There is a point of 'general' criticism I've been thinking about for some time, and I thought I'd offer it here.
It's about a tendency to have the PC's being clever enough to figure out the evil, misleading plots WAY ahead of schedual, strong enough to succesfully resist Bhaal from start to finish.
No, I am not accusing people of Mary Sue-ness. And in some stories, for some villains, making them incompetent can be kinda fun. But let me give an example:
Mellisan: I know that many people though 'evil' the first time they saw her (I fell for it. TOo naive I guess) but the fact that all PC's are immediately suspicious of her, and Mellisan has to come up with a story to make them trust her SOMEWHAT... irks me somewhat. An often heard complaint of ToB is that it's so 'straightforward' Well, if the major plot twist in the story is gone over so lightly, with the Bhaalspawn not really having invested much trust in Mellisan, yes. Personally, I would prefer that
A: they use the plot twist, and use it to best effects. If your characters aren't likely to trust Mellisan as she appears in the game, change stuff! Have Mellisan save their lives a few times. Mellisan succeded in convincing hunderds fo Bhaalspawn that she was their salvation. Could she have done that if she had a big sign saying 'Backstabber' over her head?
B: They don't use the 'goody two shoes Mellisan at all'. If they don't like the plot-twist (a completely understandable choice) don't use it. Heck, your story will only gain originality.
Other villains that are 'wasted' sometimes are Bhaal himself (a few dreams with the PC, with the PC getting a 'victory' in most dreams. After a while, the Bhaal dreams become less exciting.) And, since I think Laufey won't mind if I speak to her, Evil Aerie. I don't know if someone else already commented on this but...
I love the potential. Evil, manipulative, cruel, sadistic faux-innocent fallen Avariel, tricking people into defending her. She could have been an extremely scary villain. Except she has become comic relief. She is so incompetent, so obviously a phoney to every semi-intelligent person that no matter how many horrible things she does, I don't feel Zaerini, Edwin or Dekaras are threatened by her, like I feel Willy E Coyote won't threaten Road Runner.
But those are just a few examples. So my criticism, summarized would be 'don't let your heroes outmatch the villain too soon, or you remove all the tension'
Anyone else have this feeling, or is it just me?
In the spirit of constructive criticism: Nerfed Villains
Started by
Guest_Rand Al'Tor_*
, Mar 22 2005 05:16 PM
46 replies to this topic
#2
Guest_Clight_*
Guest_Clight_*
-
- Guests
Posted 22 March 2005 - 05:57 PM
A slightly different angle, it doesn't in general make sense to me to write a story where the characters encounter something taken directly from the game which did not impress the author and just pass it with a "well, that was stupid and didn't work". That could include a villain's deception, or something completely different. It could be humorous sometimes, but it can also mean that you intentionally write a part of your story so that it doesn't work.
#4
Guest_Lord E_*
Guest_Lord E_*
-
- Guests
Posted 23 March 2005 - 01:40 AM
Good point Rand, and I am guilty as charged, mostly because I didn't feel motivated to use energy on Melissan at the time. She just didn't interest me enough to concentrate on her as the main villain.
Well, Peri thought that she was untrustworthy and annoying. And I have hard time imagining even the fluffiest LG Bhaalspawn who would trust her under the circumsteances.
Mellisan: I know that many people though 'evil' the first time they saw her (I fell for it. TOo naive I guess) but the fact that all PC's are immediately suspicious of her, and Mellisan has to come up with a story to make them trust her SOMEWHAT... irks me somewhat. An often heard complaint of ToB is that it's so 'straightforward' Well, if the major plot twist in the story is gone over so lightly, with the Bhaalspawn not really having invested much trust in Mellisan, yes. Personally, I would prefer that
Well, Peri thought that she was untrustworthy and annoying. And I have hard time imagining even the fluffiest LG Bhaalspawn who would trust her under the circumsteances.
#5
Laufey
-
- Moderators
-
- 18306 posts
Transcendant
Posted 23 March 2005 - 06:22 PM
*grin* Evil Aerie...you'll be satisfied later on, I think. I'm not done with her by far.
As for Melissan, I haven't quite decided how to deal with her yet. The problem is that I just find her...boring. As a villain, she simply doesn't interest me very much. I'll have to try to avoid falling into the trap of letting that shine through.
As for Melissan, I haven't quite decided how to deal with her yet. The problem is that I just find her...boring. As a villain, she simply doesn't interest me very much. I'll have to try to avoid falling into the trap of letting that shine through.
Rogues do it from behind.
#6
Guest_Rand Al'Tor_*
Guest_Rand Al'Tor_*
-
- Guests
Posted 23 March 2005 - 09:09 PM
*grin* Evil Aerie...you'll be satisfied later on, I think. I'm not done with her by far.
I hope so. I DO expect her to eventually cause serious harm, you wouldn't make her so important if you had no plans with her, and I'm curious to what she has done, but... I expect her to get in a strong position because of a moment of weakness. Because fi she were to suddenly become competent, I can't help but feeling that would be like Nimbul outsneaking Dekaras.
I don't know what's gonna happen obviously, and maybe you'll prove me wrong but... the problem is tha EvilA erie doens't scare me. Which is a shame, as a sadistic, vengeful Fallen Avariel with a talent for manipulation could have been extremely scary. Really someone I'd wonder 'you're good Deakaras, but are you good enough to defend against someone who can twist the hearts of all but the wisest?' As it is, she is astill sadistic, still a psychopath but... everyone that can add 2 and 2 can see she's a phoney. And that's why I have trouble imagining HER as a nemesis for Dekaras. I'm not afraid of her, and I feel like I should be. As it is, she is closer to a second Nimbul than a second Irenicus in my feelings.
As for Melissan, I haven't quite decided how to deal with her yet. The problem is that I just find her...boring. As a villain, she simply doesn't interest me very much. I'll have to try to avoid falling into the trap of letting that shine through.
Yeah, that is something that happens sometimes too. People taking something that doens't make sense in the game, and still putting it in. Like the tests sometimes. If you feel the tests are pointless as they are in the game (I can see that) than why not change them? Or throw them out?
#7
Laufey
-
- Moderators
-
- 18306 posts
Transcendant
Posted 23 March 2005 - 10:50 PM
I don't know what's gonna happen obviously, and maybe you'll prove me wrong but... the problem is tha EvilA erie doens't scare me. Which is a shame, as a sadistic, vengeful Fallen Avariel with a talent for manipulation could have been extremely scary. Really someone I'd wonder 'you're good Deakaras, but are you good enough to defend against someone who can twist the hearts of all but the wisest?' As it is, she is astill sadistic, still a psychopath but... everyone that can add 2 and 2 can see she's a phoney. And that's why I have trouble imagining HER as a nemesis for Dekaras. I'm not afraid of her, and I feel like I should be. As it is, she is closer to a second Nimbul than a second Irenicus in my feelings.
Well, I can't really respond to that in much detail without spoiling you, which I don't think you'd want me to. All I can say is, she *will* manage to do some serious damage before her time is up.
As for Melissan, I haven't quite decided how to deal with her yet. The problem is that I just find her...boring. As a villain, she simply doesn't interest me very much. I'll have to try to avoid falling into the trap of letting that shine through.
Yeah, that is something that happens sometimes too. People taking something that doens't make sense in the game, and still putting it in. Like the tests sometimes. If you feel the tests are pointless as they are in the game (I can see that) than why not change them? Or throw them out?
*nods* I agree. If I come across a part of the game plot that makes no sense at all to me, then I do change it rather than trying to twist myself into a knot in order to somehow make it fit in.
Rogues do it from behind.
#8
Guest_Silver_*
Guest_Silver_*
-
- Guests
Posted 28 March 2005 - 08:44 AM
Mellisan: I know that many people though 'evil' the first time they saw her (I fell for it. TOo naive I guess) but the fact that all PC's are immediately suspicious of her, and Mellisan has to come up with a story to make them trust her SOMEWHAT... irks me somewhat. An often heard complaint of ToB is that it's so 'straightforward' Well, if the major plot twist in the story is gone over so lightly, with the Bhaalspawn not really having invested much trust in Mellisan, yes. Personally, I would prefer that
A: they use the plot twist, and use it to best effects. If your characters aren't likely to trust Mellisan as she appears in the game, change stuff! Have Mellisan save their lives a few times. Mellisan succeded in convincing hunderds fo Bhaalspawn that she was their salvation. Could she have done that if she had a big sign saying 'Backstabber' over her head?
B: They don't use the 'goody two shoes Mellisan at all'. If they don't like the plot-twist (a completely understandable choice) don't use it. Heck, your story will only gain originality.
Other villains that are 'wasted' sometimes are Bhaal himself (a few dreams with the PC, with the PC getting a 'victory' in most dreams. After a while, the Bhaal dreams become less exciting.)
Heh, I do see your point, very much so. Though hopefully I've managed to avoid the 'PC always manages to get a victory over Bhaal' thing in my story - my Bhaal is very manipulative and knows exactly what buttons to push to really hurt Kane.
As for Mellisan - I really do find her too obvious, I saw right through her the first time I played. And I can't see Kane or especially Benny trusting her under any circumstances really, particularly since neither of them are trusting by nature. But I plan to do something a bit different with her anyway, something that I really hope will work out okay.
#9
Guest_IriaZenn_*
Guest_IriaZenn_*
-
- Guests
Posted 30 March 2005 - 12:41 AM
Unfortunately (or fortunately if you're the bad guy) Anni is very naive, I might have her fall for Melly's act, though there is the problems of Edwin and Sarevok being around to be their usual "don't trust anyone" selves. Though she might just trust Melly even more if the two of them try to tell Anni what to do.... 
#10
Guest_SisterVigilante_*
Guest_SisterVigilante_*
-
- Guests
Posted 11 July 2005 - 09:00 PM
Agreed. A villain has to be scary.
But what makes a villain scary, I think, is not so much their powers, but their psyche.
Mellisan was extremely dangerous. She was the most powerful enemy in the game, period, excepting possibly Demogorgon or whomever, and the final battle against her was suitably impressive.
She didn't have any character to speak of, though. Her motives were boring; her dialogue was cookie-cutter. She was just an Evil Woman, period.
Now it may just be my belief that people are basically good, and that it takes a strong force to pervert somebody into a truly villainous state. But I do think it's true that nobody considers himself to be a villain. Whatever you're doing, you think it's the right thing to do. You have your reasons for doing it. And that's precisely what makes so many villains so scary.
What I love about BG is that the most dangerous villain is potentially yourself, your own Bhaal taint; and it's on that principle that the villains, from Sarevok to Balthasar, are designed. They represent what you might become yourself, under the proper circumstances.
But what makes a villain scary, I think, is not so much their powers, but their psyche.
Mellisan was extremely dangerous. She was the most powerful enemy in the game, period, excepting possibly Demogorgon or whomever, and the final battle against her was suitably impressive.
She didn't have any character to speak of, though. Her motives were boring; her dialogue was cookie-cutter. She was just an Evil Woman, period.
Now it may just be my belief that people are basically good, and that it takes a strong force to pervert somebody into a truly villainous state. But I do think it's true that nobody considers himself to be a villain. Whatever you're doing, you think it's the right thing to do. You have your reasons for doing it. And that's precisely what makes so many villains so scary.
What I love about BG is that the most dangerous villain is potentially yourself, your own Bhaal taint; and it's on that principle that the villains, from Sarevok to Balthasar, are designed. They represent what you might become yourself, under the proper circumstances.
#11
Guest_IronDragon_*
Guest_IronDragon_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 July 2005 - 07:36 AM
I agree totally. Evil people do not believe they are evil at all, rather they think their actions are justified and that they are acting in the best interest of society or their family or their community. Villains become truly terrifying when the reader realizes that they understand the villain’s motivations and even sympathizes just a little bit with them.
As a character Mellisan is incredibly two dimensional, she is more of a cliché than anything else. Her motivation is her lust for power, but that is a cop out, power means nothing without an understanding of what she would do with it. It would take so little to give her the depth of a true villain, maybe she really does believe she is doing the Bhaal spawn a favor by ending their tortured existence. Maybe she so loved Bhaal she feels the only way to glorify him is to take his place. Maybe she thinks she can take his portpholio (death itself not simply murder) and change it into something benevolent with the kind and beautiful Goddess Mellisan coming to those in pain and torment and taking them to the other side. Amazing, thirty seconds of brainstorming and already she has a character, now why couldn’t those wizards on the coast do the same thing?
As a character Mellisan is incredibly two dimensional, she is more of a cliché than anything else. Her motivation is her lust for power, but that is a cop out, power means nothing without an understanding of what she would do with it. It would take so little to give her the depth of a true villain, maybe she really does believe she is doing the Bhaal spawn a favor by ending their tortured existence. Maybe she so loved Bhaal she feels the only way to glorify him is to take his place. Maybe she thinks she can take his portpholio (death itself not simply murder) and change it into something benevolent with the kind and beautiful Goddess Mellisan coming to those in pain and torment and taking them to the other side. Amazing, thirty seconds of brainstorming and already she has a character, now why couldn’t those wizards on the coast do the same thing?
#12
Guest_Clight_*
Guest_Clight_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 July 2005 - 09:29 AM
It's not that simple. Not everyone thinks something like that. It's perfectly possible to believe you are being selfish. Now, someone might think that's right, but they still won't imagine they are benefitting others rather than themselves.Evil people do not believe they are evil at all, rather they think their actions are justified and that they are acting in the best interest of society or their family or their community.
Because those ideas would make her a wussy, and incredibly deluded. Even just being eeevil is better than such exaggeratedly sugar-coated motives, especially for a cold-blooded murderer. Or, at least, they would take more explaining, certainly more than you can come up with in thirty seconds.As a character Mellisan is incredibly two dimensional, she is more of a cliché than anything else. Her motivation is her lust for power, but that is a cop out, power means nothing without an understanding of what she would do with it. It would take so little to give her the depth of a true villain, maybe she really does believe she is doing the Bhaal spawn a favor by ending their tortured existence. Maybe she so loved Bhaal she feels the only way to glorify him is to take his place. Maybe she thinks she can take his portpholio (death itself not simply murder) and change it into something benevolent with the kind and beautiful Goddess Mellisan coming to those in pain and torment and taking them to the other side. Amazing, thirty seconds of brainstorming and already she has a character, now why couldn’t those wizards on the coast do the same thing?
Besides, do you see reason to think Irenicus wants revenge for someone else's benefit, or that Sarevok imagines things will get better for other people after he, uh, does pretty much exactly the same thing as Melissan wanted to? Irenicus doesn't care, he is only driven by pain and hatred (or somesuch), whereas Sarevok may think he deserves to become a god and is thus doing the right thing, but he doesn't think he's doing it to help others by having them murdered more effectively in the future. In fact, in ToB he practically refers to himself as evil.
#13
Guest_Kulyok_*
Guest_Kulyok_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 July 2005 - 09:38 AM
I was already close to pressing the "post" button...
... but Clight has already delivered my thoughts on the subject. You don't practise Leglimency, do you?
Just to provide that Sarevok's quote:
*TOB*
Sarevok: What is this I see? A wingless bird. How fitting that you should flop along with this group, eager to prove your worth.
Aerie: I’ve already proven my worth. To everyone as well as myself.
Sarevok: Brave words. But I think you mouth platitudes you can’t even understand.
Aerie: It ... it doesn’t matter what you think. I am no frightened elf within the circus, anymore. I’ve learned enough so that evil like yours makes me only feel pity.
Sarevok: Pity, is it? You should feel fear instead, girl. Were (CHARNAME) not your companion and protector, you would be nothing before me.
Aerie: Think what you like. It is you who are nothing before my god and my faith. Baevan and Aerdrie Faenye would both sweep you as if you were dust before them.
Sarevok: Bah! They come at your beck and call to protect your miserable life, do they?
Aerie: They protect me. But seeing as (CHARNAME) was once enough to defeat you, and that was a long time ago, you shouldn’t go asking for more than you can handle.
Sarevok: Keep thinking that, girl. You haven’t a clue what true evil is.
... but Clight has already delivered my thoughts on the subject. You don't practise Leglimency, do you?
Just to provide that Sarevok's quote:
*TOB*
Sarevok: What is this I see? A wingless bird. How fitting that you should flop along with this group, eager to prove your worth.
Aerie: I’ve already proven my worth. To everyone as well as myself.
Sarevok: Brave words. But I think you mouth platitudes you can’t even understand.
Aerie: It ... it doesn’t matter what you think. I am no frightened elf within the circus, anymore. I’ve learned enough so that evil like yours makes me only feel pity.
Sarevok: Pity, is it? You should feel fear instead, girl. Were (CHARNAME) not your companion and protector, you would be nothing before me.
Aerie: Think what you like. It is you who are nothing before my god and my faith. Baevan and Aerdrie Faenye would both sweep you as if you were dust before them.
Sarevok: Bah! They come at your beck and call to protect your miserable life, do they?
Aerie: They protect me. But seeing as (CHARNAME) was once enough to defeat you, and that was a long time ago, you shouldn’t go asking for more than you can handle.
Sarevok: Keep thinking that, girl. You haven’t a clue what true evil is.
#14
Guest_Oyster Girl_*
Guest_Oyster Girl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 July 2005 - 10:25 AM
[Aside]I agree totally. Evil people do not believe they are evil at all, rather they think their actions are justified and that they are acting in the best interest of society or their family or their community. Villains become truly terrifying when the reader realizes that they understand the villain’s motivations and even sympathizes just a little bit with them.
As a character Mellisan is incredibly two dimensional, she is more of a cliché than anything else. Her motivation is her lust for power, but that is a cop out, power means nothing without an understanding of what she would do with it. It would take so little to give her the depth of a true villain, maybe she really does believe she is doing the Bhaal spawn a favor by ending their tortured existence. Maybe she so loved Bhaal she feels the only way to glorify him is to take his place. Maybe she thinks she can take his portpholio (death itself not simply murder) and change it into something benevolent with the kind and beautiful Goddess Mellisan coming to those in pain and torment and taking them to the other side. Amazing, thirty seconds of brainstorming and already she has a character, now why couldn’t those wizards on the coast do the same thing?
Mellisan is really a very ordinary, everyday sort of evil writ large. It's true that evil people don't believe they're evil, but taking the extra step from there to "they think their actions are justified and that they are acting in the best interest of society or their family or their community" gives most of them too much credit. They just don't care enough about anyone besides themselves to waste the psychic energy to justify their actions. That they want it is enough.
I've just spent a weekend with a group of people who have all been touched by a very Mellisan-like personality. There was considerable complaining about his latest stunts, all centered around what most of the party guests believed were attempts to disrupt the party. I don't believe it had anything to do with active maliciousness; I think he's just that stupid and self-centered. This past weekend was convenient for certain things that he wanted to do and inconvenient for others that he had previously promised to do; that he was disrupting his ex-wife's post-wedding party by demanding the one and refusing to fulfill the other may never have occurred to him. I believe he was completely serious when he told his ex-wife that "maybe I should stop by the party; most of the guests are my friends, too."
I've said before, when the alignment debates get started, that Evil is nothing more than selfishness. There's nothing necessarily tragic or even interesting about an Evil character or villain; all that's required is a personality that doesn't think outside of himself. "I want this; everyone else should rearrange their lives to give me what I want."
#15
Guest_Lord E_*
Guest_Lord E_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 July 2005 - 11:51 AM
Mellisan is really a very ordinary, everyday sort of evil writ large. It's true that evil people don't believe they're evil, but taking the extra step from there to "they think their actions are justified and that they are acting in the best interest of society or their family or their community" gives most of them too much credit. They just don't care enough about anyone besides themselves to waste the psychic energy to justify their actions. That they want it is enough.
Another variety of Evil are people who consider themselves to be "realists" and "honest", while everyone who tries to do the right thing or cares about others is just a hypocrite and in reality has a sinister or selfish motive for seemingly good attitudes and actions. These people proudly are self-serving bastards, and believe that all the others are as well, but only they have the courage and intelligence to admit that.
I've said before, when the alignment debates get started, that Evil is nothing more than selfishness. There's nothing necessarily tragic or even interesting about an Evil character or villain; all that's required is a personality that doesn't think outside of himself. "I want this; everyone else should rearrange their lives to give me what I want."
Or course, villains tend to be more interesting than just your everyday evil person. And tragic villain is an old and honored story tradition.
#16
Guest_Oyster Girl_*
Guest_Oyster Girl_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 July 2005 - 01:10 PM
Yeah. I just didn't want to dip that close to politics.Another variety of Evil are people who consider themselves to be "realists" and "honest", while everyone who tries to do the right thing or cares about others is just a hypocrite and in reality has a sinister or selfish motive for seemingly good attitudes and actions. These people proudly are self-serving bastards, and believe that all the others are as well, but only they have the courage and intelligence to admit that.
Sometimes, but they don't have to be. It depends on what the writer is aiming for in the story.Or course, villains tend to be more interesting than just your everyday evil person.I've said before, when the alignment debates get started, that Evil is nothing more than selfishness. There's nothing necessarily tragic or even interesting about an Evil character or villain; all that's required is a personality that doesn't think outside of himself. "I want this; everyone else should rearrange their lives to give me what I want."
How interesting was the nominal villain in The Silence of the Lambs? How many people even remember his name? His purpose in the story wasn't to be interesting in and of himself; his purpose was to be a catalyst, a reason to bring Clarice and Hannibal together to play off each other. To try to flesh him out further, to turn him into Yet Another Tragic Villain, would have crowded the story too much.
Conversely, a villain doesn't have to be sympathetic to be interesting. Goldfinger comes immediately to mind.
Old, tarnished, and cliched, as far as I'm concerned, but that's likely because it's been overdone in the real world, too. It was a great fad in published fiction for nearly a decade and is still fairly common in profic and extremely common in fanfic. At the height of its popularity as a literary meme, it was also all over the news in the form of tearful prisoners' rights groups wailing that their clients were merely misunderstood.And tragic villain is an old and honored story tradition.
As executed by the vast majority of writers who attempt it, the tragic villain is just another in a long line of "men who just need the love of a good woman".
Does that mean it's impossible to write a good tragic villain? No, but it is very difficult to avoid those traps. I'm certainly going to bring those assumptions with me when I read a story, and I'm very likely to set a sympathetic villain story aside half-read because of them.
(Challenge: find the villains in Shyamalan's The Village. There are villains, and they are very sympathetic.)
#17
Laufey
-
- Moderators
-
- 18306 posts
Transcendant
Posted 18 July 2005 - 01:29 PM
(Challenge: find the villains in Shyamalan's The Village. There are villains, and they are very sympathetic.)
Oh, very wellmeaning, very gentle and peaceful...and to me, utterly repulsive for what they did.
Rogues do it from behind.
#18
Guest_Lord E_*
Guest_Lord E_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 July 2005 - 02:17 PM
[quote]
Yeah. I just didn't want to dip that close to politics.
[/quote]
I think that is actually the most common RL Evil attitude. Gleeful sadists, Nietchzean moral relativists and megalomaniacs bent on world conquest are really quite rare. Then there are also the miserable, mean-spirited and dim-witted thugs.
[quote]
Or course, villains tend to be more interesting than just your everyday evil person.[/quote]
Sometimes, but they don't have to be. It depends on what the writer is aiming for in the story.
[/quote]
Well, villain is naturally often an important part of the story, in terms of threat to the hero if nothing else.
[quote]
How interesting was the nominal villain in The Silence of the Lambs? How many people even remember his name? His purpose in the story wasn't to be interesting in and of himself; his purpose was to be a catalyst, a reason to bring Clarice and Hannibal together to play off each other. To try to flesh him out further, to turn him into Yet Another Tragic Villain, would have crowded the story too much.
[/quote]
...here, however he is there just in order to provide the plot with urgency and an explanation as to why they needed Lecter's help. I felt mostly revulsion and pity for him, while Lecter and his relationship with Clarice was what really intrigued me.
[quote]
Conversely, a villain doesn't have to be sympathetic to be interesting. Goldfinger comes immediately to mind.
[/quote]
Indeed. Jago rocks and the man doesn't have a sympathetic bone in his body.
[quote]
[quote]And tragic villain is an old and honored story tradition.[/quote]
Old, tarnished, and cliched, as far as I'm concerned, but that's likely because it's been overdone in the real world, too.
[/quote]
I love tragic villain stories, but that's likely because I haven't been assaulted by a barrage of lame ones. There is an important difference between understanding and excusing/accepting. My own story about Sarevok clearly is written with love and compassion, but I still don't think he isn't responsible for his choices or that what he did wasn't evil.
[quote]
As executed by the vast majority of writers who attempt it, the tragic villain is just another in a long line of "men who just need the love of a good woman".
[/quote]
Ah, that is just lame. It is also demeaning to men.
[quote]
(Challenge: find the villains in Shyamalan's The Village. There are villains, and they are very sympathetic.)[/quote]
*mental note*
Yeah. I just didn't want to dip that close to politics.
[/quote]
I think that is actually the most common RL Evil attitude. Gleeful sadists, Nietchzean moral relativists and megalomaniacs bent on world conquest are really quite rare. Then there are also the miserable, mean-spirited and dim-witted thugs.
[quote]
Or course, villains tend to be more interesting than just your everyday evil person.[/quote]
Sometimes, but they don't have to be. It depends on what the writer is aiming for in the story.
[/quote]
Well, villain is naturally often an important part of the story, in terms of threat to the hero if nothing else.
[quote]
How interesting was the nominal villain in The Silence of the Lambs? How many people even remember his name? His purpose in the story wasn't to be interesting in and of himself; his purpose was to be a catalyst, a reason to bring Clarice and Hannibal together to play off each other. To try to flesh him out further, to turn him into Yet Another Tragic Villain, would have crowded the story too much.
[/quote]
...here, however he is there just in order to provide the plot with urgency and an explanation as to why they needed Lecter's help. I felt mostly revulsion and pity for him, while Lecter and his relationship with Clarice was what really intrigued me.
[quote]
Conversely, a villain doesn't have to be sympathetic to be interesting. Goldfinger comes immediately to mind.
[/quote]
Indeed. Jago rocks and the man doesn't have a sympathetic bone in his body.
[quote]
[quote]And tragic villain is an old and honored story tradition.[/quote]
Old, tarnished, and cliched, as far as I'm concerned, but that's likely because it's been overdone in the real world, too.
[/quote]
I love tragic villain stories, but that's likely because I haven't been assaulted by a barrage of lame ones. There is an important difference between understanding and excusing/accepting. My own story about Sarevok clearly is written with love and compassion, but I still don't think he isn't responsible for his choices or that what he did wasn't evil.
[quote]
As executed by the vast majority of writers who attempt it, the tragic villain is just another in a long line of "men who just need the love of a good woman".
[/quote]
Ah, that is just lame. It is also demeaning to men.
[quote]
(Challenge: find the villains in Shyamalan's The Village. There are villains, and they are very sympathetic.)[/quote]
*mental note*
#19
Guest_Kulyok_*
Guest_Kulyok_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 July 2005 - 03:27 PM
I wonder, though: is anybody sympathetic with villain and what they do, as they read a book? Sympathetic with the rapist, not his victim? With the bad guy and with what he does? With the torturer, the sadist, the madman, the child-killer?
*sigh* Yes, I know, I know, I am likely to be assaulted with cries that it must be a deeply horrible(or worse, immature) person... But I would like to see the results of an anonimous poll on the subject.
*sigh* Yes, I know, I know, I am likely to be assaulted with cries that it must be a deeply horrible(or worse, immature) person... But I would like to see the results of an anonimous poll on the subject.
#20
Guest_Lord E_*
Guest_Lord E_*
-
- Guests
Posted 18 July 2005 - 04:21 PM
I wonder, though: is anybody sympathetic with villain and what they do, as they read a book? Sympathetic with the rapist, not his victim? With the bad guy and with what he does? With the torturer, the sadist, the madman, the child-killer?
With the bad guy, frequently. But the kind of evil that is most certain to put me off is petty, mundane and sadistic evil. I don't recall feeling sympathy for a rapist, child molester, wife beater or someone who is cruel to animals, especially if any of these happen on-screen.
*sigh* Yes, I know, I know, I am likely to be assaulted with cries that it must be a deeply horrible(or worse, immature) person... But I would like to see the results of an anonimous poll on the subject.
I should think it's not that rare. If the bad guy is seen as human, there is something to identify with. He can also be attractive, or there can be something admirable in him. People are interesting, well-written and fleshed out characters are interesting. It doesn't matter if they are villains.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
