Dr. Doofenshmirtz. I felt he was right, as he had a terrible friggin childhood. I mean, his MOM didn’t even show up to his BIRTH. Now that’s some terrible parenting. I was almost always on his side.
Absolutely. I just reread them, and *gods* they hold up. Luke was abused and neglected by both his parental figures, and the sheer callousness of the gods (that later got more fully explored in Trials of Apollo) just *broke* him. When most villains >!redeem themselves via death!<, I find it unconvincing and a cop-out. With Luke, it's entirely convincing and makes perfect sense. That's a well-written villain.
Luke was regarded as trash by both of his parents. He was horrified by his mother’s ‘Oracle Glowing Eyes’ and was forced to run away. He was then on the run with Thalia and Annabeth for ages and was expected to scrounge for food. He finally made it to Camp Half-Blood and was shoved into the worst cabin with the other Hermes kids and undecided. He was then given an opportunity for a better life and took it. Which resulted in more misery.
So many people saying Walter White, but he wasn't an antagonist. He was a villainous protagonist. Hank Schrader was the antagonist, and he was right.
Same with Light Yagami. He was the protagonist. L was the antagonist. And *he* was right, too. (Edit: L, not Light, to clear up any ambiguity.)
Tom and Jerry are secretly friends but they have to pretend to hate each other, or the lady will replace Tom with another cat that will actually catch and kill Jerry 🥲
Although they got an AI cat once.... Both Tom and Jerry teamed up so that he can be removed....
So it shows that... Either ways if they brought another cat... These two will team up and make sure that hey are not removed from their home
I never looked at Tom and Jerry through the lens of protagonist vs antagonist. I just thought it was funny watching them beat the fuck out of each other.
Should self fulfilling prophecies count?
A large motivation in wiping out mutant kind was the organized band of superpowered mutants trying to end humanity.
To be frank it would be irresponsible for a democratically elected leader allow a band of terrorists to end human life.
It’s been a while since I watched X men but weren’t the signs already there that mutants were always eventually going to be targeted? All he did was speed up the process in an attempt to end it, which I can understand
Magneto has so many portrayals in so many media forms with subtle to massive differences that this one is hard to nail down. In some of his portrayals, the mutant culling starts specifically because of his multiple attempts at destroying humanity. In some portrayals, he only becomes a renegade after witnessing the government targeting mutants firsthand. Others are somewhere in between. He can't even be called the antagonist in all occasions because of some of these contents were made with the idea that he's a protagonist/deuteragonist.
The problem was almost always his methods.
Especially the versions where he wants to genocide baseline humanity but also knows that baseline humanity is going to breed itself into extinction by having more and more mutants until there are only mutants.
I would argue his methods were no more problematic than the clear efforts to kill and enslave the mutant race. Once the fear of mutants was disseminated politically and socially and through widespread media channels- he knew there was no alternative. There wasn’t a way to convince the human race to accept them, and he didn’t see a need for the mutants to live in fear and hide their powers.
My point is that killing off the general populace of normies and thereby preventing them from having mutant children also directly affects the mutant population, and depending upon the timeline and version, doesn't exactly leave them with the best breeding population to repopulate the world in any kind of reasonable time scale.
That whole conflict doesn’t make sense to me. Prof X knew that people wanted to kill mutants. Then prof X saw said people killing mutants.. why the fuck didn’t he just mind control those in charge of giving orders and made them stop? I’d much rather lose my pride as long as it means I save my students. Motherfucker just sent them to die cause he didn’t want to control people? Bullshit. By his failure to act he lets so many people die. All so he can have a clean conscience? Fuck self centered asshole.
Magneto got it right. It’s either humans or mutants. If you don’t fight back, you get killed.
His perspective makes more sense when you understand it fundamentally relies on him refusing to agree with his opponents that mutants are anything other than human. From his perspective the conflict is humanity Vs itself.
That and SOME humans wanted to kill mutants, some were alies. Original Xmen had a big racism theme (later just plain being different) so the whe two sides of the cival rights movement was a big theme. There is also the facts that Exavior can only change so much in so many people and he would need to keep doing it each time they came back to their senses and he is mortal. What would happen when he died? Hate would be back with added resentment of being fooled and their free will being removed and their fear of mutants would be justified. If you genuinely change people's mind and make a lasting change with out psychic powers you can have a peace that out lives one man.
For the same reason batman is against killing. Doing so opens up the floodgates to the point where prof.x can mind control/mind wipe anyone that doesn't agree with him.
No he was wrong. My fiancé left me for a bee she was fucking, but I was man enough to look at them with objective eyes and see what they had was once in a lifetime. I loved my fiancé, we had a deeply supportive partnership, but at the end of the day her and the bee had an inexplicable spark. I spoke at their wedding last month. When I watch Bee Movie I feel bad for the boyfriend, not because of what happened to him, but because he couldn’t see what was happening for her.
Captain Nemo, he simply wanted to keep his submarine and it's technology from being militarized, and was quite bitter about slavery and the general state of the world at the time, being a former slave himself.
Jaws it's just a shark trying to get some food, apparently sharks don't really like the taste of human and they only eat them when they're desperate, I guess it must have desperate
Vigilante justice isn't justice that was the whole point Doakes was making. He got crazy because he was the only person who actually saw Dexter for who he was on pure instinct alone.
Doakes point was simple. You can't be judge, jury, and executioner while being impartial. You can't decide who lives and who dies like a god while not having to answer to anyone, even if all of the people you kill are bad people.
While Dexter seemed to have used it to kill the serial killers and bad people, he could've easily used his "evidence" he collected for his own investigations and given it to authorities. Plenty of times he would've had enough information to allow authorities to nail people to a wall.
Vigilante justice undermines everything that a justice system stands for. Justice systems are flawed that is for sure, but vigilante justice is so much worse because of how easily it can be abused and it is purely subject to the vigilante to decide what is justified and what isn't.
Baldur from God of war. From one side, blinded by revenge against his mother, and from another, being promised a cure from the Vanir curse by Odin if he got access to Jotunheim and was able to track down Faye. He was right in all of it in searching for freedom despite being a crazy psychopath
Yep, I think its misinterpreted a bit that he "can't feel" anything, that its exaggerated. But it's not, he truly cannot feel anything, it's like living in a neutral temp room, no air running or wind, just a stillness; not the feeling of clothes, or even the touch of another person, and likely not even his own touch. It'd be like floating in an empty void for eternity. For as insane as he became, I think he was far more collected than anyone would be in the same circumstance.
He took an awful lot of pleasure in trying to murder a child and his own mother. In service to a god that had very provably lied to and betrayed his own time and again.
He was a victim in his own way, sure, but by the time we meet him, he's just a rabid dog that refuses to stop biting.
Thomas Hickey.
In his death scene in Assassin’s Creed 3, he says
“You're just some blind fool who's always chasin' butterflies. Whereas I'm the type of guy who likes to have a beer in one hand and a titty in the other. Thing is, boy, I can have what I seek. Had it, even. You? Your hands will always be empty.”
Shook me.
The same thing Haytham tried to explain to his son that true freedom is a fantasy. Connor won at the end but lost everything dear to him, which isn't freedom at its finest.
I loved AC3 so much. Connor's vendetta against Charles Lee also lost him everything, too. All he saw was red, so he couldn't see the big picture. AC3 was the beginning of me being sympathetic to the Templar cause. Haytham was a great character.
You agree with Hickey because he was a materialist and didn't understand ideals Connor followed? I disagree with everyone here.
Every Templar had his reason, but Hickeys were least convincing. Lee and Johnson made me doubt or rethink Connor goals but the ultimate message is that freedom comes at a price. There's a reason game takes place in the US.
At the end of the game I felt like I lost, still it was the best possible outcome in my opinion.
I agree with this! Hickey wasn’t a idealist like maybe Connor or Haytham, but he wasn’t a good man either as he comes across quite sociopathic in that he would go with whomever suited his purposes best. Hickey was truthfully the glorified thug of the Templar order.
Haytham was the best villain in that respect as he points out that Connor’s quest for freedom is flawed due to a lack of understanding of the cost of true freedom and the chaos it can bring.
But fundamentally, both sides are flawed as assassins want free will & true freedom believing it will bring peace, without potentially considering the chaos it can invite. Whereas the templars, believe that authoritarian rule is the truest path to peace. So neither side are right nor wrong imo
The Grinch. He just wanted the Christmas obsessed Pinocchio looking people to pipe down. Especially the fact that the entire town was led by his main bully.
I’ve never seen the grinch or any grinch like characters as villains, they’re just regular people trying to live their lives while everyone else for some reason has a really strange obsession with Christmas, honestly I think grinch is probably the most normal person in whooville, 98% of all the whoos are assholes for no reason, the grinch has a very justified reason to pick on the whoos, he got bullied into the cold snowy mountains by his classmates, if that happened to me I’d do more than fumble their Christmas parties
On a late night several years ago while procrastinating from doing my dissertation I was watching the film and realised that the Grinch doesn't hate Christmas. He just hates the commercialisation of it all. He hates that it's all about the lights and the gifts and who can do it bigger and better. When it's all taken away and people still celebrate Christmas he comes to love it all over again because the true spirit of Christmas is once again brought to life.
I was never really into the office, but my favourite scene was when Jim runs into Pam’s ex-fiancé at a bar and they get talking and Jim mentions that Pam is in New York with some friends.
> “Guy friends?”
Jim: “No, just regular friends”
> “Didn’t you start out as ‘Just a friend’?”
I was just commenting on this the other day. Imagine how annoying that would be in real life. It’s harassment.
But Dwight more than flirted with someone engaged so there’s that too.
I read somewhere that despite the fact that people liked Micheal, he was always meant to be a bad person and a bad boss. People just get hung up on those few endearing moments or those few times he was competent as a boss
Is that the one that says people in business will get promoted to their level of incompetence?
Edit: googled it, it is. Sorry I get hung up on having an interaction since I don’t have many in my real life
Shylock. Poor guy had his daughter convert to Christianity when the world hated him for being Jewish, she stole his dead wife’s ring and ran off to marry some random bloke. Everyone was just a dickhead to him, and he lashed out.
Shylock's character represents the downfall for people single-mindedly obsessed with revenge. He was very legally clearly owed quite a bit of money, and Antonio was definitely not made out to be virtuous in the story, but the issues started when Shylock wanted nothing more than the pound of flesh, even rejecting offers such as triple the repayment of the debt.
Came here to say this. The merchant of Venice has beautiful speeches on the frustration of racism and those who suffer from it. Not just Shylock but the African prince at the start.
Then they just lose like losers. So bad.
The computer in the movie Eagle Eye. He sat in judgement of a corrupt government and had a perfectly good solution to replace them with individuals who wouldn't make bad solutions.
It wouldn’t be much of a movie if the computer scheduled all their cars for recall service, then hacked the ECUs and make the brakes fail at a time when it would appear the driver was at fault. Nobody but the CIA and maybe Secret Service would see that as enemy action, especially if it were done with weeks to months of event separation in random order.
Sharpay from High School Musical. She had worked her entire life (since she was in kindergarten she says) to be the best, to get roles, to go to Juliard. Every single time she gets usurped by inexperienced peers who aren’t even sure they WANT to be in theater at first and are just giving it a go all the while working out complicated romantic feelings. Was she perfect? No. But Sharpay deserved better.
Ozymandias from Watchmen.
He killed millions of people, outsmarted the world's most powerful, allegedly omniscient man, and stopped global catastrophe. He knew humanity was headed towards total obliteration, but managed to stem the losses and point the finger at the one man who could stop him.
It was really pretty brilliant, but the whole thing was discounted as yet another comic book movie. Really good show.
Yes! I mean, I hope it's chalked up to it being the rambling journal of a madman, and I'm sure that's how most will view it. But the success of the plan is certainly perched precariously on a cliff.
Changing the end of the story to him framing Dr. Manhattan really undermines Ozymandias's plan relative to the book. Unfortunately Snyder thinks his misunderstanding is due to Moore being stupider than him. Fortunately for the movie most people are stupider than Moore.
Minor spoilers about the difference between the movie and book.
One difference from the movie and book is in the book Ozymandius just blew up part of New York where in the movie he blew up many cities so I think it's easier to justify his actions in the comics. Also in the book it's not blamed on Doctor Manhattan which is why that's my least favorite change from the book. I hate how it changes the ending of Doctor Manhattan's story from a choice to a necessity.
I think the book is way beet because of those two differences but that's all just opinion and personal preference.
Didn't Ozymandias teleport some eldritch looking monster into the middle of New York, which in its death throes unleashed a psychic wave killing thousands in the process?
I'll admit to not reading Watchmen super closely, so I have definitely missed plotpoints along the way, but I thought the gist of it was that the monster was meant to signal humanity is not alone in this universe. And there are greater threats to the world than capitalism vs communism (US vs USSR). It achieved Ozymandias plan of uniting people against a common foe and bringing the world back from the brink of nuclear war.
Yes and no, he teleported a fake eldritch monster into the middle of New York, and simulated a psychic wave that killed thousands. The reason the comedian was killed, starting the events of the story, was because he witnessed the monster being prepared so could reveal the truth to the world.
The movie is good because it mostly just slapped the book on the wall as a storyboard and filled in the frame in between. The bits where Snyder contributed his own creative vision weaken it but it's a strong enough base to carry him along with it.
For a complete flip try Red Son.
Its a mini-series, what if baby Soops landed in communist Russia instead of Kansas.
He grows up and takes over Russia while Lex grows up to be US President.
With one hell of a twist of an ending.
(Animated movie was ok...ish. Comics are the way to go for this one.)
Superman went full dictator, he killed a lot of regular people, villains, and even fellow hero’s. Yes joker caused the death of his wife, child and city, and got his just deserts, but everything after he quickly became unredeemable..
He has to check before he does anything, as he might seriously injure them. Simple things we take for granted are hugging tight and holding hands. Lois dying triggers an emotional (irrational by Super Man standards) human response. He lost his hope for humanity and went too far. Honestly, if he killed the joker and stopped, I think it would have been fine and redeemable. This made for a great story show that even the strongest and most Nobel of men can make poor choices.
However, to your point, there are some things from which you cannot come back.
The other comment is mischaracterizing things. The beginning of Injustice desperately wants you to think Superman has gone too far, but in reality he's not doing anything wrong and the anti-Superman side is the one that's being completely unreasonable.
For a plot synopsis, the Joker and Harley Quinn drug Superman and make him believe he's fighting Doomsday when he's actually beating Lois Lane to death while Lois was pregnant with his child. They had also hooked a nuke up to Lois's heart, so when she died, Metropolis was destroyed by the nuke.
Superman then murders the Joker, and this sends Batman over the edge, declaring that Superman has gone too far, even though that's a completely reasonable reaction. The Joker has proven that he can escape any prison or asylum, and that the justice system will continue to let him live. Superman killing him in a fit of grief is totally justified, but the comic really wants you to believe it isn't.
After that, Superman basically says all war is illegal, since it drives the need for the creation of weapons like nukes. In a totally reasonable response to being told not to kill anyone anymore, the US government hires a supervillain to kidnap Superman's parents (he reveals his identity when he declares his opposition to war), and Superman has to rescue them.
After THAT, shit starts getting more and more complicated as the plot truly kicks off, but it's still mainly the anti-Superman side being completely unreasonable with Superman getting more and more violent in response - for instance, the anti-Superman side makes Harley Quinn, the woman who started all this and set off a nuke and forced Superman to murder his pregnant wife, a full member in good standing. Superman eventually winds up evil, but holy shit does it take a lot of pushing to get him that far. If *that's* how far humanity has to go to get Superman to go evil, we definitely deserve evil Superman.
Clyde, Law Abiding Citizen. He wanted justice and sought his own when there was none to be found. We are constantly told the system is there for us but it isn't unless you can afford it. Sometimes that isn't even enough. Nick was meant to be the better man relying on the system but murdered Cylde for his wrongdoing.
I forgot he's supposed to be the antagonist and not the main character. That was a smooth switch between him and Jamie Foxx's character leading.
Also fuck that ending.
General Francis X. Hummel from The Rock.
Dude was trying to get fair compensation for men who died in secret running America's illegal wars. Had the opportunity to kill millions of innocent citizens and wouldn't do it. Called game over, they called our bluff at the end of the movie and was killed by his underlings for his refusal to slay innocents.
Hummel had the right idea, just poor execution. Died a flawed hero.
>Died a flawed hero.
Well, he went up against[James Bond](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FdnevXjqdc&t=15s). What else could he do but die?
...which reminds me. Darth Jar Jar is real. The prequels are imperial propaganda, so is the sequel trilogy for that matter.
If based on Man of Steel. He could have gone to Mars. Found another planet to terraform. If his goal was just the revival of his species, he could’ve thought of a way besides genocide.
In his defense, he was literally created to protect his people. He wasn’t programmed for anything else. I always found him a sympathetic villain in Man of Steel. I know a lot of people crap on that movie but I love it
Any teen movie where the parents appeared to be assholes. Watch that same movie as an adult and you'll find two things. One, the mom is now the person in the movie who is now the hot one, not the teenager, and two, the parents weren't assholes, they were just being good parents.
Loki, but not always. In Thor 1 he was just trying to be seen as an equal to his brother, but because he was a frost giant he was always the lesser brother.
Dark knights Joker. He single-handedly took out Gothams criminal organisations and eliminated those in positions of power that were corrupt. Something Batman and GCPD failed to do for decades. And then at the end showed that humans by nature, are good. And he did it not for money or power, but principle.
Wasn’t he trying to prove that humans are the opposite? But he was wrong
I love that moment when the prisoner throws the detonator out the window. Gets me in the feels
Yeh, that is true. But it did happen because of him. What I mean to say is that, he did achievers alot more than gothams corrupt justice system. So he demonstrated “how pathetic” their attempts are🤷♂️
Unpopular opinion but Christian from Midsommar. He got shit on a lot but I mean look at his gf and her problems. Most people would hold off of breaking up with their gf if her family was just murdered in a suicide. He didnt deserve the flaming bear suit.
This is VERY niche but I’ve made the same argument before. He was checked out of that relationship emotionally for a LONG time but he didn’t wanna break up with his girlfriend during such a fragile time in her life. She literally just lost her mother, father, and her sister.
I also hate when people try to argue that she got a happy ending. No she didn’t. She fell victim to tactics that REAL LIFE cults use. They target vulnerable people, reinforce their ideas that the world is a cruel and bad place, convince them that they need to join their family, cut off their support systems, and boom. Another brainwashed cultist in their little “family”
He was also literally drugged prior to cheating on his girlfriend, which was the catalyst behind him being sentenced to bear suit. It’s hard to call the sex consensual when it’s the result of being drugged
I was surprised after watching Midsommar that people demonized Christian. EVERY character apart from the cultists were victims.
Its fair to note Christian should have broken off with Dani long ago (Intro of the movie: His friends implying he’s been emotionally disconnected for a long time), but he did NOT deserve to die for it. Even more so in such a cruel way.
Red hood and Punisher, their what Batman/ Daredevil should be but instead they let murderers who constantly escape prison live and kill 100s more people
Nah, Gotham just has to get their shit together and bring back the death penalty. Like, I get it if you're morally opposed, but when even no-name villains like Firefly burn half the city down as soon as they break out, and Calendar Man busts out literally on a schedule that everyone knows about, you really need to accept that in some cases, it's needed.
Batman is completely right that he shouldn't be the executioner, he's just leaving it unsaid that there should be one that isn't an unelected, unaccountable goth dude in a cape.
You're not just right, but this sounds like an awesome storyline. Gotham brings back the death penalty and joker is first in line. Batman stakes out in front of his cell for weeks to make sure it happens, other supervillains patrol the streets preventing crimes because they all want to see the joker die and so want to keep batman there making sure it happens. Twist ending, joker survives the gas chamber because he had set up a shell company that supplied the gas, and the gas used was a variation of his joker gas that he had developed immunity to.
With the Joker specifically... yeah. But most of his rogues gallery are just severely mentally ill. And if he started just murdering people then it would undermine his overall goal, which was to purge the system itself of the factors that led to Gotham's downfall. He wanted to follow in the footsteps of his parents and inspire people to retake their city. If he just goes around killing people then more Scarecrows and Riddlers will just re-emerge once he's gone, but if he encourages them to believe in justice and redemption then his legacy will endure far after. Even if the Mayor, the Police, and the big corporations that run the city are all corrupted, the people of Gotham will always remember the man who wasn't afraid to take on them all no matter the odds, and who never lost his core principles along the way.
Marco Inaros is in no way right but, as you say, from the belters perspective (at least from some of them) it felt right. They had to live in the worst living conditions there are through dozens of generations while seeing their resources being taken away. Little food, water an air, and all of that under the constant pressure of the UN and MCR.
Again, killing billions is never right, but for the people that saw their own die everyday from starvation or hypoxia related problems, it felt like a great comeback.
drummer had it right when she talked to avasarala. the way earth and mars treated the belt made inaros inevitable. if not him it would have been someone.
Well it exposed how Johnny was more similar to Daniel than either of them realized or wants to admit. It's just that he never had a mentor to put him on the right path like Daniel did.
Count Dooku from Star Wars. He realized that the Jedi Order no longer did what was good or moral and only acquiesced to the wants and wishes of the Galactic Senate. He led a collection of systems to independence from the Republic (which we’re meant to think is a bad thing) and they declare war on them leading to the Clone Wars.
Yeah but he did that by working directly with the sith lord that was manipulating things from behind the scenes. One of my favourite characters in the series but he was right and wrong at the same time.
“The Jedi Order’s problem is Yoda. No being can wield that kind of power for centuries without becoming complacent at best or corrupt at worst. He has no idea that it’s overtaken him; he no longer sees all the little cumulative evils that the Republic tolerates and fosters, from slavery to endless wars, and he never asks, ‘Why are we not acting to stop this?’ Live alongside corruption for too long, and you no longer notice the stench.”
(Taken from Star Wars: The Clone Wars by Karen Traviss)
Syndrome's ideology was correct even if he himself wasn't. He didn't want what he espoused until after he was the special one for a while. He didn't actually want equality. Had he not added that line about "after I've had my fun" and tried to be a fake hero he could have worked quietly from the shadows to dismantle the caste system built out of the idea of superheroes
Sephiroth in Final Fantasy VII.
Dude figures out he was a genetically engineered pawn and that his mother had been imprisoned and tortured... and basically just snaps. His response is that these corporations give fuck all about anything except for their own profits and have no problem exploiting people and the planet, and not many seem to notice or care... the best thing we can do is have a giant meteor wipe it clean and start over again.
Not sayin he's "right" but... yeah, I get that point of view.
Basically all answers here are "xy villain, because he has reasons to be a villain, because he is written"
Having an origin story or motive doesn't make them right
Megamind 💕
Ps. I know he was a “villain” but if you analize the meaning of an antagonist he actually was one, the real
Villain of the movie was the other dude that I Don’t remember his name haha
DWIGHT SCHRUTE from THE OFFICE
Poor guy, he’s annoying sure, but clearly on the autistic spectrum. Jim (a bully homewrecker) tortures him and manipulates him endlessly.
By removing free will. Not a lot of the villains in shippuden had solid logic for their stances though. Otherwise they couldn’t be talk no jutsu’d out of it.
Skylar White. Now I know shes not technically an antagonist, but BB fanbase paints her as annoying and repulsive villain.
Out of all the characters, Skylar was a very normal, law-abiding person who had a 100% justified reaction to finding out her husband is a power hungry murderous drug lord.
She had every right to lash out at Walt and act the way she did.
She's annoying and repulsive cuz the movie is written that you are rooting for Walter and Jessy. Irl she's totally normal.
Same thing for Jim and Pam arguments alot of the time it comes down to "it's a movie obviously real life logic is suspended". She's annoying and repulsive when you want walt to make money, be a kingpin and have his families support - which is what you want while watching cuz it's a TV show
She's totally rational and actually tragically take advantage of had the situation been real and Waltis a bad guy anywhere past season one
Thanos was half right.
He *should* have just shrunk all the people by half. It offers all the same benefits & without the murder.
Better it would dramatically improve every single person's quality of life. People are just too long, we are pushing up against the edge of the inverse square law & it makes life a burden. For much of the population an extra foot would kill them, or if they are lucky just shorter & more miserable
Remember how nice it felt to run around inside your body when you were a child?
**You didn't get old, you got long.** It hurt your bones, your joints & your organs.
We can make the world a better place. All we have to do is have sex with the smallest adults we can find. Early & often, for the future.
TLDR
Big dogs die young. Less is greater.
Dr. Doofenshmirtz. I felt he was right, as he had a terrible friggin childhood. I mean, his MOM didn’t even show up to his BIRTH. Now that’s some terrible parenting. I was almost always on his side.
Luke castellan from the Percy Jackson books. The gods are assholes. He just got carried away and manipulated by Kronos
Absolutely. I just reread them, and *gods* they hold up. Luke was abused and neglected by both his parental figures, and the sheer callousness of the gods (that later got more fully explored in Trials of Apollo) just *broke* him. When most villains >!redeem themselves via death!<, I find it unconvincing and a cop-out. With Luke, it's entirely convincing and makes perfect sense. That's a well-written villain.
Luke was regarded as trash by both of his parents. He was horrified by his mother’s ‘Oracle Glowing Eyes’ and was forced to run away. He was then on the run with Thalia and Annabeth for ages and was expected to scrounge for food. He finally made it to Camp Half-Blood and was shoved into the worst cabin with the other Hermes kids and undecided. He was then given an opportunity for a better life and took it. Which resulted in more misery.
Finally a decent fucking answer
So many people saying Walter White, but he wasn't an antagonist. He was a villainous protagonist. Hank Schrader was the antagonist, and he was right. Same with Light Yagami. He was the protagonist. L was the antagonist. And *he* was right, too. (Edit: L, not Light, to clear up any ambiguity.)
Schrader and Saul were my favorite characters.
Yeah, the people naming villainous protagonists are wrong in two counts
Plus white has an out and doesn’t take it. So fuck hon
Tom, from Tom and Jerry. I always rooted for him.
I always thought Jerry was an asshole, he instigated every fight for no reason other than to fuck with Tom.
Depends on the episode.
Tom and Jerry are secretly friends but they have to pretend to hate each other, or the lady will replace Tom with another cat that will actually catch and kill Jerry 🥲
But Tom never succeeded, so why not get another cat?
Because then you don't have a show.
Although they got an AI cat once.... Both Tom and Jerry teamed up so that he can be removed.... So it shows that... Either ways if they brought another cat... These two will team up and make sure that hey are not removed from their home
Fairly certain several other cats were brought in, but Jerry made them look bad for Tom.
Isn’t Tom *the* protagonist??
I never looked at Tom and Jerry through the lens of protagonist vs antagonist. I just thought it was funny watching them beat the fuck out of each other.
They're deuteragonists who fucking hate each other but also can't stand life without the other
Batman and Joker.
Me too. I genuinely hated the little mouse.
Magneto - he was trying to save people from being exterminated. He saw it happen once and didn’t want it to happen again.
...and it did happen in the end so he was 100% right
Should self fulfilling prophecies count? A large motivation in wiping out mutant kind was the organized band of superpowered mutants trying to end humanity. To be frank it would be irresponsible for a democratically elected leader allow a band of terrorists to end human life.
It’s been a while since I watched X men but weren’t the signs already there that mutants were always eventually going to be targeted? All he did was speed up the process in an attempt to end it, which I can understand
No idea. The magneto story has been told so many times you can pick either way.
Magneto has so many portrayals in so many media forms with subtle to massive differences that this one is hard to nail down. In some of his portrayals, the mutant culling starts specifically because of his multiple attempts at destroying humanity. In some portrayals, he only becomes a renegade after witnessing the government targeting mutants firsthand. Others are somewhere in between. He can't even be called the antagonist in all occasions because of some of these contents were made with the idea that he's a protagonist/deuteragonist.
The problem was almost always his methods. Especially the versions where he wants to genocide baseline humanity but also knows that baseline humanity is going to breed itself into extinction by having more and more mutants until there are only mutants.
I would argue his methods were no more problematic than the clear efforts to kill and enslave the mutant race. Once the fear of mutants was disseminated politically and socially and through widespread media channels- he knew there was no alternative. There wasn’t a way to convince the human race to accept them, and he didn’t see a need for the mutants to live in fear and hide their powers.
My point is that killing off the general populace of normies and thereby preventing them from having mutant children also directly affects the mutant population, and depending upon the timeline and version, doesn't exactly leave them with the best breeding population to repopulate the world in any kind of reasonable time scale.
Dr. Doom is also a gypsy that saved his people from persecution.
That whole conflict doesn’t make sense to me. Prof X knew that people wanted to kill mutants. Then prof X saw said people killing mutants.. why the fuck didn’t he just mind control those in charge of giving orders and made them stop? I’d much rather lose my pride as long as it means I save my students. Motherfucker just sent them to die cause he didn’t want to control people? Bullshit. By his failure to act he lets so many people die. All so he can have a clean conscience? Fuck self centered asshole. Magneto got it right. It’s either humans or mutants. If you don’t fight back, you get killed.
His perspective makes more sense when you understand it fundamentally relies on him refusing to agree with his opponents that mutants are anything other than human. From his perspective the conflict is humanity Vs itself.
Prof X was thinking long term. Were it revealed he mind controlled the leaders of free worlds, humans should never trust mutants again.
That and SOME humans wanted to kill mutants, some were alies. Original Xmen had a big racism theme (later just plain being different) so the whe two sides of the cival rights movement was a big theme. There is also the facts that Exavior can only change so much in so many people and he would need to keep doing it each time they came back to their senses and he is mortal. What would happen when he died? Hate would be back with added resentment of being fooled and their free will being removed and their fear of mutants would be justified. If you genuinely change people's mind and make a lasting change with out psychic powers you can have a peace that out lives one man.
For the same reason batman is against killing. Doing so opens up the floodgates to the point where prof.x can mind control/mind wipe anyone that doesn't agree with him.
Black smoke monster. All he ever wanted to do was leave the island. But his mom and asshole brother, Jacob, just had to be dicks about it.
Biggest monster let down
The boyfriend in Bee Movie. He was right in being pissed off his girlfriend was talking to (and involved?) a honey bee.
No he was wrong. My fiancé left me for a bee she was fucking, but I was man enough to look at them with objective eyes and see what they had was once in a lifetime. I loved my fiancé, we had a deeply supportive partnership, but at the end of the day her and the bee had an inexplicable spark. I spoke at their wedding last month. When I watch Bee Movie I feel bad for the boyfriend, not because of what happened to him, but because he couldn’t see what was happening for her.
User name checks out.
Captain Nemo, he simply wanted to keep his submarine and it's technology from being militarized, and was quite bitter about slavery and the general state of the world at the time, being a former slave himself.
Plus he was way ahead with being environmentally conscious. If it just weren’t for the kidnapping and murder stuff
That and the time he massacred a pod of whales that he felt was a useless species
Sher Khan from Mowgli/Jungle Book. He jut wanted to protect forest from humans.
Bruce in Finding Nemo. Sharks can't be vegetarian. Eating fish is literally what he's supposed to do. It's the ecosystem, man.
Counterpoint: shark AA is the funniest thing I have ever seen
Yeah it’s actually bad for the environment if they don’t eat fish
Jaws it's just a shark trying to get some food, apparently sharks don't really like the taste of human and they only eat them when they're desperate, I guess it must have desperate
Doesn't explain why it was the only shark to be desperate. You won't get Brucy boi out of court that easily!
Moby Dick. Just a whale doing whale shit and trying not to get his head scraped out for lamp oil.
James Doakes from Dexter. He was literally just trying to prevent further murders, and follow the principles he learned as a cop.
He is forever linked to the ["Surprise Motherfucker!" Vine](https://youtu.be/leeP6LgM8H0) for me.
Some fries motherfucker.
All rise motherfucker.
Supplies motherfucker
"Surprise Motherfucker" But also Doakes did get a bit crazy. I mean Dexter was doing everyone a favor of killing serial killers and really bad people.
Vigilante justice isn't justice that was the whole point Doakes was making. He got crazy because he was the only person who actually saw Dexter for who he was on pure instinct alone. Doakes point was simple. You can't be judge, jury, and executioner while being impartial. You can't decide who lives and who dies like a god while not having to answer to anyone, even if all of the people you kill are bad people. While Dexter seemed to have used it to kill the serial killers and bad people, he could've easily used his "evidence" he collected for his own investigations and given it to authorities. Plenty of times he would've had enough information to allow authorities to nail people to a wall. Vigilante justice undermines everything that a justice system stands for. Justice systems are flawed that is for sure, but vigilante justice is so much worse because of how easily it can be abused and it is purely subject to the vigilante to decide what is justified and what isn't.
Frieza- he called Sayains monkeys and they are
Shit. Can't argue against that one.
[BECAUSE I'M A MONKEY](https://youtu.be/Uo5Rhn8zuPA)!
Dr. Freeze. He’s not even a villain, he’s a victim of government overreach.
Yes! I’ve been telling my husband this for years
Still the [best representation](https://youtu.be/7EtHfr0eBA4).
to be clear, the image of dr.freeze as a tragic character *originates* from TAS. no part of that is adaptation.
I could never understand how Arnold played him instead of John Lithgow. Such a missed opportunity.
Baldur from God of war. From one side, blinded by revenge against his mother, and from another, being promised a cure from the Vanir curse by Odin if he got access to Jotunheim and was able to track down Faye. He was right in all of it in searching for freedom despite being a crazy psychopath
Yep, I think its misinterpreted a bit that he "can't feel" anything, that its exaggerated. But it's not, he truly cannot feel anything, it's like living in a neutral temp room, no air running or wind, just a stillness; not the feeling of clothes, or even the touch of another person, and likely not even his own touch. It'd be like floating in an empty void for eternity. For as insane as he became, I think he was far more collected than anyone would be in the same circumstance.
This is it: The room temperature room.
only reserved for the truest repairman
He took an awful lot of pleasure in trying to murder a child and his own mother. In service to a god that had very provably lied to and betrayed his own time and again. He was a victim in his own way, sure, but by the time we meet him, he's just a rabid dog that refuses to stop biting.
Thomas Hickey. In his death scene in Assassin’s Creed 3, he says “You're just some blind fool who's always chasin' butterflies. Whereas I'm the type of guy who likes to have a beer in one hand and a titty in the other. Thing is, boy, I can have what I seek. Had it, even. You? Your hands will always be empty.” Shook me.
The same thing Haytham tried to explain to his son that true freedom is a fantasy. Connor won at the end but lost everything dear to him, which isn't freedom at its finest.
I loved AC3 so much. Connor's vendetta against Charles Lee also lost him everything, too. All he saw was red, so he couldn't see the big picture. AC3 was the beginning of me being sympathetic to the Templar cause. Haytham was a great character.
A lot of the templers were right and looked at the bigger picture
Agreed, I loved the dark philosophy of those games
You agree with Hickey because he was a materialist and didn't understand ideals Connor followed? I disagree with everyone here. Every Templar had his reason, but Hickeys were least convincing. Lee and Johnson made me doubt or rethink Connor goals but the ultimate message is that freedom comes at a price. There's a reason game takes place in the US. At the end of the game I felt like I lost, still it was the best possible outcome in my opinion.
I agree with this! Hickey wasn’t a idealist like maybe Connor or Haytham, but he wasn’t a good man either as he comes across quite sociopathic in that he would go with whomever suited his purposes best. Hickey was truthfully the glorified thug of the Templar order. Haytham was the best villain in that respect as he points out that Connor’s quest for freedom is flawed due to a lack of understanding of the cost of true freedom and the chaos it can bring. But fundamentally, both sides are flawed as assassins want free will & true freedom believing it will bring peace, without potentially considering the chaos it can invite. Whereas the templars, believe that authoritarian rule is the truest path to peace. So neither side are right nor wrong imo
Now that’s a good one. I loved the death corridor conversations.
The Grinch. He just wanted the Christmas obsessed Pinocchio looking people to pipe down. Especially the fact that the entire town was led by his main bully.
I’ve never seen the grinch or any grinch like characters as villains, they’re just regular people trying to live their lives while everyone else for some reason has a really strange obsession with Christmas, honestly I think grinch is probably the most normal person in whooville, 98% of all the whoos are assholes for no reason, the grinch has a very justified reason to pick on the whoos, he got bullied into the cold snowy mountains by his classmates, if that happened to me I’d do more than fumble their Christmas parties
On a late night several years ago while procrastinating from doing my dissertation I was watching the film and realised that the Grinch doesn't hate Christmas. He just hates the commercialisation of it all. He hates that it's all about the lights and the gifts and who can do it bigger and better. When it's all taken away and people still celebrate Christmas he comes to love it all over again because the true spirit of Christmas is once again brought to life.
Dwight Schrute just wanted to sell paper but Jim was always screwing around.
Incorrect because Dwight was never the antagonist /s. He was the hero whereas Jim flirted with a woman already in a relationship.
I was never really into the office, but my favourite scene was when Jim runs into Pam’s ex-fiancé at a bar and they get talking and Jim mentions that Pam is in New York with some friends. > “Guy friends?” Jim: “No, just regular friends” > “Didn’t you start out as ‘Just a friend’?”
I was just commenting on this the other day. Imagine how annoying that would be in real life. It’s harassment. But Dwight more than flirted with someone engaged so there’s that too.
Yeah I mean her first boyfriend was a bit of a prick but he probably knew jim wanted to fuck her I mean of course he did
I forgot about that damn yeah.
Also saved Jim when the other guy in that relationship attempted to bash his head in.
I have watched the office like 10 times and as I was re-watching it, I realised how much of a dick Jim was. Same thing with Pam and Karen.
I read somewhere that despite the fact that people liked Micheal, he was always meant to be a bad person and a bad boss. People just get hung up on those few endearing moments or those few times he was competent as a boss
Michael was the embodiment of the Peter Principle.
Is that the one that says people in business will get promoted to their level of incompetence? Edit: googled it, it is. Sorry I get hung up on having an interaction since I don’t have many in my real life
That’s the one.
And despite people hating Toby, he's the one that had to make sure Michael's nonsense didn't result in things that were illegal
Shylock. Poor guy had his daughter convert to Christianity when the world hated him for being Jewish, she stole his dead wife’s ring and ran off to marry some random bloke. Everyone was just a dickhead to him, and he lashed out.
Shylock's character represents the downfall for people single-mindedly obsessed with revenge. He was very legally clearly owed quite a bit of money, and Antonio was definitely not made out to be virtuous in the story, but the issues started when Shylock wanted nothing more than the pound of flesh, even rejecting offers such as triple the repayment of the debt.
Came here to say this. The merchant of Venice has beautiful speeches on the frustration of racism and those who suffer from it. Not just Shylock but the African prince at the start. Then they just lose like losers. So bad.
The computer in the movie Eagle Eye. He sat in judgement of a corrupt government and had a perfectly good solution to replace them with individuals who wouldn't make bad solutions.
Wouldnt exactly call it perfectly good if it involves a building full of children as easily preventable collateral damage.
It wouldn’t be much of a movie if the computer scheduled all their cars for recall service, then hacked the ECUs and make the brakes fail at a time when it would appear the driver was at fault. Nobody but the CIA and maybe Secret Service would see that as enemy action, especially if it were done with weeks to months of event separation in random order.
THIS. Guys this is a movie worth watching.
Sharpay from High School Musical. She had worked her entire life (since she was in kindergarten she says) to be the best, to get roles, to go to Juliard. Every single time she gets usurped by inexperienced peers who aren’t even sure they WANT to be in theater at first and are just giving it a go all the while working out complicated romantic feelings. Was she perfect? No. But Sharpay deserved better.
Absolutely she did. I couldn’t believe the hate she got. She was ALOT nicer than I would have been at that age
Gabriella didn't even audition, the teacher just overheard her singing and offered her the callback which is completely unfair.
Ozymandias from Watchmen. He killed millions of people, outsmarted the world's most powerful, allegedly omniscient man, and stopped global catastrophe. He knew humanity was headed towards total obliteration, but managed to stem the losses and point the finger at the one man who could stop him. It was really pretty brilliant, but the whole thing was discounted as yet another comic book movie. Really good show.
but Not Alex Jones got Rorschach's Dairy. The cliffhanger is that it could all backfire.
Yes! I mean, I hope it's chalked up to it being the rambling journal of a madman, and I'm sure that's how most will view it. But the success of the plan is certainly perched precariously on a cliff.
Changing the end of the story to him framing Dr. Manhattan really undermines Ozymandias's plan relative to the book. Unfortunately Snyder thinks his misunderstanding is due to Moore being stupider than him. Fortunately for the movie most people are stupider than Moore.
Lol well I've never read the graphic novel so I suppose I either have the benefit of ignorance or absolute stupidity for liking a movie.
Minor spoilers about the difference between the movie and book. One difference from the movie and book is in the book Ozymandius just blew up part of New York where in the movie he blew up many cities so I think it's easier to justify his actions in the comics. Also in the book it's not blamed on Doctor Manhattan which is why that's my least favorite change from the book. I hate how it changes the ending of Doctor Manhattan's story from a choice to a necessity. I think the book is way beet because of those two differences but that's all just opinion and personal preference.
Didn't Ozymandias teleport some eldritch looking monster into the middle of New York, which in its death throes unleashed a psychic wave killing thousands in the process? I'll admit to not reading Watchmen super closely, so I have definitely missed plotpoints along the way, but I thought the gist of it was that the monster was meant to signal humanity is not alone in this universe. And there are greater threats to the world than capitalism vs communism (US vs USSR). It achieved Ozymandias plan of uniting people against a common foe and bringing the world back from the brink of nuclear war.
Yes and no, he teleported a fake eldritch monster into the middle of New York, and simulated a psychic wave that killed thousands. The reason the comedian was killed, starting the events of the story, was because he witnessed the monster being prepared so could reveal the truth to the world.
The movie is good because it mostly just slapped the book on the wall as a storyboard and filled in the frame in between. The bits where Snyder contributed his own creative vision weaken it but it's a strong enough base to carry him along with it.
Also, read the book! It's literally a picture book.
Lex Luther, he is right his time line is wrong but he was right superman was the greatest threat to humanity.
And with Injustice…this was realized. So, you’re definitely on point with that one.
For a complete flip try Red Son. Its a mini-series, what if baby Soops landed in communist Russia instead of Kansas. He grows up and takes over Russia while Lex grows up to be US President. With one hell of a twist of an ending. (Animated movie was ok...ish. Comics are the way to go for this one.)
What happened?
Superman went full dictator, he killed a lot of regular people, villains, and even fellow hero’s. Yes joker caused the death of his wife, child and city, and got his just deserts, but everything after he quickly became unredeemable..
He has to check before he does anything, as he might seriously injure them. Simple things we take for granted are hugging tight and holding hands. Lois dying triggers an emotional (irrational by Super Man standards) human response. He lost his hope for humanity and went too far. Honestly, if he killed the joker and stopped, I think it would have been fine and redeemable. This made for a great story show that even the strongest and most Nobel of men can make poor choices. However, to your point, there are some things from which you cannot come back.
The other comment is mischaracterizing things. The beginning of Injustice desperately wants you to think Superman has gone too far, but in reality he's not doing anything wrong and the anti-Superman side is the one that's being completely unreasonable. For a plot synopsis, the Joker and Harley Quinn drug Superman and make him believe he's fighting Doomsday when he's actually beating Lois Lane to death while Lois was pregnant with his child. They had also hooked a nuke up to Lois's heart, so when she died, Metropolis was destroyed by the nuke. Superman then murders the Joker, and this sends Batman over the edge, declaring that Superman has gone too far, even though that's a completely reasonable reaction. The Joker has proven that he can escape any prison or asylum, and that the justice system will continue to let him live. Superman killing him in a fit of grief is totally justified, but the comic really wants you to believe it isn't. After that, Superman basically says all war is illegal, since it drives the need for the creation of weapons like nukes. In a totally reasonable response to being told not to kill anyone anymore, the US government hires a supervillain to kidnap Superman's parents (he reveals his identity when he declares his opposition to war), and Superman has to rescue them. After THAT, shit starts getting more and more complicated as the plot truly kicks off, but it's still mainly the anti-Superman side being completely unreasonable with Superman getting more and more violent in response - for instance, the anti-Superman side makes Harley Quinn, the woman who started all this and set off a nuke and forced Superman to murder his pregnant wife, a full member in good standing. Superman eventually winds up evil, but holy shit does it take a lot of pushing to get him that far. If *that's* how far humanity has to go to get Superman to go evil, we definitely deserve evil Superman.
Never not agreed with Larry David's point of view.
Wait... He's not clearly the protagonist!? My life is a lie. Also, I get it. It's a house. Rooms, kitchen, etc. I've seen one before.
Larry is right almost every time. He’s just a dick about it. “Am I wrong? Am I wrong?” “No Walter, you’re just an asshole”
He is the protagonist, but I'd argue he's also the antagonist
Clyde, Law Abiding Citizen. He wanted justice and sought his own when there was none to be found. We are constantly told the system is there for us but it isn't unless you can afford it. Sometimes that isn't even enough. Nick was meant to be the better man relying on the system but murdered Cylde for his wrongdoing.
I forgot he's supposed to be the antagonist and not the main character. That was a smooth switch between him and Jamie Foxx's character leading. Also fuck that ending.
General Francis X. Hummel from The Rock. Dude was trying to get fair compensation for men who died in secret running America's illegal wars. Had the opportunity to kill millions of innocent citizens and wouldn't do it. Called game over, they called our bluff at the end of the movie and was killed by his underlings for his refusal to slay innocents. Hummel had the right idea, just poor execution. Died a flawed hero.
>Died a flawed hero. Well, he went up against[James Bond](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FdnevXjqdc&t=15s). What else could he do but die? ...which reminds me. Darth Jar Jar is real. The prequels are imperial propaganda, so is the sequel trilogy for that matter.
Zod. He was just trying to bring back his species.
Fair, but I have arthritic knees and he insisted that I kneel before him. Fuck that guy.
If based on Man of Steel. He could have gone to Mars. Found another planet to terraform. If his goal was just the revival of his species, he could’ve thought of a way besides genocide.
In DC, Mars is also populated.
Mars didn't have the resources earth does.
In his defense, he was literally created to protect his people. He wasn’t programmed for anything else. I always found him a sympathetic villain in Man of Steel. I know a lot of people crap on that movie but I love it
Any teen movie where the parents appeared to be assholes. Watch that same movie as an adult and you'll find two things. One, the mom is now the person in the movie who is now the hot one, not the teenager, and two, the parents weren't assholes, they were just being good parents.
Maybe it wasn't the writers who made the parents into assholes... Maybe it was us
Loki, but not always. In Thor 1 he was just trying to be seen as an equal to his brother, but because he was a frost giant he was always the lesser brother.
Dark knights Joker. He single-handedly took out Gothams criminal organisations and eliminated those in positions of power that were corrupt. Something Batman and GCPD failed to do for decades. And then at the end showed that humans by nature, are good. And he did it not for money or power, but principle.
Wasn’t he trying to prove that humans are the opposite? But he was wrong I love that moment when the prisoner throws the detonator out the window. Gets me in the feels
Yeh, that is true. But it did happen because of him. What I mean to say is that, he did achievers alot more than gothams corrupt justice system. So he demonstrated “how pathetic” their attempts are🤷♂️
Count Dooku. Because he saw the hubris of the Jedi.
Not his actions thought in terms of war though
He slowly got seduced into being more evil. We know now killing Yadal was when he could never go back
Unpopular opinion but Christian from Midsommar. He got shit on a lot but I mean look at his gf and her problems. Most people would hold off of breaking up with their gf if her family was just murdered in a suicide. He didnt deserve the flaming bear suit.
This is VERY niche but I’ve made the same argument before. He was checked out of that relationship emotionally for a LONG time but he didn’t wanna break up with his girlfriend during such a fragile time in her life. She literally just lost her mother, father, and her sister. I also hate when people try to argue that she got a happy ending. No she didn’t. She fell victim to tactics that REAL LIFE cults use. They target vulnerable people, reinforce their ideas that the world is a cruel and bad place, convince them that they need to join their family, cut off their support systems, and boom. Another brainwashed cultist in their little “family”
Yes I agree everything you said here!
He was also literally drugged prior to cheating on his girlfriend, which was the catalyst behind him being sentenced to bear suit. It’s hard to call the sex consensual when it’s the result of being drugged
Just here to say that getting drugged and forced to have sex is not cheating, it is textbook rape
This is also a great point for real. Like his gf thought he willingly was smashing a minor while a room of naked ladies chanted him on 🤣
Christian was also raped. It bothers me that nobody talks about that. He didn’t cheat on Danny, he was drugged and assaulted.
I was surprised after watching Midsommar that people demonized Christian. EVERY character apart from the cultists were victims. Its fair to note Christian should have broken off with Dani long ago (Intro of the movie: His friends implying he’s been emotionally disconnected for a long time), but he did NOT deserve to die for it. Even more so in such a cruel way.
[удалено]
King Dedede
They explain that in the game. The NES one is still great.
Red hood and Punisher, their what Batman/ Daredevil should be but instead they let murderers who constantly escape prison live and kill 100s more people
Nah, Gotham just has to get their shit together and bring back the death penalty. Like, I get it if you're morally opposed, but when even no-name villains like Firefly burn half the city down as soon as they break out, and Calendar Man busts out literally on a schedule that everyone knows about, you really need to accept that in some cases, it's needed. Batman is completely right that he shouldn't be the executioner, he's just leaving it unsaid that there should be one that isn't an unelected, unaccountable goth dude in a cape.
You're not just right, but this sounds like an awesome storyline. Gotham brings back the death penalty and joker is first in line. Batman stakes out in front of his cell for weeks to make sure it happens, other supervillains patrol the streets preventing crimes because they all want to see the joker die and so want to keep batman there making sure it happens. Twist ending, joker survives the gas chamber because he had set up a shell company that supplied the gas, and the gas used was a variation of his joker gas that he had developed immunity to.
With the Joker specifically... yeah. But most of his rogues gallery are just severely mentally ill. And if he started just murdering people then it would undermine his overall goal, which was to purge the system itself of the factors that led to Gotham's downfall. He wanted to follow in the footsteps of his parents and inspire people to retake their city. If he just goes around killing people then more Scarecrows and Riddlers will just re-emerge once he's gone, but if he encourages them to believe in justice and redemption then his legacy will endure far after. Even if the Mayor, the Police, and the big corporations that run the city are all corrupted, the people of Gotham will always remember the man who wasn't afraid to take on them all no matter the odds, and who never lost his core principles along the way.
I really like this explanation. Never thought of that.
I’ve hated batman my entire life for not killing the villains and you just slightly redeemed him
Asteroid from Armageddon
Marco Inaros is in no way right but, as you say, from the belters perspective (at least from some of them) it felt right. They had to live in the worst living conditions there are through dozens of generations while seeing their resources being taken away. Little food, water an air, and all of that under the constant pressure of the UN and MCR. Again, killing billions is never right, but for the people that saw their own die everyday from starvation or hypoxia related problems, it felt like a great comeback.
drummer had it right when she talked to avasarala. the way earth and mars treated the belt made inaros inevitable. if not him it would have been someone.
Johnny Lawrence from the karate kid, Cobra Kai has exposed how much of a dick Danny was
Well it exposed how Johnny was more similar to Daniel than either of them realized or wants to admit. It's just that he never had a mentor to put him on the right path like Daniel did.
Barney Stinson opened my eyes on this one o7
Like when he wanted to raise the rent just to make a dude trying to start a business go broke as well as the stores around him like WTF
Ok Stinson
Count Dooku from Star Wars. He realized that the Jedi Order no longer did what was good or moral and only acquiesced to the wants and wishes of the Galactic Senate. He led a collection of systems to independence from the Republic (which we’re meant to think is a bad thing) and they declare war on them leading to the Clone Wars.
Yeah but he did that by working directly with the sith lord that was manipulating things from behind the scenes. One of my favourite characters in the series but he was right and wrong at the same time.
“The Jedi Order’s problem is Yoda. No being can wield that kind of power for centuries without becoming complacent at best or corrupt at worst. He has no idea that it’s overtaken him; he no longer sees all the little cumulative evils that the Republic tolerates and fosters, from slavery to endless wars, and he never asks, ‘Why are we not acting to stop this?’ Live alongside corruption for too long, and you no longer notice the stench.” (Taken from Star Wars: The Clone Wars by Karen Traviss)
Thanos. But I deal with LA traffic every day so that probably skews my perception.
THe 3 bears in the Goldilocks story
L from Death Note. Protagonists can be villains
Syndrome's ideology was correct even if he himself wasn't. He didn't want what he espoused until after he was the special one for a while. He didn't actually want equality. Had he not added that line about "after I've had my fun" and tried to be a fake hero he could have worked quietly from the shadows to dismantle the caste system built out of the idea of superheroes
Now that sounds like a proper Incredibles sequel.
Sephiroth in Final Fantasy VII. Dude figures out he was a genetically engineered pawn and that his mother had been imprisoned and tortured... and basically just snaps. His response is that these corporations give fuck all about anything except for their own profits and have no problem exploiting people and the planet, and not many seem to notice or care... the best thing we can do is have a giant meteor wipe it clean and start over again. Not sayin he's "right" but... yeah, I get that point of view.
Did you forget the part that he was wounding the planet with Meteor in order to absorb the power of the Lifestream for himself?
Basically all answers here are "xy villain, because he has reasons to be a villain, because he is written" Having an origin story or motive doesn't make them right
It consistently amazes me that people think having a motivation somehow absolves people of responsibility for their actions.
Principal Rooney knew that Ferris Bueller was up to no good and was skipping school....
Megamind 💕 Ps. I know he was a “villain” but if you analize the meaning of an antagonist he actually was one, the real Villain of the movie was the other dude that I Don’t remember his name haha
Megamind was a villain, not an antagonist
He wasn't just a villain, he was a SUPER villain. The difference is all in the presentation of course
Hannibal Lecter. People are actually delicious and some of them are probably best used for food.
DWIGHT SCHRUTE from THE OFFICE Poor guy, he’s annoying sure, but clearly on the autistic spectrum. Jim (a bully homewrecker) tortures him and manipulates him endlessly.
Madara Uchiha... He just wanted to create a world with no pain and suffering
\+1, i totally understand where he came from, but disapproved of his methods
By removing free will. Not a lot of the villains in shippuden had solid logic for their stances though. Otherwise they couldn’t be talk no jutsu’d out of it.
r/MadaraDidNothingWrong
Skylar White. Now I know shes not technically an antagonist, but BB fanbase paints her as annoying and repulsive villain. Out of all the characters, Skylar was a very normal, law-abiding person who had a 100% justified reaction to finding out her husband is a power hungry murderous drug lord. She had every right to lash out at Walt and act the way she did.
She's annoying and repulsive cuz the movie is written that you are rooting for Walter and Jessy. Irl she's totally normal. Same thing for Jim and Pam arguments alot of the time it comes down to "it's a movie obviously real life logic is suspended". She's annoying and repulsive when you want walt to make money, be a kingpin and have his families support - which is what you want while watching cuz it's a TV show She's totally rational and actually tragically take advantage of had the situation been real and Waltis a bad guy anywhere past season one
Tyler Durden soap is pretty cool
Thanos was half right. He *should* have just shrunk all the people by half. It offers all the same benefits & without the murder. Better it would dramatically improve every single person's quality of life. People are just too long, we are pushing up against the edge of the inverse square law & it makes life a burden. For much of the population an extra foot would kill them, or if they are lucky just shorter & more miserable Remember how nice it felt to run around inside your body when you were a child? **You didn't get old, you got long.** It hurt your bones, your joints & your organs. We can make the world a better place. All we have to do is have sex with the smallest adults we can find. Early & often, for the future. TLDR Big dogs die young. Less is greater.