Misaimed fandom of villains

Through Mary, Crusher of heresies,

So as alot of people on this forum and outside this forum know I'm writing a book and researching about it I became worried that instead of the readers rooting and cheering for the Blessed Virgin (who is going to be the protagonist) they would shout and cheer for the devil.

This is called misaimed fandom and alot of films are guilty of this. It is when the audience/fans of the film set their eyes more on the 'cool', 'awesome', 'badass' to use the correct word antagonist rather than on the less 'cooler' hero and alot of films and books are victims to this, among them:

Batman 1989: while this film is extremely overrated as if it wasn't enough, many people say that the film should have been called Joker not Batman. It doesn't concentrate so much on Batman as on the Joker and even then, the actor who played him [Joker] was even more famous than the actor who played Batman and he really stole the show. When I mean stole the show, I mean that he pranced around, shouted and did alot of 'cooler' things than Bat'Ican't move my head!'man. The Dark Knight also suffers from this, likely from the marketing being directed towards the Joker and because Heath was such an excellent actor in this film, while the Batman with actual good morals is left in the background.

In fact, there is even a fandom for Ras al Ghul, with people saying that he was the one who is right all along and not Batman.

Watchmen (both the book and film, but mostly the book):There are even alot of people who think that Rorscach of Watchmen was the one who was right all along when in fact, he is an angry, bitter psycopath who has not only lost his faith in God and humnaity, he doesn't even want to better things. Instead of trying to inspire people to do good, he just wants top let them burn. In fact, the only main character in Watchmen who has actual good moral is Nite Owl. He is kind and calm and although he was cowardly at first, he be decided to actually resume his superheroism with inspiration from Rorscach. As for the other characters: Dr. Manhattan doesn't care if you were to be mugged in front of him, even though he can practically do anything because he is godlike; Silk Spectre is a hero not so much as to protect the innocent but because her mother was one: she does it for the kicks; Ozymandias is proud and only acts because he wants HIMSELF to be a hero and not for the good of humanity.

Star Wars: Which character do you remember the most from Star Wars? It's Darth Vader isn't it? Or is it Han Solo?

A Clockwork Orange: People who are fans of Alex ajust miss the point by miles. The book is supposed to show what an evil psychopath Alex is and yet we have silly idiots dress up like him and do the things which he does. It just makes you weep for the future of humanity:crying::banghead:.

Can anybody please give me advice on avoiding at least the vast majority of people from rooting for the villain? I have a few thoughts and ideas already but first I want epople to share their thoughts with me. Thank you all!

[quote="philipmarie, post:1, topic:231248"]

Star Wars: Which character do you remember the most from Star Wars? It's Darth Vader isn't it? Or is it Han Solo?


Well Darth Vader was THE villain of the first film...Han Solo was a sidekick.

It's not about "rooting" for the character per say. I think the only time the audience would actually *cheer *for Darth was when he picked up the Emperor and threw him over the rail. Everyone likes seeing good overcome evil.

But sometimes you just have that unforgettable personality. I happen to like the over-the-top ham actor "BWAHAHAHA! *thunder and lightening" villains rather than the seriously dark ones. Kinda like the difference between Gaston and the Horned King if you want to put it in Disney terms...or maybe "old joker" vs. "new joker" (but I haven't seen either Batman film so I can't opine on that). In Darth Vader's case, you have a villain that redeems himself in the end.

But just because you have a great character for a villain and you like a character as a villain doesn't mean you want to see him succeed.

Dangit I wish I could put my finger on it a little more eloquently...

I thought this thread was going to be about Lady GaGa and her fans, aka "Little Monsters." Nothing like overtly trying to defeminize women into witches and turn fans into goths and pagans... "Lets turn every day into halloween so we can squeal for the few seconds of blissful glee that the shallow entertainment provides, then we'll need a new shallow amusement to keep us entertained, then a new one, and a new one..."

OTOH, a lot of those Unforgettable Villains are there to Show one How Alluring and “Sexy” Evil Is. :thumbsup:

A good example Is Hannibal Lecter. Total Evil, yet he is Alluring, even “Likeable.”:rolleyes:

Satan had to have a “Likable, Alluring, Sexy” Side for Eve to be Convinced by Him to sin and truly fall for His Lies. :shrug:

Just saying.

Good thread.

translate to-

WAAAAH! People enjoy well written, three diimensional characters with depth, rich personalities and an intersting plot! BOO HOO!

Hey, dude. Just because someone LIKES the villain, doesn’t mean they want them to WIN. My favorite character ever is a serial killer who hates humanity, but ya know what? I KNOW he’s a sick twisted freak and what he does is disgusting. I hate his actions, I think he makes horible choices, but he’s well written, wonderfully developed, and goes through more character growth than anyone else.

Forgive me for appreciating such a thing.

Some people need to get their heads into reality and realize evil=/= ugly. if evil WASN’T beautiful, alluring, sexy, attractive and desirable, NO ONE WOULD BE EVIL. You don’t seem to know the difference between LIKING something and CHEERING for something. I CERTAINLY never cheered for my favorite little Victorian psychopath, but I hurt for him when his father beat him, when his mother abandoned him, when he was whipped, sold, degraded. I FELT for this character, because he was HUMAN. he was an evil, twisted human, but human nonetheless. FEW people are truly, irredemably evil, and it would be POOR writing to be so narrow minded as to ONLY show that.

Oh yeah, BTW? ANyone who would read a story about the virgin mary and the devil (YAAAWN) is already on your side of the fence. Just saying

You know what? Villains are likeable. I don't want to read a story where the villain is a flat, 2D, BLARG EVIL character.

If the villain is a human being, then they should ACT LIKE one. And if they act like one, if they seem plausible, and well written, then they will be just as likeable as the hero. Why? Their actions are not likeable, it's the character that is.

I think you get this VERY wrong... Villain fans? We don't ROOT for the villains, silly! We don't support the things we do. Anyone who actually goes and does what Alex does is MESSED UP to start with, and other fans of the character? They KNOW what he is, they disagree with what he does, but they find him interesting.

One of my favorite characters is a sociopath. He does AWFUL things, HORRIBLE things, heck, kills puppies... but he's interesting. He's not likeable because "evil is sexy"... Yes, he's suave, he seems normal... That's what's a little unsettling about characters like that. And that's why I like them. They're a good villain.

Really, there are two major types of good villains:
Villain A. Evil, horrific, no redeeming qualities.... You want more of them, because you love to hate them. You want them to come back again and again, because you want the main character to take 'em on.
Villain B. Terrible actions, you think they're pure evil at first... Then you realize how lost they are, how miserable their lives are, and you feel sorry for them. That's why you care for them: Basic human compassion.

Then there are the villains inbetween, where you really don't know what to think.

Anyway, we Christians have this nice little belief that we should hate the sin, and love the sinner? Most my favorite characters fall into that second category of villain: The type that's just suffering. Something in their lives has pushed them to this point, and for them, they can't find a way back. I love these characters, and feel for them... But that doesn't mean I condone their actions!

The characters in watchmen? They're interesting. A lot of them are horrible, some of them stand in the middle, and a few have truly good qualities... But they're real.

Nobody is perfect, many people are far from it... Which is why I'm not a fan of fiction where the main character is just perfect, good, wonderful, and the villain is a pure evil evil slime ball, with awfulness drippin off it. I don't want a villain who KNOOOOWS he's EEEEVIL, and enjoys it... I want a villain who, like an actual person would, thinks what they're doing is okay, is good. Said villain is terribly wrong, but that's what they THINK.
And the hero? I want to see the hero mess up. Because no person is perfect.

Anyway, I hope this clears things up, even a little. I don't see why everyone in CAF thinks villain fans "root for them", that's what alllll threads of this nature seem to think. :shrug:

We want the villains to be interesting and three dimensional. We must also care for what happens to the villain but that doesn't mean that you like him. A villain without motivations or with illogical ones retards the story and gives our hero a huge mismatch. It isn't even wrong to give him certain 'good' qualities which the hero doesn't have, such as being polite and tasteful and all that. Also, to the villain, what they do is good. They don't necessarilly think that what they do is for a greater good like Ozymandias from Watchmen (who blew up New York to unite the countries of the world so that they would fight against an alien attack), or like Sandman from Spiderman 3 (I hate that film!), because if a villain is trying to get revenge on the hero or trying to traffick drugs, he knows that what he is planning to do is bad.

We then have the anti-hero, who does heroic things in a way which we would associate with badness. Batman from the 1989 film is like this, always killing villains and all that. This is a patethic case though, because this version of Batman goes against everything that Batman stands for: protecting the innocent. If he kills people, he becomes likethe criminals and Batman wouldn't do that. He kills the Joker, not to protect Gotham city but to avenge the death of parents. YAWN!

Speaking of superheroes, I saw Spiderman 2 yesterday and while this isn't a denial of the filmmakers and actors' talents (Toby Macguire IS Peter Parker!), to me the film is so overrated as the best superhero film ever. Remember the scene where Doc Octopus kidnaps Mary Jnae? Remember how SPiderman was losing his powers because of the trouble which he undergoing? He regains his powers to rescue his ex-girlfriend from the Doc and thats it. The speech which May Parker gave her nephew that heroes are self sacrificing was pointless: Spiderman isn't SPiderman because he protects the innocent. Just as long as his girlfriend is in danger or that she loves him, he will always be SPiderman. It's not the moral that makes Spidrman, it is the girl.:(

Sorry but if you want to incite yawns, go back to using boyscout, blond jocks in pretty gold armor.

Heroes are just entitled to good characterization as villains and hence, the anti-hero can be the best humanized/realistic example of such a hero. They’re not gods. They’re still people. In fact, I would actually be wondering about the mental capacity of anyone who receives superpowers and all of a sudden vows to save the world. Even if God Himself would suddenly come down and grant me magical powers that I had only dreamed of having all in exchange in using them to save humanity, I wouldn’t just go out there and do it. I would seriously pull a Moses and say, “Whoa! Whoa! Time out! Slow down! Pull your brakes! Are you serious!? WHY ME!?”

Besides, you think fighting crime is an easy thing? You better talk to anyone in law enforcement or simply just read the news. It is not so simple. Like it or not, there are times when even the good guys have to play dirty. That’s the reality we live in and I refuse, nay abhor any story that seeks to paint a Candyland.

This is not even throwing in the stupidity of judging a hero based on what they look like. For starters? There is no logical connection between evil and the color black. Symbolism is all relative.

LostWanderer, I agree but I never said that the anti-hero musn’t be fully characterized. In fact, expecting the minor characters, the anti-hero must be fully characterized. Here, Batman just doesn’t work as anti-hero, especially since throughout the whole movie he isn’t shown to be an anti-hero. If you want a real anti-hero, look at Rorschach or V from the Alan Moore comic (even though the latter is an anarchist:shrug:) In fact, Rorschach works perfectly as an anti-hero because while we admire him for his heroism and devotion and agree with his views of telling the world the truth, we do not in the least support his cruel acts of violence against criminals. I’m not on this forum with you, YOUR ON THIS FORUM WITH ME!!!

Anyway, there is also another anti-hero who is more fmaous than these two and it is Satan in Milton’s Paradise Lost. People think that he is ‘awesome’ while in fact Milton wanted us to see what a bad apple he is.

Spekaing of Satan, he is going to e one of the main anatagonists in my book but without spoiling anything, I’ll just say that he isn’t going to try to destroy the human race because he’s just evil: I’m going to give the reasons why he is evil, the consequences his evilness brings upon us and why he acts that way, and compare it to why the Blessed Virgin is good, the consequences Her goodness has upon us and the motivations which make Her do the things which She does. That is all i can say :p.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.