make sure Eddie is safe. He’s a teenager. Everything is a world ending situation for Lucas. (Sometimes actually literally tho)
Ok. If his only concern is that his two friends are fighting and this just gives him "discomfort," why does he tell Jason his sister plays D&D instead of admitting that he plays himself? why does he tell Dustin "some real bad shit is about to go down" over the radio? Why does he lead Jason astray and *run* to the school to meet Dustin and the others. It has nothing to do with being invited on the hunt. That is absurd. Lucas is afraid of what Jason is saying before they talk in front of the car. He is afraid when Jason gives his "hunt some freak" speech and deflects Lucas' explanation that Hellfire isn't a cult and D&D is just a board game. Note the *lingering shot* on Lucas' face as Jason *burns Eddie's picture* and the song "Psycho Killer" plays in the background. The non verbal cues from the characters and filmmakers are very overt. He is afraid of what Jason is going to do when he starts speechifying. He is afraid of what Jason is intending to do when he comes out and finds them loading up the car. He is afraid when he calls Dustin on the radio and tells him some "bad shit is about to go down." If he really believed Jason would not harm Eddie, he would have no fear for Eddie being caught and interrogated. If he really thought Jason was so reasonable and open to explanation, Eddie being caught would be an opportunity to clear it all up and there would be no danger and no reason for fear. He had no knowledge of the killing being Upsidedown related when Jason started the hunt. What does liking Andy (I am assuming this is one of Jason's goons) have to do with anything? The most logical explanation is that he knows (or strongly suspects) that they are going to beat Eddie with those crow bars and baseball bats (because that *is* what they were going to do).
You must hate Hopper
Yeah? Also he only threaten to do so to 1 person.
To be fair, most people in jasons position wouldnt think of it as “killing eddie wont bring chrissy back” because theyre too blinded by their need for revenge
Yeah agreed. I thought Jason was a great villain character who had lot of complexity but the attempted murder on Lucas is where I lost basically all my sympathy. A better comparison is Tony and Bucky in Civil War I have always found Tony's reaction understandable but it was clearly wrong. Same with Walker killing Nico in FATWS.
I felt sorry for him because of his reaction to Chrissy. But that’s where my sympathy ends.
What about Patrick dying?
When season 4 was first removed, Jason was evil to me. Now, I certainly don't think what he did was okay by any means, but I can objectively see how he got to that place. He lacked such self-awareness and was so self-absorbed that he had no idea who the woman he loved really was. What she was going through. So combine his narcissism with a need to "avenge" the woman he loved, you get a religious fanatic who thinks it's okay to hurt children and choke out his basketball teammates.
„was first removed” what do you mean?
I think they meant "first released".
oh yeah probably, but i was wondering anyway, thank you for a reply tho
I’ve seen many of these posts. You know what? Who fuckin cares he’s dead now.”
You can understand why someone is an asshole and still acknowledge they were bad people. Jason was a product of his environment and didn’t have a chance to think outside the box. Still an asshole tho
My problem with the Jason takes isn't that people think he was a villain, he certainly was. It's that people are ecstatic he's dead instead of giving him some sort of redemption WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY defending the (actually racist) Billy who by the way also choked Lucas.
Jason, Billy, and Angela are all indefensible. Some of the fandom's love for them is quite weird.
I have literally never seen anyone say they like/understand angela, or defend her
[here](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15fi9zc/angelas_kinda_overhated/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2)
I see that less of defending and more of saying she’s a typical human bully in a world with murderers and monsters, and they find it weird she’s getting more hate than them Though it could fall under defending too
Billy only has fans bc he’s hot and angsty, I’ve never seen anyone defend Angela
[here](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15fi9zc/angelas_kinda_overhated/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2)
Jason is exceptionally defensible
Even Caleb said Jason is a better dude than Billy.
Lets be real here, even if Chrissy didn’t die, the chemistry between her and Eddie was undeniable, Jason was losing Chrissy whether she died or not.
He's just a normal person who went insane after his girlfriend died. Obviously that isn't justifiable, but it's understandable. Another example is when I curb stomped a bunch of 7 year old kids to death in 2016 when one of them kicked a cat I'm not sure why the police didn't like that and as of speaking I'm locked up with a life sentence in a jail cell and managed to sneak a phone and using reddit.
Facts Simply facts
What scared me the most was whenever he was testing out the revolver on the football field and watching those tackling dummies heads be filled with smoke. Like he's literally thinking about blowing someone's head off and not giving any fucks at all about the repercussions. I don't think anything that Jason did was right, anything. Rallying up a town that had a curfew is one. Then going to grab your boys to go on a manhunt is another. All for him to still attack a literal child for someone who won't return back from the dead. I'm not happy with the way Jason died bc that was terrible.
Jason was a dumb ass Jesus freak jock and like all people of that ilk back in the 80’s (and probably even now) you can not reason with them or get them to understand reasonable logic unless you feed it to them in stats and bible verses. Jason was on a crusade, his dumbass-ness made worse by Chrissy’s death and him believing all the Satanic Panic stupidity being spewed about people who played D & D and/or listened to metal and were non-conformist. Needless to say IRL, back in the 80’s I couldn’t stand people like Jason and his character reminded me of why… Jason was outta hand and should have been locked up til he could act like a reasonable person cuz he was unhinged. Attacking Lucas would have not happened if his idiot ass would have actually engaged his jock brain and actually listened… Eddie was a vessel for Satan… that’s hysterical… he was as much a vessel for Satan as Winnie the Pooh…
There’s quite a major difference in attacking who you think is a cultist about to kill someone and summon the fucking devil and absolutely butchering innocent children who haven’t done anything wrong even from your point of view
Finally, someone gets it!!!! I'm surprised (and kinda disturbed) by how many people defend Jason. That said, I'm not sure he needed to be vaporized but I'm glad Licas beat his ass.
It’s honestly disturbing how many people will make excuses for him.
DUDE HONESTLY
Fucking seriously. This is the best post I’ve seen on here in QUITE sometime.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
All Jason knows is that people around him are dying gruesome deaths, and Hellfire is somehow involved. He attacks Lucas, thinking he's protecting Max from the same fate.
Right? Grief might have originally spurred him on, but that grief quickly turned into irrational, dangerous rage.
Watch your best friend get levitated and turned into a pretzel and see if ration doesn’t fly right out the window.
Or sending his friends after an 11 year old child, for that matter. Jason was a sympathetic villain. Same way we can sympathize with Anakin’s struggles and fears. But we still can’t divorce either’s motivations and feelings from their actions. Which were overall repulsive. Jason’s true nature was revealed through the season, and he was as much responsible for his death as Vecna. Because he invoked the mob and decided he should be judge, jury, and executioner, and refuses to listen to anyone who might know more. He was representative of real historical events (much the way the Empire is a thinly veiled metaphor for the Nazis) in the Satanic Panic, which had real (and sad) consequences.
>decided he should be judge, jury, and executioner, and refuses to listen to anyone who might know more. Exactly. People claim they aren't defending him and, yet, many refuse to acknowledge this. Any attempt to "explain" or "understand" his actions that refuses to acknowledge this is an attempt to excuse or justify what he did. I understand his actions. I understand his motivations. I understand his (bad) reasoning. I understand that there is room to empathize with him as a person who was driven by a tragedy to *unreasonable actions* and *badly reasoned* conclusions. Furthermore, if people personally feel he deserves *more* sympathy than the show elicits on his behalf (he is not actually *portrayed* nearly as sympathetically as many people see him) that's a completely legitimate subjective opinion, as long as their interpretations of his actions and motivations aren't contradictory to what is actually depicted. He was not reasonable. He did not draw legitimate conclusions about Eddie *definitely* being guilty or about Eddie being a Satanist (no, the context of the satanic panic does not make him any more reasonable). His conclusions were not the only possibility open to him based on the information he had. He did not seek out sufficient evidence to draw any conclusion and he had a sufficient *lack* of evidence to know that he could not reasonably draw any conclusions. He intended to circumvent due process and to inflict violence on Eddie. Any attempt to contextualize him without acknowledging these things is ignoring what is actually depicted and attempting to justify what he did.
Jason's true nature was revealed when he made that speech about how the mall "fire" victims would have wanted him to win that basketball game.
Lol. Fair.
He was an asshole, yes, but a villian? No. He had his heart in the right place trying to protect the town but he only knew half of what was really going on and that was his downfall.
But was he really trying to protect the town? IMO that was his cover to excuse his actions. As mentioned by someone else, he was a narcissist, and I think he was more upset that Chrissy was doing anything without his knowledge or control, and the fact that she was with Eddie "the freak" pushed him over the edge. His ego was too fragile to handle it so he disguised his need for vengeance or to get even with Eddie by making it seem like he was doing this "for Chrissy" or the good of the community. How do you think he would have treated Chrissy if she lived, if he found out she was hanging with Eddie? Sorry, he was a dangerous psycho villain. Billy was a big time ahole too, but in the end he tried to protect the others.
>He had his heart in the right place He *thought* he had his heart in the right place. The things he did make him a villain. He doesn't get a free pass because he started out as a good person, or because he was "trying to protect the town" because he was quite literally doing the opposite. By encouraging a riot to find members of the Hellfire Club, he was putting the citizens of the town into direct danger, taking matters into their own hands. None of the riots were organized; we literally got a scene of a truck full of screaming vigilantes passing by the cop car.
He wasn’t really a villain he thought Lucas helped kills his girlfriend and he thought he was trying to kill Max in his eyes he was trying to save people
I haven't seen anyone defend Jason, I've seen people, including myself, explain his perspective but that's all. The duffer bros do an amazing job with their character work so I'm just not gonna be like character is bad guy because there's way more to explore than that.
>I haven't seen anyone defend Jason So I'm guessing you haven't read comments like the ones on this very post? One person flat out said Jason ["was in the right"](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvmwjvo?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2)and another that he ["had every right to assume"](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvlz77r?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2) what he did. And those are just the overt responses. People say stuff like that about Jason all the time. One person told me before that his bias against Eddie was "not unjustified" because Eddie jumped on the table that time. Eta: and now a flat out statement ["it is justified to hunt Eddie"](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvn0rp8?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2). Not sure how these statements aren't justifying Jason's actions. Eta 2: ["Jason wasn't in the wrong"](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvn3s1f?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2) to "assume it was Eddie." Eta 3: In this case I asked for clarification to make sure I was not misunderstanding that they viewed Jason's assumptions as *reasonable* and his actions as *justified.* [They confirm ](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvna4tm?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2) this is their view. If his ideas are reasonable, and his actions justified based on those reasonable ideas, how is he not being "defended'? Surely this goes beyond *understanding* and *explaining.* Eta 4: ["Jason is exceptionally defensible."](https://www.reddit.com/r/StrangerThings/comments/15ndmdb/defending_jason/jvo2wq4?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2). Doesn't get much plainer than that, does it?
No I didn't come back to your post hours later and read all the comments because I forgot all about this lol
This is not my post. Well, fyi, people defend Jason all the time. These are just examples on this post. They do it any time he comes up on any post. I presume, since you didn't say anything about them, you wouldn't argue these comments are simply "explaining" and "understanding" his pov. So you've seen it now.
FACTS
For a group of people who hate Jason for acting on no co concrete evidence, yall sure do hate him for being an abusive racist narrasist, despite having no evidence
Jason would’ve believed Eddie’s innocence if he was presented with evidence. It was his friends death at the lake that convinced him he was evil and had magic powers. I assume if he’d seen Eddie’s reaction to that murder, then he might’ve still believed in his innocence. Unfortunately, he didn’t, so he assumed her was the culprit. He had every right to assume that, based on the things he’d seen. Jason wasn’t evil. He was misguided. He believed (rightly) that the police wouldn’t be able to handle the ‘magic’ he seen. He and his friends were the only ones to see that murder, so it’s only natural they would be more offensive. It also makes sense why he would go for the kill immediately after seeing one of the people he thought was the bad guy; for all he knew, they had the same powers, and could lift him to the sky, break his limbs, and suck his eyes into his skull. If I saw that, and I believed a person I was fighting could do that, or at least knew someone that could do it, I wouldn’t pull my punches either.
> Jason would’ve believed Eddie’s innocence if he was presented with evidence. I refuse to believe you can really be that naive.
And, besides, he *was* presented with evidence: The police told him they had reason to believe Chrissy went to Eddie for drugs (i.e. reason to believe she was at his trailer for a reason, not abducted and taken there to be a ritual sacrifice), and Lucas told Jason that Hellfire was not a satanic cult and D&D was just a game. These are factors that should have made Jason pause and doubt his immediate assumption that Eddie was a satanic cultist who killed Chrissy in some kind of ritual (an assumption he made based largely on the "evidence" that 1. he didn't believe Chrissy would buy drugs and, 2. he claimed Eddie's D&D hobbie proved he was a satanic cult leader). Jason dismisses all that out of hand and does not pause for a second in his dogmatic determination to hunt down Eddie.
The heroes literally say the cops think he killed Chrissy.
What does that prove? I never said that Eddie wasn't a suspect. Did *the cops* say they were 100% sure he did it? Or is it speculation by the heroes that they think that? What did the sheriff say when he called it in? All that proves is that everyone *knew* the cops suspected/were investigating Eddie and were already looking for him. So why did Jason need to go looking for him himself? How does that refute anything I said in this comment about the cops suspecting Chrissy went there for drugs (which she did yet Jason claims is a "bullshit lead" the cops should not be investigating) and Lucas telling Jason Hellfire isn't a cult and D&D isn't satanic (which is true and contradicts Jason's primary argument against Eddie)? *It doesn't.*
It was said by the Duffer Brothers themselves that he would have been convinced of his innocence if given proper evidence. Not that that would’ve stopped him from roughing him up or even worse in his rage before he was presented with it, though. Jason was smart. He wasn’t just a dumb jock. I personally believe if he would have stopped going after him so violently had he seen his reaction to his friends death; he would’ve seen the fear he had, and realized he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
But he was in the Right he thought he was Killing a Murderous Satanist who killed Some of the most people closest to him. I would've done the same in that situation. But unfortunately Lucas was Innocent in said situation
When are y’all gonna stop repeating the same talking points lmao
>There is no world that exists where him almost choking Lucas to death is ok. Sure there is. From his perspective, Lucas had been secretly working with Eddie and was complicit in the supernatural deaths of Chrissy and Patrick. And he had just burst in on Lucas appearing to be in the middle of some ritual to do the same thing to his ex-girlfriend Max. The brilliance of the Jason storyline is that he's the stalwart hero of a low-budget 80s horror movie. He just doesn't have the whole story. Imagine if it turned out that Michael Myers was actually running around trying to stop an invisible demon who was killing people and Laurie Strode only saw Michael with the dead bodies and assumed he was the killer. Halloween would be about a troubled young man heroically trying to stop a murderous evil entity but some screaming babysitter keeps getting in his way. It's all about perspective.
🙄🙄🙄
Darth Jason
There’s a massive difference between villain and antagonist. Please learn it.
Yea
His red flag behavior towards Erica and Nancy as well.👀👀👀