Hey! I did not expect this video to get as many views as it did, so thanks for the watch! I’m new to this style of video-and there are already things I would want to change! So my apologies for some of the errors I made here. Overall, I wanted this video to be contemplative and question a lot of aspects of these antagonists. Firstly, few major clarifications: 1. When I talk about each villain being right, I generally don’t mean that their entire belief system is correct, but that they may have a point or be right in some aspect. Tai Lung is DEFINITELY wrong in thinking violence is the solution, but he’s right to feel shitty about the way much of his life was built up. His execution, pride, and other values are all wrong! I took being “right”, moreso as having a human justification but taking it to an evil extreme. I discuss their rightness as coming from parts of their motivations, but I can see how that wording can be an issue. 2. Antagonists and villains are definitely separate things, and I argue that Death is both an antagonist, and a villain and Miguel is in an antagonist who is in a gray-space between anti-hero and villain. This is because of how drastic and malicious their interactions with the heroes seem! Death terrorizes Puss into panic attacks, so it can be argued he is more villainous. I acknowledge that this is a looser interpretation of "villain" and you’re perfectly allowed to disagree! This video is meant to spark debate and questioning about villain and hero dynamics. Thanks for bearing with the issues in this and I hope to improve in my reasoning for the next video!! Please be kind and civil in the comments :) Smaller Corrections: - Beowulf is a Old English story not Old Norse! - Jinx *SPOILER* killed Silco, but its less of a thought-out choice and impacted by her spiraling mental health to be fair.
"But Death couldn't have found Puss in the first place if he could mask his location to anywhere on the globe. And that's why this video is sponsored by-"
the thing that made dracula even more mad at humans than he already was, is that he gave them a full year to just say sorry, and instead when he came back to what he wished would be a heartfelt apology, he saw only a festival celebrating her death, and not only the leaders where comemorating, but every single person, the nobles, commoners, and even the children
Bro nobody knew anything about her being a witch or dracula being a good guy despite the fire and stuff except some cor, rupt pol, iticians. Even if they refuse they would just got burned like her. Some feel their actions are pointless. Even the show show us through that one guy who study science himself. I wouldn't blame them. The better revenge would be to save people from their grasp and make them laugh at them. That's the whole point of the show. Unfortunately the director thought people would be smart enough to understand it.
So because some people did bad things the whole world deserves to be wiped clean? Dracula just a monster who used his wife’s murder as justification for genocide. He was not in the right
@aaad3552 They literally call his plan a massive suicide note. He fully intended to kill all humans then starve to death to be with his wife. Dracula was in the right for being angry about the murder but he gave up on justice and just wanted to die and take everyone with him
you forgot to mention this wholesome fact about Doofensmirts, none of his tragic backstories involve his ex-wife, they simply grew apart and he doesn't have the want to get her, and for his daughter Vanessa he's extremely invested in her life because he didn't have good parents
Also ever noticed how a lot of the gifts and hangouts he has with her line up with some of his backstories, like how no one showed up for his birthday party so he helped Vanessa get people and he gave her a massive cake. That’s a true father there, giving your child a better upbringing than you had
Dr Doof is not trapped. Unlike Sisyphus who is trapped and tortured in a loop, Doof finds contentment in his loop. There is a reason his machines always have a self-destruct button, and why he always awaits Perry’s intervention before acting. He relishes the idea of having a routine, and his evil comes off as more of a way to express himself rather than do actual harm. He is a villain at the end of the day, with a very tragic backstory, but his main motive isn’t to rectify his past or the injustices he faces, it is to be the perfect foil to his greatest enemy and friend
In the short lived show Milo Murphys Law, Doofenshmirtz's story continues. He comes to find that he actually invents time travel in future (even briefly meeting his future self) and decides to set down a new path, to be better. And of course, Perry is there, supporting him in his new journey
When shifu learned that, his found son was not the dragon Warrior; he did not re-abilitate Tai Lung nor did he destroy Tai lung. Shifu was simply paralysed by indecision, causing him to abandon his son.
yeah, doof's the best antivillain, he's not evil, he just makes any crazy idea he has into reality, he doesn't hate his "enemy" perry either, nor want to hurt anyone (other than a little bit of bullying level stuff, lol, like pulling down the pants of someone mid-speech), sometimes they just sit together and have a talk, or throw a party
@@jan_harald and what I really like about him is even though his parents treated him badly he still treats his daughter the best and doesn’t use that bad childhood as a crutch for evil actions
This is why Anti-Villains are underrated in Fiction, Imo. Cuz while Anti-Heroes are - "I'm the 'Hero', but that doesn't mean I'm a Saint." Anti-Villains are - "I'm the 'Villain', but that doesn't mean I'm a monster."
Honestly, I’d consider the Wolf from Puss in Boots to be more of an anti-villain than anything. Even though he acts very much like a villain, I have a hard time considering him an actual villain because of the fact that, as a personification of death itself, he can’t really be considered evil per se. He’s literally an amoral force of nature that just annoyed at a mortal being for wasting what he had and decided that he wasn’t gonna let that fly.
@@eeyorehaferbock7870 Yes hes indeed an anti-villain, as his mere existence would be a bane of heroes like puss and boots yet hes justified and not inhertly evil. You could even consider him as neither anti-villain or a hero, and call him a Neutral force.
@@eeyorehaferbock7870 an anti villain is by definition a bad guy who do bad either for good reason or with good means wolf is none cause he still want to kill puss for revenge
@@eeyorehaferbock7870 Here's how I saw it, just as you said he's a force of nature but I don't believe he was ever capable of personally killing Puss; he was merely standing by every time Puss came close to death to reap that last life.
Okay, so here we have.. evil, with a side of bad parenting skills. "Uhuh, and what about the next one?" Okay, so that's weaponized incompetence. With good parenting on the side.
my favorite trope with villains being right is when they are right up until the last point. when they get all the information and come to almost the correct conclusion, likely something almost identical to the hero's ideology, but that has just been twisted slightly so its the worst version of that line of thought.
@@m_winewood All consciousness is derived from the same source. This means that every soul is essentially the same light except filtered differently through the prism of life that changes our perceptions and experiences and gives us our unique characteristics. Now since all souls are from the same source, we can deduce that it doesn't matter if you abuse someone, you can't abuse yourself after all, so harming and abusing someone else doesn't matter if it is for your own satisfaction. Now since all souls are from the same source, we can deduce that everyone is equally valuable, nobody is better or lesser than anyone, so all life is sacred and matters and deserves to be respected and cherished. Two different conclusions from the same existential truth.
My favorite quote about how to write a great villain is "they should be a protagonist for the other side of the story." Edit: Because so many people misunderstand the word protagonist and the meaning of the quote itself, let me explain it. This quote doesn't mean "the character opposite the protagonist has a morally just reason or is actually a misguided good person". It means that they are their own person. they move idenpendantly from the protagonist they do not act like a character in a story doing nothing until the protagonist shows up. They are moving forward in their own journey, not waiting on the "hero" of the story to spring them to life. They have their own motivations and goals that they are striving to achieve. This is what the quote means it has nothing to do with morality and has everything to do with agency, motivation, and purpose.
That sounds really cool, but you can also have great villains who are just flat out bad people or “antagonists” no matter what perspective you look at it from.
Love how every response (except one) missed the point. Protagonist doesn't= hero/good guy. The protagonist is who the story follows, you can have a villain protagonist. Just because they are the focus doesn't mean they become "good" it actually challenges our perspective as the audience. Focusing on the villan doesn't make them good it makes it harder for the audience to see them as truly evil or allows us to see into their twisted mind more. Which is good writing, plenty of villains are loved more than their heroes for a reason they are written with depth.
@@Wiley_WolfJust because the society created the hero doesn't mean that the society is right or just. The villain might be wrong in their actions, but in certain cases, they may be right with their conclusions and in calling out the problems of said society. Also, leaving the society isn't really an option - you don't choose to be born into the society, you just are and you have to deal with that fact.
A boy was fascinated by all things military, his thoughts were never far from history's wars and warriors. His dreams were filled with battles fought for noble causes and selfless sacrifice for greater good. When a schoolyard bully invaded his dreams, the dreams took shape and became intent. The boy now knew what the man would do, he would become a soldier. He would place himself between the innocent of the world and the bullies that sought to prey upon them. Like the warriors he had idolized, he would fight evil, oppression, tyranny. He would no longer be content with books and dreams, he would go and live it. Years pass and the young soldier stands amidst unthinkable carnage, bloated, mangled corpses strewn in all directions, black-scorched blood pools in cratered sand. The soldier chokes on greasy black smoke and vomits again, violently. The dead around him had been soldiers in name only, not warriors by any measure. And worse, they had died in desperate flight, targeted from above as they retreated in panicked chaos. These men were not soldiers, no, neither had they fell in heated battle. For there had been no battle, this was the site of a slaughter and the dead here were victims of murder. The soldier sleeved the vomit from his mouth and felt something tighten in his gut, hot, painful, something completely new to the proud young man. He felt ASHAMED. As he stood there surveying a fucking crime scene, his shame grew cold and morphed into something far darker. It became hatred, hatred for what he represented, for what was being done in his name. But, mostly he hated himself for he had somehow became the very thing he had sworn to oppose. I ask you, is this soldier a villain for loathing the country he was sworn to serve? Would he be, if he then swore to oppose his country instead? Well, am I? Am I a villain?
Tai lung wasn't really right, but he did have a justification, being promised this title of great honor, for his entire life, working hard until he heard his bones crack, just to be denied, that is a decent justification but it's a justification for revenge, so not REALLY right but it's understandable.
Definitely! I think he’s right in the regard he might have be mistreated and promised false hope, but of course he is wrong in taking it towards revenge and thinking that he was owed greatness no matter what
@@nanuqo2006 eh in a sense death was right, in that you should be more appreciative of your life, and as puss wasn't appreciative for 8 of his past lives, death decided to just take the last one, until puss finally gained that appreciation, and Miguel just is flat out right, like we see what happens when the Canon is broken, the universe just begins to erase itself, and Miguel having been the reason for an entire universe being erased, knows first hand, and tries preventing that from happening to another universe at all costs, so he's kinda just objectively right, it's the whole greater good thing, it sucks but the loss of a single life vs the loss of all life is kind of a no brainer
@@toxic_tomb1238 Death was not at all right. The events of PiB2 were literally just him having a massive ego trip chasing down Puss. Sure, he was throwing his lives away, but that doesn't make it morally correct to chase down and kill him. Just because Puss ended up a better person doesn't mean what Death did was acceptable at all. Puss was still alive when Death tried to kill him. He is overstepping the boundaries of 'his job' and committing evil actions.
@@nanuqo2006 he's death, the literal incarnation of death, he makes up his own rules, plus him throwing away his lives is basically saying he's not wanting to live, death was just collecting early also you ignored the main point
the end scene of grendle lying on the floor is truly sad. just watching a helpless animal lie there in pain as he is about to cry with no one there to comfort him brought tears to my eyes. I would never wish this on anyone.
yet there are people who are in times like that. They have no one to talk to... Thats why i try to be the most positive version of myself even when i dont wanna wake up for good
when hero find dark as an evil force they want to erase it. but then they after they erase it they finally understand why human need darkness, now to save everyone, the hero need to become the every same darkness that they erased
Being understandable is not exactly equal to being right. Most good writings make villains understandable by showing you why he's on that path but very rarely show that the path itself is the right one.
Which not all writers or audiences see sometimes, conflating understandable or explainable motives, or "having a point", with justifiable or excusable actions. It's a distinction thankfully this video does address, with Death (..."straight up".) being overtly sadistic towards his target for not appreciate life and "insulting" death rather than simply killing Puss or waiting for him to die, Dracula targeting the entire world instead of just the people who killed and then celebrated his wife's death, Tai Lung for taking being denied the Dragon Warrior position and having no other path in life besides it as an excuse for a rampage, Doofenshmirtz preferring grand acts of chaos doomed to fail instead of simply working on his deep seated issues in a normal way, or even Grendel taking out his rage on innocents and indulging in their suffering rather than simply leaving when the sound of their partying hurt him. Each of these individuals take the path of destruction, chaos or malice when confronted with tragedy or injustice, regardless on the nature of that tragedy or injustice and this is what makes them villains even if they have some point to make and is usually what best separates them from heroes, who at best, when faced with similar tragedies or injustices, either have the will to endure them or are changed for the better, deciding to become more responsible, honorable courageous or generous. (e.i., one seeks to hurt the world because it hurt them, another seeks to stop others are protected from hurt., with some interplay here and there).
@@callmev3531 I some what agree, so I would like to ask you this question from someone who went from Hero to Villian. Eren Yager, a boy who had everything ripped away from him by monsters with no heart, no soul. His original plan was to target those who hurt him and his entire village, something a Hero would do, which is why early on we see him as a Hero, but then we start to see what is actually happening. The entire world is against them, the entire world see's them as monsters. He didn't do anything wrong, his friends didn't do anything wrong, yet they see them as the monsters. Every single day he had to fight just for his freedom over something that was completely out of his control, yet when he starts the rumbling; everyone see him as the villian. He is now being betrayed as this horrible monster. (In the eyes of the audience) Even though he is simply defending himself from the constant advances of the enemy. He doesn't take joy in killing anyone, infact he hates it. He isn't upset that he isn't the chosen one, he has been attacked his entire life. Eren see's humanity as the villian which in short it is. EVERYONE saw them as a villian, the entire world feared this land because of one man who abused the power of the titans. Eren flattened 80% of humanity, all people that feared him anyways. What was he to do, what is the "Heroic" path to take? Should he have sat there and let everyone he knows and love get murdered just for exsisting? Should he have allowed them never to have children and make familes of there own just for being an eldian? I am genuinly curious, what is the herioc steps to take here. TLDR: The island was targeted by the whole world, he seeked revenge for the attacks on the island, what would be the "heroic" path to take here. How should he have gone about this the "Heroic" wayy
@@callmev3531 Well said, and I think it's a very jarring contrast between Hero and Villains, and never really gets delved deep into in media. I mean, I guess I could understand, it'd probably be boring for many to sit through a deep philosophical lesson on "why does a villain do this" and "why does a hero do that" type of thing, if done poorly.
I am so flipping glad you didn't have Thanos on this list. That can of worms has been opened way too many times but adding doofinsmerts is a master touch!
From the marvel movies? nah, thanos was completely wrong and a total moron as well. There's no chance thanos gets on any list of this type, not one with merit anyway.
@@Archedgaryes, eliminating half the people AND half the food (he snapped out half the plants and food, too) was a moron play by Thanos. You're back at square one but now everyone has pain of loss.
@@davidm4566 I know they said half of all life, but I believe thanos just wiped out intelligent life. However, I do agree his move was rather ignorant. population growth is somewhat exponential (not actually, but there are similarities). if Thanos erases all life, it would take a mere two generations or so and it would be close to where it was at before. life would have to routinely be halved every 40-60 years which is a terrible tradeoff
@@Archedgaryou must’ve missed the part where an entire movie was made to show that everything Thanos said was 100% true and when the avengers undid his work, they killed billions.
Doctor Doofenshmirtz is the most tragic villain. His own parents didn't show up to his birth! And he had to spend his childhood as a stand in for a LAWN GNOME! Joker claims it only takes one bad day for someone to go down his route, but Doof is proof that even the kindest hearts can be broken by repeated evil.
Good he ended as comedic villan after faling art school. Remeber that place he was birth reseber Austria, birth place of failed painter that take Jews under shovers
Heroes and villains always have the same back story-pain. The difference is what they choose to do about it. Villain says “the world hurt me, so I'll hurt it back.” Hero says “the world hurt me, I'm not gonna let it hurt anyone else.” Heroes use pain. Villains are used by it.
This right here, so many villains are just victims themselves lashing out at the world for what it did to them. All the villains like that would've been heroes if they had the proper support or even just someone to aim their rage, but sadly most often all they have are themselves and a growing need for revenge
counterpoint: dystopias. It is the simplest broad category to point to, but is not exclusive, either. In these stories, the heroes go about reforming or destroying a corrupt society, which can easily be twisted into "i was hurt, so i will hurt it back" while remaining a hero, though that does come with a heaping helping of cynicism. Morality is never black and white, and as such, we can never make such broad generalizations, and stories from the past might change the sympathetic party with a shift in society's general morality (stories from an era of "might makes right" dont quite hold up in the modern era of mental health awareness and the value of an individual despite their hardships and trauma).
The problem is that so very often, the heroes *don't* say "so I'm not gonna let it hurt anyone else". In fact, that's more often a villain's line than a hero's, because it is a demand for change, and change brings chaos and violence, and heroes oppose chaos and violence in their defense of the status quo. Whether the villain is attempting to forcibly change the status quo for revenge or in hope of a better future, the desire for change is the exact thing that separates them from the hero in the better part of modern western stories. The characteristic stance of the hero is simply a veto against the villain's call to change, sometimes with a weak acknowledgment of the villain's point added in at the end.
I think calling Death a villain is inherently a misrepresentation of the character. An antagonist, yes. But not a villain. Death isn’t evil, he isn't really doing anything wrong. As for him relishing in the fear, id say that Puss is a special case. I dont think it right to say that because he has it out for one guy who has repeatedly mocked him and squandered chances others would kill/die for (ha) that hes villainous. As for disappointment, he definitely is to an extant but when he pokes Puss one last time, reminding him they will meet again, he genuinely smiles at Puss's ansewr, happy to see that Puss has grown.
Death has villainous qualities due to his cruelty and sadism, but inheritly represents a very classical idea of justice that delivers appropriate punishmeht to Hybris. Him tormenting Puss is part of this idea of justice, because its a reaction to Puss arrogance and boastfulness, so Death humiliates him to teach him humility.
Death very much is a villain. He doesn't need to go after Puss like he does. He doesn't need to go after Puss at all. He doesn't need to try to kill Puss. He could simply wait until Puss dies of "natural" causes. He is *actively,* *willfully,* & *knowingly* doing something evil, unnecessary, & beyond the confines of his role, entirely because he feels slighted by Puss' ego. Granted, the slight is an understandable one, & Puss desparately needed the lesson in humility, but a natural disaster doesn't conciously decide that you, in particular, ought to have your house destroyed.
@@illTemperedSeaBass The thing is, he is played as villainous, but his role is still more antagonistic or that of an anti-villain, as him going after puss is provoked by the laters hybris. In classical dramas, Death would be absolutely framed as a force of good, teaching the hero a lesson.
yeah Death is a villain and not just an antagonist because Puss isn't even dead for real. Death is overstepping his boundaries and going after Puss for *personal* reasons.
This video has pushed me to re-evaluate my own main villain and give him more of a clear goal and backstory. To not just commit horrible acts to oppose the heroes but to do what he thinks is right to avenge what he's lost. Thank you for making this video and I can't wait to see more!
"This injustice destroyed me, so I'm going to _eradicate_ it, before it creates another monster like me. Nobody deserves this. _I_ didn't.", basically?
It’s still important to remember that in our quest to make our villains more realistic, we should always remember that sometimes people are bad not because they have an actual good reason, but because they simply *think* they’re doing what’s right.
The thing is....As some would say "What does it mean to be human?", you can apply the same mentality and say to yourself "What does it mean to be moral?"...."What does it mean to be a monster?"....."What does it mean.....to live?"...
To me the question has never been whether the villain is right. Almost every position can have an argument made for it, and I mean upwards of 90% of them. The real question is where is the line? Where do you draw the line on the actions. All of these(yes including Miguel) villains go beyond what could be considered the 'normal' boundary. It's one thing for Grendel to break up the party that is significantly disturbing him, but its another to march in and murder everyone over just a party. To me the line has always been this "Both the actions and the ends must justify each other". Dracula was right in accusing people for the death of his wife, but he goes way to far, saying all humans are evil and moving for grand-genocide. Miguel claims this whole "Predestination" bs, but is proven totally wrong by the end, where he's wrong in the idea that simply saving a single person causes reality to tear apart. A villain can have a point, but what makes them the villain is that they totally lose the point they had. Tai lung could have gone off and become a wandering kung fu practitioner, but instead he attacks the valley, then attacks the person who denied him. Similarly Grendel went beyond merely just some average attacks, Grendel had no issue with killing people on the thousands, and that mother of his, she let him rampage for a long while, but when he got hurt due to the constant rampages, she blames the person who was called in to deal with the issue, rather then on the person who was killing on mass. I don't like the idea of saying the villain was 'right', as it often leads to people trying to excuse their behavior. Rather, I'd use the wording "When the villain has a point", the villain can still be wrong, but they can start from a completely logical or moral conclusion.
This. So much this. I absolutely hate it when people say 'the villain had a point so that justifies everything they did, right?' NO. No it does not. Very often villains will be fighting against some kind of injustice, but what makes them villains is that they become more fixated on taking out their rage at the injustice on those who hurt them rather than fixing the problem. There are many ways of facing injustice, but reacting with violence to those who caused it doesn't fix anything in the longer term, it just removes the immediate threat - not to mention, it makes you believe that any problem can be solved with violence, and you know the old saying: when the only tool you've got is a hammer, every problem begins to look like a nail. If I may offer my own perspective: this is what happens when you're stuck thinking at the level of the problem. People have been violent or abusive to you? Be violent and abusive back. Villains inflict their trauma on others in compulsive cycles that they are doomed to repeat without understanding why, and thus become the very tyrants they claim to hate. The reason heroes are heroic is because they rise ABOVE the problem to arrive at the level of the solution: though they may have the urge to be abusive, they understand that the true solution to abuse is to create a culture of compassion in which abuse could never flourish in the first place. True heroes are transformational in nature, both because they are willing to change their own faults and because they seek to reflect those same changes in the world around them; villains only seek to change the world to fit them, they tend not to look inwards or make any real change in themselves. The struggle between hero and villain is ultimately one of transformation versus trauma: allowing pain to change and guide you to a better and brighter future versus being trapped by your pain in a past that keeps repeating through self-fulfilling prophecy.
@@StolanisI hate when people glorify villains and try to justify their actions because what they are saying according to their perspective is "RIGHT" , Joker is a great example of this , I like joker as a character but as a person he is utmost pathetic and despicable but people try to justify his actions because he is "RIGHT" in how he views society , joker is a nhilistic guy ofcourse he is not going to have great views about society he doesn't care . No matter what sad backstory joker might cook in front of me it's not going to justify the horrible shit he does to people because "ACTIONS" matter , Just because joker had a traumatic childhood doesn't mean he can commit mass murder and just do "muh society" and get away with it . Batman had a traumatic childhood ,batman knows society is made up of good and bad people both and joker focuses and exaggerates on the bad part of it Batman spends his whole life defending Gotham no matter what a shithole it is , that is the drawing line between a hero and a villian. Joker puts a smile on other people faces by carving one on them with his knife and batman puts a smile on other faces by making them secure and feel safe . I though joker was cool in childhood but then I realised how much mature and great batman is.
Tbf to tai lung he was literally groomed and taught the only way to solve problems is violence think about it what IS the dragon warriors job it's to solve problems with violence and that's all it's ever been if it was to solve problems through peace talks and talking u wouldnt need to learn kung fu to even be eligible for the position notice every villan po defeats he never beats with words its ALWAYS VIOLENCE ITS ALWAYS SEALING the dragon warrior isnt naruto he isnt talk no jutsuing ppl they're fighting and imprisoning evil ppl and THATS what tai ling was GROOMED SINCE HE WAS A KID TO BE the dragon warrior the greatest warrior and the beacon of hope who SOLVES ALL ISSUES THROUGH VIOLENCE tai lung simply thought that by defeating everyone including the dragon warrior hed finally be worthy for the position but even more important to him hed finally have shifu his father figure be proud of him in tai lung's world and mind problems ARE SOLVED THROUGH VIOLENCE he is and is always proven correct every time we see the "heroes" defeat/beat up the bad guys the literal only reason tai lung is considered the villan of the story is cause he used violence against po and we as the audience like po so that's bad
This is very good! I always disliked these Villain Has a Point and Justified Villain cliches as Blaming The Victim, expressing both The End Justifies The Means and Society Is To Blame tropes. These cliches are common in real-life and fictional terror ideologies. Either substitute a dystopian culture led by a tyrant, Terrorists For Hire, or Terrorists Without a Cause, since no social issue justifies evil.
It all depends on your definition of a hero I guess. Some people view heroes as those who sacrifice themselves for others, those who do bad things for the greater good, those who go above and beyond to save as many as they can. Any act that is grandiose can be viewed as heroic, such as great war veterans who went through hell and survived while pulling their companions through to safety, while the other side of the coin involves ending others existence, performing horrific actions to others in order to save those they care about. Whether this action is heroic or not depends entirely on which side this person was on, what history remembers correctly about the actions, and who is telling the tale. One may be a mythical retelling of a hero, while another could be a cautionary tale of a dangerous monster. Remember, history is written by the victors.
Those are probably the best villains. Those where you understand what put them on their way, what their goal is, but with wrong decisions along the way. Following the saying "the path to hell is paved with good intentions" Because those villains make you question if you would do the same, if put into their position. Would you be able to do it better? Worse? Often those villains simply had enough. They tried doing it the "right" way. It didn't work. So they stopped caring.
@@Bancheis yup, the difference between a rebellion and a revolution is success. If it succeeds, songs are sung about deposing the corrupt and evil government. If it fails, songs are sung about upholding peace and order against violent insurgents.
3 месяца назад+2
@@Bancheis Yes maybe one man's hero is another man's villain I think Batman often goes into that like the one where the mark of the batman got people killed in prison.
Kung Fu Panda 1 plot be like: “we understand your child has sociopathic tendencies, so we are going to hard bait them with a trip to Disney world and then cancel at the last second”
I think a beautiful representation of a caring person turned evil is the Arkham series Mr. Freeze. They tell Victors story in a way that shows he doesn’t want to do the things he does. He may be angry with the world for what happened to Nora, but he does everything out of a place of love. Every action he has done was to try and help save his wife, every day a reminder of the pain he goes through. Even his condition, the suit he wears, a constant reminder and a personification/characterization of his pain, his love and grief for his wife taking physical form through the torture of being confined in his suit. They end his story in a bittersweet ending, with Nora unfreezing and showing Victor that it’s ok to let her go because she understands that he could only let her go if he knew his one love was ok with passing. He spends his time with her in his final days, loving and caring for her the same way he did for all those years, ending it all with their deaths. Nora succumbing to her sickness, and Victor taking his own life for his one true love and removing his suit, hoping to be with her again in the afterlife
He really is a tragic villain. His reasons were not only logical, they were understandable. His goal was noble. What makes him a villain is how he tries to reach that goal. He puts his own needs over those of others.
I love how Miguel is shown to be wrong through Miles’ perspective being outside of what is expected of Spider-Man. Miles is doing his own thing and immediately recognizes that all the other Spider-Men are willing to sacrifice the ones they love to keep order, but he believes there must be another way. Took me by surprise and excited to see where it leads
I mean, that's literally the same lesson in Marvel's Spider-Man, when Peter have to choose between the civilians of New York and his beloved aunt May. And he choose the city.
My only hope is that Miles' attempts to defy fate, or rather the continuity of his universe's timeline, so he doesn't have to sacrifice anything isn't as simple as him being able to save his father and that's it, otherwise it makes the stakes set up by the concept of disrupting "canon events" potentially dissolving realities lose a sense of danger or consequence. The primary evidence that "canon events" can even be subverted without destabilizing realities is both Miles' and Prowler Mile's reality not dissolving when the Alchemax spider was transferred to Miles' reality and both their futures changed (even if Prowler Miles' world still suffered without a Spiderman and Miles' Peter was indirectly killed because reality was altered by the Collider's interference) Gwen's father abandoning his police captain "role" in his timeline, effectively being saved on a technicality (though maybe dooming the next police captain that replaces him to his fate, meaning a stranger and their loved ones would be suffering so Gwen can keep her father), so Miguel is partially incorrect over how destructive anomalies are (in a sense, "canon events" are like genes and anomalies are like viruses with the potential to either alter or destroy the systems they infect, as various Spider-Beings were mutated rather than killed by the events that made them Spider-Beings), but this was revealed by mistake, one that hypothetically could have doomed all three of their realities. If Miles does save his reality and his father, the threat shouldn't just be Spot, it should primarily be Miles trying to find a similar technicality to Gwen, fighting with everything he's got and paying heavily to fight fate and win.
@@saintakira24it’s pretty clear in the movie that if the police chief doesn’t die the universe ends, it was shown many times through the entire film. It would be a cope out if the film makes say that Mike’s universe is special or something.
@@goastlyarrowplays But that's the thing, it's NOT clear, because it's also the same universe where a bunch of Spiders showed up and Spot destroyed that universe's Alchemax We don't know if saving Singh destroyed the universe or if it went up in flames because the machine that opens holes through dimensions was blown apart
@@saintakira24 I'm always hearing about how he's projecting at it just doesn't sit right with me at all, it seems alot more like due to his guilt of destroying an entire universe he is no longer taking any chances or risks to make sure that no-one ever has to go through what he dud
16:30 it’s worth noting that Gwen asks Miguel if breaking the canon is what destroys universes, raising the possibility that he’s been letting people die for nothing this whole time.
Excerpt from my comment: Spoiler warning: What Miguel thinks is causing the corruption of the verses isn't actually due to people disrupting the "Cannon Events" that seem to happen to every Spider, he's done the age old blunder of confusing Correlation and Causation. What is actually happening here is that the verses are getting deleted due to an event called Incursion. That is caused by beings from one verse invading another and staying there for a length of time. Source: Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness And what did Miguel do exactly in the verse that was deleted? That's right, he stayed in another verse where his "Cannon Event" didn't happen. That's why he is so focused on the to the exclusion of everything else. He's been blinded by his own folly. In fact what did he do immediately after the universe he invades got deleted? That's right, he gather even more invaders and went to other verses, endangering them in the process! He is the cause the the Incursions, and he is the reason why they keep happening!
@@ThisIsNotADrellI love the theory, but in Into the Spiderverse, the other spidermen were in Miles’ universe for days with no consequences outside of glitching. But less than a day in Pavitr’s (the Indian spiderman’s) universe was all it took for the beginning of a collapse? It just raises a lot of doubt in that theory.
@@rynnmediathe damage in Pavitri's universe is a direct result of Spot's actions, it has nothing to do with either cannon events or incursions. You can tell because the destruction of the universe Miguel was in Washington was very different than the black hole of Pavitri's universe. As far as the first movie we don't know how long it takes an incursion to trigger a collapse and there are probably a lot of factors to that? I'm really hoping the third movie clears all of this up, especially since it seems to connect to the main MCU, which includes Loki and the new time stream.
@@RodneyG669 so it’s not due to stating in a different universe too long. But I recently heard that theory! The ONLY thing holding it back for me though is the implication that the other universes The Spot went to should’ve had the same destructions. But I suppose it’s only due to chance since I heard that the original Peter Parker said it could cause that black hole in the first movie to Kingpin. Maybe Miles got unlucky with it being the dimension he had just broke a canon event in?
Actually I'm pretty sure Castelvania Dracula just wanted to destroy that one village and gave them time for them to pray for their God. But they saw it as symbol of weakness and celebrated day of his wife's death. That drove him absolute crazy. He warned them he told them and they just celebrated. Moreover this must be spread and those who was guilty for this were given even more power and fame for this.
I feel like when it comes to villains like this there’s one phrase from Fate/Stay Night that suits them well. “Just because you’re correct, doesn’t mean you’re right.”
Really? Le Greater Good argument? You're such a romantic sean... A hero would sacrifice themself. A villain would sacrifice someone else. Once you get into numbers you're definitely at villain school. I can't think of a hero who would sacrifice someone to stop say a Sharknado no he gets his chainsaw and he jumps into that whirlwind of teeth and fins. Even scifi movies know that much. Achilles was awesome because he went out there like a total boss. Noone cares about stupid king guy in his command tent.
Dr.Onda from Netflix’s Ultraman. He wants to kill all the Kaiju to keep the city safe. He dosent deny he wants revenge either, just saying that he isn’t a hunter. And in the end he evacuates his ship before making his final stand against ultraman and the Kaiju. Honestly I sympathized heavily with him.
@@saintakira24 the OG Ultraman and even following seasons have showcased that these Kaiju are "tragic beings". To quote Ishiro Honda, "Monsters are tragic beings. They are born too tall, too strong, too heavy. They are not evil by choice. That is their tragedy. They do not attack people because they want to, but because of their size and strength, mankind has no other choice but to defend himself. After several stories such as this, people end up having a kind of affection for the monsters. They end up caring about them."
I mean lets not forget that he tried to use a Self Destruct that was absolutely going to kill a million civilians in the blast radius. Because he was too blinded by grief and revenge against Ultraman for failing him.
@@fenrirsrage4609 exactly he is a villian but only because he let his emotions get the better of him. Otherwise he was just doing his job, killing the Kaiju.
@@saintakira24 Well they more villainized him during the ending. He was threat throughout the whole movie but became a villain when he tried to blow himself and thousands of civilians up. Only to kill two Kaiju and the ultramen. He became a villain when his grief over took him.
@@thehwguy4293It’s also proven that Kaiju can be tamed or controlled. People would se the controlling of a Kaiju as inhumane despite what the Kaiju themselves have done.
I mean miles is pretty fodder in marvel, so if he piped up any of the heavy hitters could dogwalk him. Ie Sentry, Thor, Captain Marvel, Hulk, Franklin Richards, Colossus, Jean Gray, Cable etc
From Miguel's perspective miles is gambling the entire multiverse for his father, a selfish path that 99 once took and is trying to stop miles from making the same mistakes, 99's overprotective nature would get more sympathy if we saw everything.
9:44 "For instead of hunting a person or people, why not target a system?" Tai Lung did target the system. He attacked the Valley of Peace which enabled Oogway and Shifu. That was the only place where he was wrong; he attempted to hold the system accountable for the individual actions of those two. Oogway was the real villain in that he saw something that he considered an issue, but did nothing to address it and in doing so made it a self-fulfilling prophecy. Shifu failed in not defending his son after not noticing whatever developing shortcomings he had induced. Had Tail Lung limited his revenge/rage to those two, he would have been wholly justified.
That was the original story. The producers added the 'attacked the village' after the film had been completed because test audiences were overwhelmingly on the side of Tai Lung. He was getting too much sympathy and part of that was that Tai Lung was imprisoned for 20 years for the 'crime' of trying to take the scroll. Basically what you're talking about was added in post and is wildly out of character for Tai Lung even in a moment of distress. Tai Lung was right but the writers forced him to be 'wrong'.
@@Archedgar The writers wanted a villain, so they needed to make the audience view him as a villain. Saying that Tai Lung is out of character because the writers wrote him to be a villain is a wild take.
@@anonymousapproximation8549they needed a Villain and made him make something out of character you build a character and in the end you see "damm, that's not exactly what I wanted, let's make him do something stupid"
One thing I noticed about Miguel: he said that he "replaced" the little girls shot uncle. Which even caused the eradication of "his" universe in the first place. He did not alter the canon event, he completely erased it. And that is why the universe he was in collapsed.
If someone's right, that doesn't mean that their opponent is wrong. A villain always has a reason to do what they're doing, and the same goes to a hero. But when they encounter eachother a conflict happens because their interests and intentions are different, and from here wins the strongest.
Heroes don't need much in the way of motivation though. They are usually pretty simple characters - there's no need to give them depth. They are just good guys in general, want to do good, no further explanation needed. It's the villains that need complexity. A well-written villain needs a motivation that lets the audience understand just why the villain would act they way they do. Heroes don't need that.
donquixote doflamingo once said: "The pirates are evil? The Marines are righteous? These terms have always changed throughout history! Kids who've never seen peace and kids who never saw war have different values. Those who stand at the top determine what's right and whats wrong! This very place is a NEUTRAL ground! Justice will prevail, you say? Of course it will! THOSE WHO WIN THE WAR BECOME JUSTICE!" We later find out how he's the epitomy of villainy, Evil Incarnate. He experienced gut-wrenching downfall from the top of society to the damn streets stealing bread. And he takes his anger out on the peasants who treated him for his former status. Yet we see he does this because of his mentality. He thinks he's a victim of society's cruelty, so he has a reason to be this evil, right? WRONG. There is one other person who experienced the same thing he did, yet still became a good person. His brother, Corazon. He kills his brother to raise a kid with an uncurable disease, but the kid heard everything and understood he's gonna be used if he trusted doffy. He asks all the time on why sciety pity's the poor, yet dos nothing about it. He made a "family" of pirates only to use them without them being self-aware. His business as basically a drug lord left a nation shattered like meth in the 90's. He used to run a slave business placing innocent people into slavery. He used a member of his "family" to turn probably half of the nation which he usurped the OG ruler from, into TOYS. LIVING TOYS. They dont even remember thier past lives, nor do the people that knew them remember them either. His evilness ruined lives and impacted millions around the world, and yet the government turns a blind eye because of his status as warlord.
i agree with everything you stated.. but one. he didn't kill corazon for the kid. it was because corazon ended up being outed as an undercover agent for the marines. it was just that finally finding something that cured the kid. that being the op-op fruit. was what ended up getting him found out.
I mean pirates break laws that people put up to protect people and marines enforce those laws to make sure no one breaks them and they all live happy lives so...
The government didn't turn a blind eye because of his Warlord status. They didn't even know half of what was really going on until the events of Dressrosa. They turned a blind eye just because he was a Celestial Dragon and the fact that he has some very sensitive knowledge that they don't want getting out.
@@Drums_of_Liberation Doffy ran the slavery rings on the archipeligo. The Celestials Frequented it.. they 100% turned a blind eye to EVERYTHING doflamingo did.
*>"If you complete this brutal training for many years & manage to beat these nigh-impossible tests, you will be rewarded."* *>"No. You did everything we said but we changed our mind. Go fkk yourself."* Nah. Tai Lung was right and it was his masters that failed him, not the other way around.
Society is a double-sided contract. Once it was violated by lying aboit guaranteed status, the guy voided the contract. The normal reaction would be to find a "appropriate response for a minor violation" but that does not exist in fictional worlds.
Is what the vile people preach to make their villainy seem less. Of course there is right and wrong in "things" the issue is there are too many "things."
It's a rhetoric that works only to an extent, as it can easily be used as an excuse for questionable behavior, a sentiment of adapting to harsh situations by making questionable decisions twisted into one about dismissing the possibility of there ever being better solutions, that moral lines can simply be not just thin or blurred but erased completely when it becomes inconvenient to uphold them. In moderation, it suggests courage and humility to be willing to do things people may not want to, but in excess, it encourages cynicism intellectual and emotional laziness.
The cool thing about Dracula is that he gave the humans who killed his wife many, many years to apologies and they never did, only then did he attack them after they celebrated the murder of his wife
@everythingsalright1121 oh my bad I thought I remembered one of the towns people looking really old after, I haven't watched the show in awhile so thanks
His motivation: unjust death of a loved one. Understandable. His goal: Redemption for said loved one. Also understandable. But it fails, which brings us to: His method: Uncontrolled violence. Not understandable.
@@HappyBeezerStudios He straight up lost his mind IMO. It took the confrontation with Alucard for him to snap back to being the person who he had become after meeting his wife and realize what he had done and how wrong it was. The one thing that bugged me was that she ended up in hell. Nothing she ever did in any way was portrayed as anything but what would earn one a place in heaven. Healer, "reformer of monsters" and scholar to name the few we were shown. Though if you think about it if she had gone to the "good place" then they would have been separated in such a way he would never be able to be with her again.
I am currently writing a novel about antagonists who've learned of their ultimate fate before the story even begins, but are trapped by the machinations of the narrative to thread the same path towards destruction. No matter how many good deeds they've done, they will always be villain in the eye of the world and the protagonists. This video cannot come at a better moment. The timing is so perfect it almost feels predestined.
Genuinely thought my youtube was glitching out, this deserves at least hundreds of thousands of views. Keeping Beowolf as a comparative narrative thread is top tier video essay story telling. Fantastic video!
2 things, First, Miguel doesnt have vampire fangs, he has spider fangs, and some spiders have really big fangs. Second, that transition at 19:08 was IMMACULATE. 🤌🏿🤌🏿 Bravo.
What separates a villain from an antagonist is their actions. An antagonist can be good or have a clear moral, while a villain must cross the line in some form. For example, in Arcane, Jinx is a villain because while her motives are sympathetic, her action of destroying the building window and risking innocent lives goes beyond being angry at the system and into indiscriminate cruelty. Meanwhile, Miguel may be angry at the world for his choice to try and find his daughter, but he never tries to murder Miles or threaten the life of his family out of spite. He tries to protect the multiverse and that's it.
I saw a video, where i saw a really good definition of the protagonist/antagonist: The main problem/issue/situation that drives the story forward is the agon, and the characters on either side of the agon are protagonist/ antagonist, depends on your perspective. A 'villain', on the other hand, is someone who has evil goals and evil intentions.
You just start talking about Beowulf, very convenient since one of my classes in school happens to be reading Beowulf. Thanks for helping me on a test :D
The transition at 19:05 was really well done. One villain to another, both giving almost the same look. I hope someone else noticed it. Great video overall too :)
9:19 "Fathers, masters, gods and kings should not go by unquestioned" what a nice quote, where is it from? I couldn't find a source. If it's original, I like it, that's some nice writing right there.
I think it's less that they were right and more that they had a point. I mean, Tai Lung wasn't right to go on the rampage that he did, but his world DID kinda get turned upside down. I mean, imagine being told that you were gonna be someone great when you were old enough, and you worked your ass off to be worthy of that greatness, only to get told "Nah, bad vibes." I would be pissed too.
11:43 correction: she DID NOT choose to kill him. It was an accident caused by a deep emotional outburst, since Jinx's mind is so screwed up with trauma. She immediately tried to apologize and hoped he would stay with her, but it failed. In actuality, the "nation of Zaun" deal wasn't really complete, anyway. Silco still had to agree to hand Jinx to the authorities in order to have that, but at this point he didn't trust them. His own words, "everyone else betrays us", "it's only us", that us being him and Jinx. If there was one person he was expecting would make that change was JINX. She, in his mind, embodied the chaos, the tragedy, the loneliness, the madness and the power of the undercity. It's a big reason why he loved her at first sight as a daughter. So much so he couldn't hand her away to seal the independence deal. "Is there anything so undoing as a daughter?" And, shockingly, his decision to save her was apparently RIGHT: in bombing the council, now we see in the teaser trailer Caitlyn call the undercity "Zaun" instead of the undercity or the Fissures or bottom. JINX MADE THE CHANGE HAPPEN. ... can you tell I love this show?
You NEED to check out schnee's analyses of Arcane. I started with his "How Arcane Writes Women" and "...Men" and I'm hooked on his analysis of anything now.
@@Xenozfan2 buddy... I am ALREADY hooked on Schnee's stuff! All his videos on Arcane are legendary, basically. Heck, of anything in general. It's so in-depth and just keeps your brain blasting again and again and again!
To be honest one villain I almost cried at when there story ended was transformers armada series star scream to put it simple he goes through the story questioning what he is and who he should be for the end to find his purpose and he sacrifices himself to show where unicron is and fires the most powerful attack he has using his minicon in the process. And right before unicron attacks and ends him he throws the star saber and ejects his minicon and then falls. And all megatron can say is what a hero he was and takes the time to morn. The lost of him even stops fighting the autobots to cope with the loss and when the other desipicons start saying how useless stars team was megatron tells them that he was the best warrior he new and helps fight unicron in star screams name. That’s how I remember star scream starting a villain and sacrificing himself as a hero. That a villain I love to see.
This video is a great piece. I do understand more and more the viewpoint of a villain. The main point is that villains are not born. They are made. This is a never ending cycle in existence. Great job.
I feel this question was best demonstrated well in My Hero especially the concept of a society that creates villains, who determines evil & the philosophies therein.
I had to drop my hero because the paper thin motivation of the villains and the author kept trying to make us be sympathetic to straight up evil characters.
Then the ending came and we find out that the entire fight was useless because society overall has not changed or healed at all, thus in the future another Tomura Shigaraki, another All for One, and another League of Villains will be created and rejected by a flawed and corrupt society. Not to mention the quirk singularity theory means that human extinction is inevitable, prolly in a couple generations.
@@anusaukko6792except society did change otherwise granny would have made the same mistake with that kid that escaped his family's basement and we wouldn't have Uraraka pushing for better quirk counseling to prevent more Togas being born. And the fact that the manga literally stated that villains have been rising less and less to the point that fewer heroes are needed. How about you actually read the ending before spreading misinformation. And you can't realistically expect everything to be perfect in a small time frame of eight years
And to a degree that works, as in an effort to create order, enforce law and civility, there are still constant imperfections that attempting to stomp out completely risks an excess of order, an oppressive system with harsh punishment of anything that doesn't fit inside it. But on the opposite extreme, there being no limitations, no restrictions, no order at all, an excess of freedom devolving into chaos, is even more overtly destructive and savage, in My Hero Acadamia's case, the various Quirks seeking to destroy society to make a world that suits only them at the expense of everyone else (and technically themselves, as they may have great powers, but that doesn't mean they'd be able survive or thrive in a world of supernaturally powered criminals fighting and destroying everything). Both are extremes, both are excesses, and villains in various stories often embody one of these extremes, the flaws of the system and the flaws within the individual, and how harmful they can be to others. Heroes meanwhile either fight to protect the balance in that system or seek to remove as many of its flaws as they can however they can. Either way, its a characters relationship with that system, how they respond to its discontents, that is often what decides wether they are a hero or a villain, and beyond that, what kind of hero or villain they are. And yes, I just described the Alignment Chart in Dungeons & Dragons.
It’s definitely too early for us to say Miguel is right or wrong. Also Beowulf is English, not specifically Nordic. It takes heavy inspiration from Nordic tales, but it isn’t Nordic itself. Grendel is an awful, evil villain, even if his mother mourns him.
Miguel is clearly wrong. The fact that the three spider people tasked to chase miles at the end all don’t have “canon” Spider-Man stories is enough to know that the writers are critiquing his world view.
@@mylesiswhite4122 no, Miguel could be right, that fact only means that they haven’t had their canon event yet. It’s entirely possible that Miles is the only exception, due to his entire existence as a spider-man being an anomaly. We also don’t even know if Miles is an exception either, even if we expect a good ending, we may not see one.
@@nexus_keeper Miguel got his powers from a failed experiment (and literally doesn’t have spider sense), Ben Reilly is a clone, spider woman is the creation of the high evolutionary by splicing different genes in an embryo. None of these are canon Spider-Man origin stories yet they claim miles to be the anomaly??
@@mylesiswhite4122 1) We don’t know if any of those stories are accurate to these versions. 2) Yeah, that still makes miles an anomaly. He got the powers that were supposed to go to another universes spider-man, which is clearly an anomaly on a completely different scale than the other examples you provided. The other examples stay in-universe, and we don’t know what classifies an anomaly, but if Miles isn’t one, than there are no anomalies. Side note: miguel not having spider sense, or most of the spider powers isn’t a big deal. Variation in character, powers and even who spider-man’s true identity is are very common.
Incredible video man, I’m so glad this popped up on my feed. This is why I love stories. Don’t get me wrong, a good ol good vs. bad can be amazing to watch, but as I’ve grown as a person it’s so cool to dive into stories where the villains are relatable and the heroes are flawed. I find a certain comfort in seeing myself in these characters, knowing that my flaws are valid and I’m doing my best. Art is such a cool thing, thanks for your deep dive into these characters!
This reminds me of my favorite book, Lady Midnight. The villian they're chasing is trying to bring their lost love back from the dead, and when they realize they they have a whole discussion on how if it was them they're not sure if they'd do any different. The villian is killing people to fuel necromancy, but they still question if they're in the right because they sympathize with them.
15:45 Technically that dude aint even spiderman. he genetically enhanced himself into a spider-vampire hybrid and took the old mantle of his spiderman from his world.
well someone had to take the role of spiderman in his universe.. in earth 42, prowler miles' universe, theres no spiderman and everything descends into chaos
That is incorrect. A. Miguel did not take the mantle of a pre-existing Spider-Man from his world(unless you mean Peter Parker from over 80 years before), that is a fan theory and not yet confirmed to be canon(insert 2099 sound effect). B. Genetic enhancement is exactly how Miguel becomes Spider-Man in the comics and in all other source material in which he is a hero. C. Other Spider-Beings like Jessica Drew, Ben Reilly, or Pavitr Prabhakar are clones or got their powers from magic, and they're still Spider-Man/Woman. Don't mean to be disrespectful, this just seems to be a common misconception.
Honestly, this is the best video I’ve ever seen. Depicting villains, who are the other side of the story, in a way that makes us feel as if they deserve more than just being thrown away by society. Monsters who are literally just doing what they were made to do, it’s like when a hero is right just cause he gets to defend the people from the villain, but in this case, the hero was never there to for the up and coming villain to stop him from going down the WRONG path. So it’s always a question of who is right and who is wrong, but never a, Is the hero just as wrong for not wanting/ not being able to save everybody?’
when i watched miguel o'hara explain canon events, he suddenly didn't feel like a villain, and i didn't know who to root for. for the rest of the movie, i was unsure, almost, about whether miguel was in the wrong.
He's in the wrong because it's a subversion of the entirety of spider-man's story, you don't sit there and let the villain run past, because the promoter screws you out of money, with great power comes great responsibility. You always TRY to save them and sometimes you fail, and then you get back up and try again.
The talk of different perspectives on things and the story of Sisyphus reminds me of a quote I heard, "For even in the story of Sisyphus there is the chance to find a hero. Because the difference between an indomitable hero and a tragic victim is one has hope and the other despair. And it all rest in the mind of Sisyphus." I don't recall where I heard it and probably not completely accurate but gets the point across. So many things are a matter of perspective. As the same thing can happen to multiple people but those who get back up and push forward in hope after such events we see as heroes. While those who use that pain and anger to lash out at the world seeking to cause pain we see as villains. And lastly those who retreat into despair closing off from the world we see as victims.
I can't help but think Miguel caused Miles to become Spider-man because HE left his universe just so he could have a family. He's probably just projecting all his guilt and shame onto Miles.
I would say you are wrong there. Miles is literally willing to risk having billions die for the chance that he can save his dad. That is literally the same thing King Pin did in the last movie.
@epicsavagebros7400 true but that's what Miguel for his family, he destroyed a entire universe because he was selfish and couldn't handle the death of his wife and child
But does this really apply to miles. We have to remember that he technically isn't his worlds original Spiderman who died in the first film. With this in mind, does the canon events still apply to him?
And sometimes you can get villiians like Emperor Palpatine who loves rolling around in evil, violence and chaos like a pig rolling around in slop and he can still be just as good
Only few villains have truly good intentions (the anti-villains), but the most times is more an wrong intentions or a radical and fake view of the world who is reputed right and realistic by the spectator
Hey! I did not expect this video to get as many views as it did, so thanks for the watch! I’m new to this style of video-and there are already things I would want to change! So my apologies for some of the errors I made here. Overall, I wanted this video to be contemplative and question a lot of aspects of these antagonists. Firstly, few major clarifications:
1. When I talk about each villain being right, I generally don’t mean that their entire belief system is correct, but that they may have a point or be right in some aspect. Tai Lung is DEFINITELY wrong in thinking violence is the solution, but he’s right to feel shitty about the way much of his life was built up. His execution, pride, and other values are all wrong! I took being “right”, moreso as having a human justification but taking it to an evil extreme. I discuss their rightness as coming from parts of their motivations, but I can see how that wording can be an issue.
2. Antagonists and villains are definitely separate things, and I argue that Death is both an antagonist, and a villain and Miguel is in an antagonist who is in a gray-space between anti-hero and villain. This is because of how drastic and malicious their interactions with the heroes seem! Death terrorizes Puss into panic attacks, so it can be argued he is more villainous. I acknowledge that this is a looser interpretation of "villain" and you’re perfectly allowed to disagree!
This video is meant to spark debate and questioning about villain and hero dynamics. Thanks for bearing with the issues in this and I hope to improve in my reasoning for the next video!! Please be kind and civil in the comments :)
Smaller Corrections:
- Beowulf is a Old English story not Old Norse!
- Jinx *SPOILER* killed Silco, but its less of a thought-out choice and impacted by her spiraling mental health to be fair.
So skibidi
Amazing video hope to see more video essays from you
You should watch Naruto and attack on Titan
Can you turn your mic up a bit for the next vid?👀
You cooked with this one nice description
when you started the puss in boots section and you said "it's chasing you right now" I genuinely thought it was gonna be a sponsorship
"But Death couldn't have found Puss in the first place if he could mask his location to anywhere on the globe. And that's why this video is sponsored by-"
100% thought it was a vpn ad
glad we all have the same braincell, I was confused after I skipped and it was still just normal video lol
thank god I wasn't the only one anticipating an ad xD
I was expecting also a NorthVPN or similar advertaisment 😅
the thing that made dracula even more mad at humans than he already was, is that he gave them a full year to just say sorry, and instead when he came back to what he wished would be a heartfelt apology, he saw only a festival celebrating her death, and not only the leaders where comemorating, but every single person, the nobles, commoners, and even the children
Bro nobody knew anything about her being a witch or dracula being a good guy despite the fire and stuff except some cor, rupt pol, iticians. Even if they refuse they would just got burned like her. Some feel their actions are pointless. Even the show show us through that one guy who study science himself. I wouldn't blame them. The better revenge would be to save people from their grasp and make them laugh at them. That's the whole point of the show. Unfortunately the director thought people would be smart enough to understand it.
So because some people did bad things the whole world deserves to be wiped clean? Dracula just a monster who used his wife’s murder as justification for genocide. He was not in the right
@@Dressyone223the shows literally tell us what to feel about him through Carmella. An old mad man.
@aaad3552 They literally call his plan a massive suicide note. He fully intended to kill all humans then starve to death to be with his wife. Dracula was in the right for being angry about the murder but he gave up on justice and just wanted to die and take everyone with him
## ###########🤓#
you forgot to mention this wholesome fact about Doofensmirts, none of his tragic backstories involve his ex-wife, they simply grew apart and he doesn't have the want to get her, and for his daughter Vanessa he's extremely invested in her life because he didn't have good parents
Also ever noticed how a lot of the gifts and hangouts he has with her line up with some of his backstories, like how no one showed up for his birthday party so he helped Vanessa get people and he gave her a massive cake. That’s a true father there, giving your child a better upbringing than you had
Doof is 100% dad goals!
DAMN... but I didn't watch that movie soooooooo.... yeah🙃
@@user-BadUsername i love that like...❤😁😀😆☺🤗
@@michiyaslana5974 Sorry I cant relate I hope you guys dont bully me or... worse track me down... erm yeah that's a bit sussy💜 (who is this diva?)
Dr Doof is not trapped. Unlike Sisyphus who is trapped and tortured in a loop, Doof finds contentment in his loop. There is a reason his machines always have a self-destruct button, and why he always awaits Perry’s intervention before acting. He relishes the idea of having a routine, and his evil comes off as more of a way to express himself rather than do actual harm. He is a villain at the end of the day, with a very tragic backstory, but his main motive isn’t to rectify his past or the injustices he faces, it is to be the perfect foil to his greatest enemy and friend
underrated take ngl this is an excellent point
I bet Doof is a Scorpio with Cancer rising.
One must imagine Doofenshmirtz happy
In the short lived show Milo Murphys Law, Doofenshmirtz's story continues. He comes to find that he actually invents time travel in future (even briefly meeting his future self) and decides to set down a new path, to be better. And of course, Perry is there, supporting him in his new journey
@@justachannel8600 Hey, as a Scorpio with a Cancer rising, what does this mean?
Tai lung is probably the best example of how to make a villain that we fear and understand at the same time
The same goes for Grimmel, Drago, Dagur, Ryker and Viggo Grimborn, Heather, Ramses, Seti, Krogan, Pitch Black, Eris and Death.
@@marcuscheng9398 but not grimmel because he's an idiot and was part of the film that ruined the whole franchise
When shifu learned that, his found son was not the dragon Warrior; he did not re-abilitate Tai Lung nor did he destroy Tai lung. Shifu was simply paralysed by indecision, causing him to abandon his son.
@@Baconator9k who deleted my comment
Anyway yes Marcus but grimmel was a terrible villain from a terrible film
@@marcuscheng9398 Pitch Black? Do you mean the aliens? Because whats his face is obviously not a villain.
"same time next week?"
-dr heinz doofenschmirtz, after getting defeated.
He reminds me of Captain America but a villain version, he could do this all day
love this comment. no reason why. i just do. this is exactly what i imagine doofenshmirtz to be
Doofenschmirtz is amazing
yeah, doof's the best antivillain, he's not evil, he just makes any crazy idea he has into reality, he doesn't hate his "enemy" perry either, nor want to hurt anyone (other than a little bit of bullying level stuff, lol, like pulling down the pants of someone mid-speech), sometimes they just sit together and have a talk, or throw a party
@@jan_harald and what I really like about him is even though his parents treated him badly he still treats his daughter the best and doesn’t use that bad childhood as a crutch for evil actions
This is why Anti-Villains are underrated in Fiction, Imo.
Cuz while Anti-Heroes are
- "I'm the 'Hero', but that doesn't mean I'm a Saint."
Anti-Villains are
- "I'm the 'Villain', but that doesn't mean I'm a monster."
Honestly, I’d consider the Wolf from Puss in Boots to be more of an anti-villain than anything. Even though he acts very much like a villain, I have a hard time considering him an actual villain because of the fact that, as a personification of death itself, he can’t really be considered evil per se. He’s literally an amoral force of nature that just annoyed at a mortal being for wasting what he had and decided that he wasn’t gonna let that fly.
@@eeyorehaferbock7870 Yes hes indeed an anti-villain, as his mere existence would be a bane of heroes like puss and boots yet hes justified and not inhertly evil.
You could even consider him as neither anti-villain or a hero, and call him a Neutral force.
@@eeyorehaferbock7870 an anti villain is by definition a bad guy who do bad either for good reason or with good means wolf is none cause he still want to kill puss for revenge
@@eeyorehaferbock7870 Here's how I saw it, just as you said he's a force of nature but I don't believe he was ever capable of personally killing Puss; he was merely standing by every time Puss came close to death to reap that last life.
Deadpool, Venom play an antivillain ofyen even if marvel makes everything a Anti hero
That transition from Spiderman 2099 to death from puss in boots was fucking slick my friend.
Going from silco to doofensmirts is hilarious
Abysmal dogshit father to great father
I mean they are both very caring fathers and all 3 were failed by their family
Okay, so here we have.. evil, with a side of bad parenting skills.
"Uhuh, and what about the next one?"
Okay, so that's weaponized incompetence. With good parenting on the side.
then going from doof to Sisyphus is even funnier
@@genericbug A visitor?
my favorite trope with villains being right is when they are right up until the last point. when they get all the information and come to almost the correct conclusion, likely something almost identical to the hero's ideology, but that has just been twisted slightly so its the worst version of that line of thought.
Any examples?
@@m_winewood All consciousness is derived from the same source. This means that every soul is essentially the same light except filtered differently through the prism of life that changes our perceptions and experiences and gives us our unique characteristics.
Now since all souls are from the same source, we can deduce that it doesn't matter if you abuse someone, you can't abuse yourself after all, so harming and abusing someone else doesn't matter if it is for your own satisfaction.
Now since all souls are from the same source, we can deduce that everyone is equally valuable, nobody is better or lesser than anyone, so all life is sacred and matters and deserves to be respected and cherished.
Two different conclusions from the same existential truth.
@@m_winewood Star Trek Into Darkness. Starfleet ideals, but twisted into permanent wartime version.
@@m_winewoodPretty much Tai Lung
Thanos, I think.
My favorite quote about how to write a great villain is "they should be a protagonist for the other side of the story."
Edit: Because so many people misunderstand the word protagonist and the meaning of the quote itself, let me explain it. This quote doesn't mean "the character opposite the protagonist has a morally just reason or is actually a misguided good person".
It means that they are their own person. they move idenpendantly from the protagonist they do not act like a character in a story doing nothing until the protagonist shows up. They are moving forward in their own journey, not waiting on the "hero" of the story to spring them to life. They have their own motivations and goals that they are striving to achieve. This is what the quote means it has nothing to do with morality and has everything to do with agency, motivation, and purpose.
But that's kinda wrong. They are villains because they are wrong. Maybe they are almost right, but there is something twisted about their goals...
Ha! History said otherwise buddy
@TheDeathmail but that's not what protagonist means. Protagonist means they are the main character. Not that they are good.
That sounds really cool, but you can also have great villains who are just flat out bad people or “antagonists” no matter what perspective you look at it from.
Love how every response (except one) missed the point. Protagonist doesn't= hero/good guy. The protagonist is who the story follows, you can have a villain protagonist. Just because they are the focus doesn't mean they become "good" it actually challenges our perspective as the audience. Focusing on the villan doesn't make them good it makes it harder for the audience to see them as truly evil or allows us to see into their twisted mind more. Which is good writing, plenty of villains are loved more than their heroes for a reason they are written with depth.
Best example of villains being right has to be Ken from the bee movie lol
lmao true
0:58 "what happens when the societies that heroes defend are the ones that create villains" 🔥🔥🔥
geto from jjk is a perfect example of this, man i wish he was the main villain instead of sukuna
Yet the same society created hero’s. If society is to blame, go live in away from it.
@@Wiley_WolfJust because the society created the hero doesn't mean that the society is right or just. The villain might be wrong in their actions, but in certain cases, they may be right with their conclusions and in calling out the problems of said society. Also, leaving the society isn't really an option - you don't choose to be born into the society, you just are and you have to deal with that fact.
It means job security for the heroes.
A boy was fascinated by all things military, his thoughts were never far from history's wars and warriors. His dreams were filled with battles fought for noble causes and selfless sacrifice for greater good. When a schoolyard bully invaded his dreams, the dreams took shape and became intent. The boy now knew what the man would do, he would become a soldier. He would place himself between the innocent of the world and the bullies that sought to prey upon them. Like the warriors he had idolized, he would fight evil, oppression, tyranny. He would no longer be content with books and dreams, he would go and live it.
Years pass and the young soldier stands amidst unthinkable carnage, bloated, mangled corpses strewn in all directions, black-scorched blood pools in cratered sand. The soldier chokes on greasy black smoke and vomits again, violently. The dead around him had been soldiers in name only, not warriors by any measure. And worse, they had died in desperate flight, targeted from above as they retreated in panicked chaos. These men were not soldiers, no, neither had they fell in heated battle. For there had been no battle, this was the site of a slaughter and the dead here were victims of murder.
The soldier sleeved the vomit from his mouth and felt something tighten in his gut, hot, painful, something completely new to the proud young man. He felt ASHAMED. As he stood there surveying a fucking crime scene, his shame grew cold and morphed into something far darker. It became hatred, hatred for what he represented, for what was being done in his name. But, mostly he hated himself for he had somehow became the very thing he had sworn to oppose.
I ask you, is this soldier a villain for loathing the country he was sworn to serve? Would he be, if he then swore to oppose his country instead? Well, am I? Am I a villain?
Tai lung wasn't really right, but he did have a justification, being promised this title of great honor, for his entire life, working hard until he heard his bones crack, just to be denied, that is a decent justification but it's a justification for revenge, so not REALLY right but it's understandable.
Definitely! I think he’s right in the regard he might have be mistreated and promised false hope, but of course he is wrong in taking it towards revenge and thinking that he was owed greatness no matter what
None of the characters in the thumbnail were right
@@nanuqo2006 eh in a sense death was right, in that you should be more appreciative of your life, and as puss wasn't appreciative for 8 of his past lives, death decided to just take the last one, until puss finally gained that appreciation, and Miguel just is flat out right, like we see what happens when the Canon is broken, the universe just begins to erase itself, and Miguel having been the reason for an entire universe being erased, knows first hand, and tries preventing that from happening to another universe at all costs, so he's kinda just objectively right, it's the whole greater good thing, it sucks but the loss of a single life vs the loss of all life is kind of a no brainer
@@toxic_tomb1238 Death was not at all right. The events of PiB2 were literally just him having a massive ego trip chasing down Puss. Sure, he was throwing his lives away, but that doesn't make it morally correct to chase down and kill him. Just because Puss ended up a better person doesn't mean what Death did was acceptable at all. Puss was still alive when Death tried to kill him. He is overstepping the boundaries of 'his job' and committing evil actions.
@@nanuqo2006 he's death, the literal incarnation of death, he makes up his own rules, plus him throwing away his lives is basically saying he's not wanting to live, death was just collecting early also you ignored the main point
the end scene of grendle lying on the floor is truly sad. just watching a helpless animal lie there in pain as he is about to cry with no one there to comfort him brought tears to my eyes. I would never wish this on anyone.
I would. I want my enemies on the ground like that, unable to advance.
@@OmniDan26 Perfect treatment for the priest who killed Dracula's girl
@@argovergara94 ????
@@OmniDan26"i have no enemies... left"
yet there are people who are in times like that. They have no one to talk to... Thats why i try to be the most positive version of myself even when i dont wanna wake up for good
"being evil is just going against the general opinion"
-Jarjar binks
"You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain!"
My favorite villain line of all time
-Harvey Dent (Aaront Eckhart), The Dark Knight (2008)
It’s great but I’ve heard it so much that it’s lost all effect and even become annoying.
when hero find dark as an evil force they want to erase it. but then they after they erase it they finally understand why human need darkness, now to save everyone, the hero need to become the every same darkness that they erased
Same
“Not a promise, not an oath, or a malediction or a curse, Inevitable."
Being understandable is not exactly equal to being right.
Most good writings make villains understandable by showing you why he's on that path but very rarely show that the path itself is the right one.
Which not all writers or audiences see sometimes, conflating understandable or explainable motives, or "having a point", with justifiable or excusable actions.
It's a distinction thankfully this video does address, with Death (..."straight up".) being overtly sadistic towards his target for not appreciate life and "insulting" death rather than simply killing Puss or waiting for him to die, Dracula targeting the entire world instead of just the people who killed and then celebrated his wife's death, Tai Lung for taking being denied the Dragon Warrior position and having no other path in life besides it as an excuse for a rampage, Doofenshmirtz preferring grand acts of chaos doomed to fail instead of simply working on his deep seated issues in a normal way, or even Grendel taking out his rage on innocents and indulging in their suffering rather than simply leaving when the sound of their partying hurt him.
Each of these individuals take the path of destruction, chaos or malice when confronted with tragedy or injustice, regardless on the nature of that tragedy or injustice and this is what makes them villains even if they have some point to make and is usually what best separates them from heroes, who at best, when faced with similar tragedies or injustices, either have the will to endure them or are changed for the better, deciding to become more responsible, honorable courageous or generous. (e.i., one seeks to hurt the world because it hurt them, another seeks to stop others are protected from hurt., with some interplay here and there).
Most people watching this will never be able to comprehend this.
@@callmev3531 I some what agree, so I would like to ask you this question from someone who went from Hero to Villian.
Eren Yager, a boy who had everything ripped away from him by monsters with no heart, no soul. His original plan was to target those who hurt him and his entire village, something a Hero would do, which is why early on we see him as a Hero, but then we start to see what is actually happening. The entire world is against them, the entire world see's them as monsters. He didn't do anything wrong, his friends didn't do anything wrong, yet they see them as the monsters.
Every single day he had to fight just for his freedom over something that was completely out of his control, yet when he starts the rumbling; everyone see him as the villian. He is now being betrayed as this horrible monster. (In the eyes of the audience) Even though he is simply defending himself from the constant advances of the enemy. He doesn't take joy in killing anyone, infact he hates it. He isn't upset that he isn't the chosen one, he has been attacked his entire life. Eren see's humanity as the villian which in short it is. EVERYONE saw them as a villian, the entire world feared this land because of one man who abused the power of the titans.
Eren flattened 80% of humanity, all people that feared him anyways. What was he to do, what is the "Heroic" path to take? Should he have sat there and let everyone he knows and love get murdered just for exsisting? Should he have allowed them never to have children and make familes of there own just for being an eldian? I am genuinly curious, what is the herioc steps to take here.
TLDR: The island was targeted by the whole world, he seeked revenge for the attacks on the island, what would be the "heroic" path to take here. How should he have gone about this the "Heroic" wayy
In the immortal words of Jake Peralta
"Cool motive, still murder"
@@callmev3531 Well said, and I think it's a very jarring contrast between Hero and Villains, and never really gets delved deep into in media. I mean, I guess I could understand, it'd probably be boring for many to sit through a deep philosophical lesson on "why does a villain do this" and "why does a hero do that" type of thing, if done poorly.
My favorite cartoon villain is Mondays from Garfield, the lasagna loving cat
I hate Mondays from Garfield, TonyGoesDigtial
Mondays is such a good villain. You just really understand why Garfield hates them so much..
@scrawls just ship him to africa.
@@scrawls im a big fan of Mondays, from Garfield, the lasagna loving cat, so i hate you on a deep level now.
The problem is why does he hate Mondays?? He doesnt work so the days are always the same.@@Ixarus6713
The transition from Miguel's eyes looking at Miles, to Death's looking at Puss was *chef's kiss*.
I am so flipping glad you didn't have Thanos on this list. That can of worms has been opened way too many times but adding doofinsmerts is a master touch!
From the marvel movies? nah, thanos was completely wrong and a total moron as well. There's no chance thanos gets on any list of this type, not one with merit anyway.
@@Archedgaryes, eliminating half the people AND half the food (he snapped out half the plants and food, too) was a moron play by Thanos.
You're back at square one but now everyone has pain of loss.
@@davidm4566 I know they said half of all life, but I believe thanos just wiped out intelligent life. However, I do agree his move was rather ignorant. population growth is somewhat exponential (not actually, but there are similarities). if Thanos erases all life, it would take a mere two generations or so and it would be close to where it was at before. life would have to routinely be halved every 40-60 years which is a terrible tradeoff
@@Archedgaryou must’ve missed the part where an entire movie was made to show that everything Thanos said was 100% true and when the avengers undid his work, they killed billions.
@@kickstart3974It wasn’t about earth… Actually it had absolutely nothing to do with earth at all, you’d know that if you watched the movies.
The way he transitions between characters and topics is enough to shed a tear, its beautiful
Doctor Doofenshmirtz is the most tragic villain. His own parents didn't show up to his birth! And he had to spend his childhood as a stand in for a LAWN GNOME! Joker claims it only takes one bad day for someone to go down his route, but Doof is proof that even the kindest hearts can be broken by repeated evil.
Ever heard of itachi uchiha
His parents attended his birth, also doof solos itachi
@@ruthless7014totally he just killed his parents with his own choice but doof never had a choice
Good he ended as comedic villan after faling art school. Remeber that place he was birth reseber Austria, birth place of failed painter that take Jews under shovers
@@ruthless7014 XD I would never expect in my life to read such a godly quote as "doof solos itachi"
their fight would be legendary
Heroes and villains always have the same back story-pain. The difference is what they choose to do about it. Villain says “the world hurt me, so I'll hurt it back.” Hero says “the world hurt me, I'm not gonna let it hurt anyone else.” Heroes use pain. Villains are used by it.
This right here, so many villains are just victims themselves lashing out at the world for what it did to them. All the villains like that would've been heroes if they had the proper support or even just someone to aim their rage, but sadly most often all they have are themselves and a growing need for revenge
counterpoint: dystopias. It is the simplest broad category to point to, but is not exclusive, either. In these stories, the heroes go about reforming or destroying a corrupt society, which can easily be twisted into "i was hurt, so i will hurt it back" while remaining a hero, though that does come with a heaping helping of cynicism. Morality is never black and white, and as such, we can never make such broad generalizations, and stories from the past might change the sympathetic party with a shift in society's general morality (stories from an era of "might makes right" dont quite hold up in the modern era of mental health awareness and the value of an individual despite their hardships and trauma).
@@notlark650 even heroes have no one. not just villians. but it's the choice that one makes that will make them a hero or a villian.
The problem is that so very often, the heroes *don't* say "so I'm not gonna let it hurt anyone else". In fact, that's more often a villain's line than a hero's, because it is a demand for change, and change brings chaos and violence, and heroes oppose chaos and violence in their defense of the status quo. Whether the villain is attempting to forcibly change the status quo for revenge or in hope of a better future, the desire for change is the exact thing that separates them from the hero in the better part of modern western stories. The characteristic stance of the hero is simply a veto against the villain's call to change, sometimes with a weak acknowledgment of the villain's point added in at the end.
Morality is black and white just like everything else is. There is always a right and wrong answer
I think calling Death a villain is inherently a misrepresentation of the character. An antagonist, yes. But not a villain. Death isn’t evil, he isn't really doing anything wrong. As for him relishing in the fear, id say that Puss is a special case. I dont think it right to say that because he has it out for one guy who has repeatedly mocked him and squandered chances others would kill/die for (ha) that hes villainous. As for disappointment, he definitely is to an extant but when he pokes Puss one last time, reminding him they will meet again, he genuinely smiles at Puss's ansewr, happy to see that Puss has grown.
Indeed, Death is not a villain.
Death has villainous qualities due to his cruelty and sadism, but inheritly represents a very classical idea of justice that delivers appropriate punishmeht to Hybris. Him tormenting Puss is part of this idea of justice, because its a reaction to Puss arrogance and boastfulness, so Death humiliates him to teach him humility.
Death very much is a villain. He doesn't need to go after Puss like he does. He doesn't need to go after Puss at all. He doesn't need to try to kill Puss. He could simply wait until Puss dies of "natural" causes. He is *actively,* *willfully,* & *knowingly* doing something evil, unnecessary, & beyond the confines of his role, entirely because he feels slighted by Puss' ego.
Granted, the slight is an understandable one, & Puss desparately needed the lesson in humility, but a natural disaster doesn't conciously decide that you, in particular, ought to have your house destroyed.
@@illTemperedSeaBass The thing is, he is played as villainous, but his role is still more antagonistic or that of an anti-villain, as him going after puss is provoked by the laters hybris. In classical dramas, Death would be absolutely framed as a force of good, teaching the hero a lesson.
yeah Death is a villain and not just an antagonist because Puss isn't even dead for real. Death is overstepping his boundaries and going after Puss for *personal* reasons.
1:21 I did NOT expect to see fr doofenschmirtz right there. That had me laughing out loud lmao.
Bro is NOT on the team 💀💀
He is such a good dad though
He's like a nicer Syndrome
The dude was right to some extent, I think?
I did not expect to see this comment, I started to laugh after seeing this
This video has pushed me to re-evaluate my own main villain and give him more of a clear goal and backstory. To not just commit horrible acts to oppose the heroes but to do what he thinks is right to avenge what he's lost. Thank you for making this video and I can't wait to see more!
"This injustice destroyed me, so I'm going to _eradicate_ it, before it creates another monster like me. Nobody deserves this. _I_ didn't.", basically?
It’s still important to remember that in our quest to make our villains more realistic, we should always remember that sometimes people are bad not because they have an actual good reason, but because they simply *think* they’re doing what’s right.
The thing is....As some would say "What does it mean to be human?", you can apply the same mentality and say to yourself "What does it mean to be moral?"...."What does it mean to be a monster?"....."What does it mean.....to live?"...
19:06 That eye transition is wild, very cool video too men, keep it up
To me the question has never been whether the villain is right. Almost every position can have an argument made for it, and I mean upwards of 90% of them. The real question is where is the line? Where do you draw the line on the actions. All of these(yes including Miguel) villains go beyond what could be considered the 'normal' boundary. It's one thing for Grendel to break up the party that is significantly disturbing him, but its another to march in and murder everyone over just a party.
To me the line has always been this "Both the actions and the ends must justify each other". Dracula was right in accusing people for the death of his wife, but he goes way to far, saying all humans are evil and moving for grand-genocide. Miguel claims this whole "Predestination" bs, but is proven totally wrong by the end, where he's wrong in the idea that simply saving a single person causes reality to tear apart.
A villain can have a point, but what makes them the villain is that they totally lose the point they had. Tai lung could have gone off and become a wandering kung fu practitioner, but instead he attacks the valley, then attacks the person who denied him. Similarly Grendel went beyond merely just some average attacks, Grendel had no issue with killing people on the thousands, and that mother of his, she let him rampage for a long while, but when he got hurt due to the constant rampages, she blames the person who was called in to deal with the issue, rather then on the person who was killing on mass.
I don't like the idea of saying the villain was 'right', as it often leads to people trying to excuse their behavior. Rather, I'd use the wording "When the villain has a point", the villain can still be wrong, but they can start from a completely logical or moral conclusion.
Ooo I really like your reasoning! I’m definitely reconsidering some things after reading this… Thanks for the in depth comment :)
This. So much this. I absolutely hate it when people say 'the villain had a point so that justifies everything they did, right?' NO. No it does not.
Very often villains will be fighting against some kind of injustice, but what makes them villains is that they become more fixated on taking out their rage at the injustice on those who hurt them rather than fixing the problem. There are many ways of facing injustice, but reacting with violence to those who caused it doesn't fix anything in the longer term, it just removes the immediate threat - not to mention, it makes you believe that any problem can be solved with violence, and you know the old saying: when the only tool you've got is a hammer, every problem begins to look like a nail.
If I may offer my own perspective: this is what happens when you're stuck thinking at the level of the problem. People have been violent or abusive to you? Be violent and abusive back. Villains inflict their trauma on others in compulsive cycles that they are doomed to repeat without understanding why, and thus become the very tyrants they claim to hate. The reason heroes are heroic is because they rise ABOVE the problem to arrive at the level of the solution: though they may have the urge to be abusive, they understand that the true solution to abuse is to create a culture of compassion in which abuse could never flourish in the first place.
True heroes are transformational in nature, both because they are willing to change their own faults and because they seek to reflect those same changes in the world around them; villains only seek to change the world to fit them, they tend not to look inwards or make any real change in themselves. The struggle between hero and villain is ultimately one of transformation versus trauma: allowing pain to change and guide you to a better and brighter future versus being trapped by your pain in a past that keeps repeating through self-fulfilling prophecy.
@@StolanisI hate when people glorify villains and try to justify their actions because what they are saying according to their perspective is "RIGHT" , Joker is a great example of this , I like joker as a character but as a person he is utmost pathetic and despicable but people try to justify his actions because he is "RIGHT" in how he views society , joker is a nhilistic guy ofcourse he is not going to have great views about society he doesn't care . No matter what sad backstory joker might cook in front of me it's not going to justify the horrible shit he does to people because "ACTIONS" matter , Just because joker had a traumatic childhood doesn't mean he can commit mass murder and just do "muh society" and get away with it . Batman had a traumatic childhood ,batman knows society is made up of good and bad people both and joker focuses and exaggerates on the bad part of it
Batman spends his whole life defending Gotham no matter what a shithole it is , that is the drawing line between a hero and a villian. Joker puts a smile on other people faces by carving one on them with his knife and batman puts a smile on other faces by making them secure and feel safe . I though joker was cool in childhood but then I realised how much mature and great batman is.
Tbf to tai lung he was literally groomed and taught the only way to solve problems is violence think about it what IS the dragon warriors job it's to solve problems with violence and that's all it's ever been if it was to solve problems through peace talks and talking u wouldnt need to learn kung fu to even be eligible for the position notice every villan po defeats he never beats with words its ALWAYS VIOLENCE ITS ALWAYS SEALING the dragon warrior isnt naruto he isnt talk no jutsuing ppl they're fighting and imprisoning evil ppl and THATS what tai ling was GROOMED SINCE HE WAS A KID TO BE the dragon warrior the greatest warrior and the beacon of hope who SOLVES ALL ISSUES THROUGH VIOLENCE tai lung simply thought that by defeating everyone including the dragon warrior hed finally be worthy for the position but even more important to him hed finally have shifu his father figure be proud of him in tai lung's world and mind problems ARE SOLVED THROUGH VIOLENCE he is and is always proven correct every time we see the "heroes" defeat/beat up the bad guys the literal only reason tai lung is considered the villan of the story is cause he used violence against po and we as the audience like po so that's bad
This is very good! I always disliked these Villain Has a Point and Justified Villain cliches as Blaming The Victim, expressing both The End Justifies The Means and Society Is To Blame tropes. These cliches are common in real-life and fictional terror ideologies. Either substitute a dystopian culture led by a tyrant, Terrorists For Hire, or Terrorists Without a Cause, since no social issue justifies evil.
The fact you tricked people into learning beowulf by explaining villains from other media is incredible.
Hi
Yeah, kinda detracts from the breakdown entirely. Especially if you already know beowulf. You wind up just skipping chunks of the video.
@@jamesmcintyre2676 bro cannot stand hearing someone say something new about a thing they know lol
@@AnnBoye Hi
@@MK-vi2cm what's up hope your Having a good day
I once heard from a Reddit post that a villain is a hero that chose the worst way to solve a problem.
This is the best way to put it I've seen so far.
It all depends on your definition of a hero I guess. Some people view heroes as those who sacrifice themselves for others, those who do bad things for the greater good, those who go above and beyond to save as many as they can. Any act that is grandiose can be viewed as heroic, such as great war veterans who went through hell and survived while pulling their companions through to safety, while the other side of the coin involves ending others existence, performing horrific actions to others in order to save those they care about. Whether this action is heroic or not depends entirely on which side this person was on, what history remembers correctly about the actions, and who is telling the tale. One may be a mythical retelling of a hero, while another could be a cautionary tale of a dangerous monster. Remember, history is written by the victors.
Those are probably the best villains. Those where you understand what put them on their way, what their goal is, but with wrong decisions along the way.
Following the saying "the path to hell is paved with good intentions"
Because those villains make you question if you would do the same, if put into their position. Would you be able to do it better? Worse?
Often those villains simply had enough. They tried doing it the "right" way. It didn't work. So they stopped caring.
@@Bancheis yup, the difference between a rebellion and a revolution is success.
If it succeeds, songs are sung about deposing the corrupt and evil government.
If it fails, songs are sung about upholding peace and order against violent insurgents.
@@Bancheis Yes maybe one man's hero is another man's villain I think Batman often goes into that like the one where the mark of the batman got people killed in prison.
Kung Fu Panda 1 plot be like: “we understand your child has sociopathic tendencies, so we are going to hard bait them with a trip to Disney world and then cancel at the last second”
That tai lung prison break scene was PEAK
One of the greatest scenes in animated history 👌
One of the greatest scenes in any form of media ever.👌
I think a beautiful representation of a caring person turned evil is the Arkham series Mr. Freeze. They tell Victors story in a way that shows he doesn’t want to do the things he does. He may be angry with the world for what happened to Nora, but he does everything out of a place of love. Every action he has done was to try and help save his wife, every day a reminder of the pain he goes through. Even his condition, the suit he wears, a constant reminder and a personification/characterization of his pain, his love and grief for his wife taking physical form through the torture of being confined in his suit. They end his story in a bittersweet ending, with Nora unfreezing and showing Victor that it’s ok to let her go because she understands that he could only let her go if he knew his one love was ok with passing. He spends his time with her in his final days, loving and caring for her the same way he did for all those years, ending it all with their deaths. Nora succumbing to her sickness, and Victor taking his own life for his one true love and removing his suit, hoping to be with her again in the afterlife
Arkham series is so damn good, need a replay soon
Freeze in Batman the animated series too.
He really is a tragic villain. His reasons were not only logical, they were understandable. His goal was noble. What makes him a villain is how he tries to reach that goal. He puts his own needs over those of others.
@@cagal1066 Includinbg him in Beyond Batman
I love how Miguel is shown to be wrong through Miles’ perspective being outside of what is expected of Spider-Man. Miles is doing his own thing and immediately recognizes that all the other Spider-Men are willing to sacrifice the ones they love to keep order, but he believes there must be another way. Took me by surprise and excited to see where it leads
I mean, that's literally the same lesson in Marvel's Spider-Man, when Peter have to choose between the civilians of New York and his beloved aunt May.
And he choose the city.
My only hope is that Miles' attempts to defy fate, or rather the continuity of his universe's timeline, so he doesn't have to sacrifice anything isn't as simple as him being able to save his father and that's it, otherwise it makes the stakes set up by the concept of disrupting "canon events" potentially dissolving realities lose a sense of danger or consequence.
The primary evidence that "canon events" can even be subverted without destabilizing realities is both Miles' and Prowler Mile's reality not dissolving when the Alchemax spider was transferred to Miles' reality and both their futures changed (even if Prowler Miles' world still suffered without a Spiderman and Miles' Peter was indirectly killed because reality was altered by the Collider's interference) Gwen's father abandoning his police captain "role" in his timeline, effectively being saved on a technicality (though maybe dooming the next police captain that replaces him to his fate, meaning a stranger and their loved ones would be suffering so Gwen can keep her father), so Miguel is partially incorrect over how destructive anomalies are (in a sense, "canon events" are like genes and anomalies are like viruses with the potential to either alter or destroy the systems they infect, as various Spider-Beings were mutated rather than killed by the events that made them Spider-Beings), but this was revealed by mistake, one that hypothetically could have doomed all three of their realities.
If Miles does save his reality and his father, the threat shouldn't just be Spot, it should primarily be Miles trying to find a similar technicality to Gwen, fighting with everything he's got and paying heavily to fight fate and win.
@@saintakira24it’s pretty clear in the movie that if the police chief doesn’t die the universe ends, it was shown many times through the entire film. It would be a cope out if the film makes say that Mike’s universe is special or something.
@@goastlyarrowplays But that's the thing, it's NOT clear, because it's also the same universe where a bunch of Spiders showed up and Spot destroyed that universe's Alchemax
We don't know if saving Singh destroyed the universe or if it went up in flames because the machine that opens holes through dimensions was blown apart
@@saintakira24 I'm always hearing about how he's projecting at it just doesn't sit right with me at all, it seems alot more like due to his guilt of destroying an entire universe he is no longer taking any chances or risks to make sure that no-one ever has to go through what he dud
19:10 that transition was clean
16:30 it’s worth noting that Gwen asks Miguel if breaking the canon is what destroys universes, raising the possibility that he’s been letting people die for nothing this whole time.
That'd make him an anti-villain : Wrong, and unknowingly so, but not for any bad intent, since we make take risks & make sacrifices all the time
Excerpt from my comment:
Spoiler warning:
What Miguel thinks is causing the corruption of the verses isn't actually due to people disrupting the "Cannon Events" that seem to happen to every Spider, he's done the age old blunder of confusing Correlation and Causation. What is actually happening here is that the verses are getting deleted due to an event called Incursion. That is caused by beings from one verse invading another and staying there for a length of time. Source: Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness
And what did Miguel do exactly in the verse that was deleted? That's right, he stayed in another verse where his "Cannon Event" didn't happen. That's why he is so focused on the to the exclusion of everything else. He's been blinded by his own folly. In fact what did he do immediately after the universe he invades got deleted? That's right, he gather even more invaders and went to other verses, endangering them in the process! He is the cause the the Incursions, and he is the reason why they keep happening!
@@ThisIsNotADrellI love the theory, but in Into the Spiderverse, the other spidermen were in Miles’ universe for days with no consequences outside of glitching. But less than a day in Pavitr’s (the Indian spiderman’s) universe was all it took for the beginning of a collapse? It just raises a lot of doubt in that theory.
@@rynnmediathe damage in Pavitri's universe is a direct result of Spot's actions, it has nothing to do with either cannon events or incursions. You can tell because the destruction of the universe Miguel was in Washington was very different than the black hole of Pavitri's universe.
As far as the first movie we don't know how long it takes an incursion to trigger a collapse and there are probably a lot of factors to that? I'm really hoping the third movie clears all of this up, especially since it seems to connect to the main MCU, which includes Loki and the new time stream.
@@RodneyG669 so it’s not due to stating in a different universe too long. But I recently heard that theory! The ONLY thing holding it back for me though is the implication that the other universes The Spot went to should’ve had the same destructions. But I suppose it’s only due to chance since I heard that the original Peter Parker said it could cause that black hole in the first movie to Kingpin. Maybe Miles got unlucky with it being the dimension he had just broke a canon event in?
19:08 That transition was clean af
Thanks!! I try my best haha
I was going to the comments to comment this too. Its soooo smooth
13:50 One must imagine doofenshmirtz happy
True
Underrated. Camus was on something else.
Actually I'm pretty sure Castelvania Dracula just wanted to destroy that one village and gave them time for them to pray for their God. But they saw it as symbol of weakness and celebrated day of his wife's death. That drove him absolute crazy. He warned them he told them and they just celebrated. Moreover this must be spread and those who was guilty for this were given even more power and fame for this.
I feel like when it comes to villains like this there’s one phrase from Fate/Stay Night that suits them well. “Just because you’re correct, doesn’t mean you’re right.”
"people die when they are killed" i watch fate too,well some.
@@bloodlove93 I will pleasure myself with this fish
peak fiction ✍️🔥🔥🔥💯💯❗❗
@@dean_l33 😟
Sometimes you really just gotta be the bone of your sword tho frfr
A hero would sacrifice one to save the world,
A villain would sacrifice the world to save one.
Or for their own gains.
Really? Le Greater Good argument? You're such a romantic sean... A hero would sacrifice themself. A villain would sacrifice someone else. Once you get into numbers you're definitely at villain school. I can't think of a hero who would sacrifice someone to stop say a Sharknado no he gets his chainsaw and he jumps into that whirlwind of teeth and fins. Even scifi movies know that much. Achilles was awesome because he went out there like a total boss. Noone cares about stupid king guy in his command tent.
"One" could be themselves
@@neate3127 only in movies
A True Hero would save both the world and the person
A True Villain would burn the world to torment one single person
Dr.Onda from Netflix’s Ultraman. He wants to kill all the Kaiju to keep the city safe. He dosent deny he wants revenge either, just saying that he isn’t a hunter. And in the end he evacuates his ship before making his final stand against ultraman and the Kaiju. Honestly I sympathized heavily with him.
@@saintakira24 the OG Ultraman and even following seasons have showcased that these Kaiju are "tragic beings". To quote Ishiro Honda, "Monsters are tragic beings. They are born too tall, too strong, too heavy. They are not evil by choice. That is their tragedy. They do not attack people because they want to, but because of their size and strength, mankind has no other choice but to defend himself. After several stories such as this, people end up having a kind of affection for the monsters. They end up caring about them."
I mean lets not forget that he tried to use a Self Destruct that was absolutely going to kill a million civilians in the blast radius. Because he was too blinded by grief and revenge against Ultraman for failing him.
@@fenrirsrage4609 exactly he is a villian but only because he let his emotions get the better of him. Otherwise he was just doing his job, killing the Kaiju.
@@saintakira24 Well they more villainized him during the ending. He was threat throughout the whole movie but became a villain when he tried to blow himself and thousands of civilians up. Only to kill two Kaiju and the ultramen. He became a villain when his grief over took him.
@@thehwguy4293It’s also proven that Kaiju can be tamed or controlled. People would se the controlling of a Kaiju as inhumane despite what the Kaiju themselves have done.
1:02 the whole plot of Naruto. Even the MC deserved to turn them around as a villain yet he didn't.
18:13 “Would Miles Morales become the villain if we followed Miguel” you genuinely had me pause the video and get chills just thinking about this
I mean Miles is literally doing something that will seemingly cause the end of the Multiverse, that was pretty obvious.
especially with that cliffhanger scene about another miles morales
I mean miles is pretty fodder in marvel, so if he piped up any of the heavy hitters could dogwalk him.
Ie Sentry, Thor, Captain Marvel, Hulk, Franklin Richards, Colossus, Jean Gray, Cable etc
From Miguel's perspective miles is gambling the entire multiverse for his father, a selfish path that 99 once took and is trying to stop miles from making the same mistakes, 99's overprotective nature would get more sympathy if we saw everything.
@@ltphantomknight8942 Don't forget that he wouldn't even be saving his father if the universe is destroyed.
Hell no, that Transition at 19:07 is the cleanest shit ever. This feels like watching a yt channel that has millions of subs. Amazing video!
Haha, I appreciate it! Trying to get good at editing so that really means a lot
9:44 "For instead of hunting a person or people, why not target a system?" Tai Lung did target the system. He attacked the Valley of Peace which enabled Oogway and Shifu. That was the only place where he was wrong; he attempted to hold the system accountable for the individual actions of those two. Oogway was the real villain in that he saw something that he considered an issue, but did nothing to address it and in doing so made it a self-fulfilling prophecy. Shifu failed in not defending his son after not noticing whatever developing shortcomings he had induced. Had Tail Lung limited his revenge/rage to those two, he would have been wholly justified.
That was the original story. The producers added the 'attacked the village' after the film had been completed because test audiences were overwhelmingly on the side of Tai Lung. He was getting too much sympathy and part of that was that Tai Lung was imprisoned for 20 years for the 'crime' of trying to take the scroll. Basically what you're talking about was added in post and is wildly out of character for Tai Lung even in a moment of distress. Tai Lung was right but the writers forced him to be 'wrong'.
@@Archedgar _Casually dismisses the writers' say as to what a character being "in character" means._
@@anonymousapproximation8549 Nope.
Better luck next time.
@@Archedgar The writers wanted a villain, so they needed to make the audience view him as a villain. Saying that Tai Lung is out of character because the writers wrote him to be a villain is a wild take.
@@anonymousapproximation8549they needed a Villain and made him make something out of character
you build a character and in the end you see "damm, that's not exactly what I wanted, let's make him do something stupid"
One thing I noticed about Miguel: he said that he "replaced" the little girls shot uncle.
Which even caused the eradication of "his" universe in the first place.
He did not alter the canon event, he completely erased it. And that is why the universe he was in collapsed.
If someone's right, that doesn't mean that their opponent is wrong. A villain always has a reason to do what they're doing, and the same goes to a hero. But when they encounter eachother a conflict happens because their interests and intentions are different, and from here wins the strongest.
Heroes don't need much in the way of motivation though. They are usually pretty simple characters - there's no need to give them depth. They are just good guys in general, want to do good, no further explanation needed. It's the villains that need complexity. A well-written villain needs a motivation that lets the audience understand just why the villain would act they way they do. Heroes don't need that.
Somehow your words remind me of an old chinese saying:
Every thing has three sides,
The one you see,
The one I see,
And the one we both don't see.
@@vylbird8014That’s a very simplistic view of heroes but sure lol
From here wins the Author who created the hero and villain. 😂
RULES OF NATURE
what if I don't want to be the bed guy anymore...
Yes the “bed” guy
I just wanna sleep man
You have school tomorrow, so you better learn to accept being the bed guy. 😠
Wake up
Pick a different character then? Like playing Bedman? Is a choice
donquixote doflamingo once said:
"The pirates are evil? The Marines are righteous?
These terms have always changed throughout history!
Kids who've never seen peace and kids who never saw war have different values.
Those who stand at the top determine what's right and whats wrong! This very place is a NEUTRAL ground!
Justice will prevail, you say? Of course it will! THOSE WHO WIN THE WAR BECOME JUSTICE!"
We later find out how he's the epitomy of villainy, Evil Incarnate.
He experienced gut-wrenching downfall from the top of society to the damn streets stealing bread. And he takes his anger out on the peasants who treated him for his former status. Yet we see he does this because of his mentality. He thinks he's a victim of society's cruelty, so he has a reason to be this evil, right?
WRONG. There is one other person who experienced the same thing he did, yet still became a good person. His brother, Corazon. He kills his brother to raise a kid with an uncurable disease, but the kid heard everything and understood he's gonna be used if he trusted doffy. He asks all the time on why sciety pity's the poor, yet dos nothing about it. He made a "family" of pirates only to use them without them being self-aware. His business as basically a drug lord left a nation shattered like meth in the 90's. He used to run a slave business placing innocent people into slavery. He used a member of his "family" to turn probably half of the nation which he usurped the OG ruler from, into TOYS. LIVING TOYS. They dont even remember thier past lives, nor do the people that knew them remember them either. His evilness ruined lives and impacted millions around the world, and yet the government turns a blind eye because of his status as warlord.
i agree with everything you stated.. but one. he didn't kill corazon for the kid. it was because corazon ended up being outed as an undercover agent for the marines. it was just that finally finding something that cured the kid. that being the op-op fruit. was what ended up getting him found out.
I mean pirates break laws that people put up to protect people and marines enforce those laws to make sure no one breaks them and they all live happy lives so...
The government didn't turn a blind eye because of his Warlord status. They didn't even know half of what was really going on until the events of Dressrosa. They turned a blind eye just because he was a Celestial Dragon and the fact that he has some very sensitive knowledge that they don't want getting out.
@@Drums_of_Liberation Doffy ran the slavery rings on the archipeligo. The Celestials Frequented it.. they 100% turned a blind eye to EVERYTHING doflamingo did.
@@romanplays1 my bad
0:28 Beowulf is Old English. If there is an Old Norse counterpart, it would be býulfr
"If you can't understand why someone would defend the argument you are attacking, you havent gotten it yet."
Yeah there's some major flaws with that logic
Counterpoint: Some people are very stupid
That's what "can't understand" means..... No?
Most people only attack straw men
@@Pybrosherkwhat flaws?
In imaginary scenarios in which it’s black and white, then sure, it doesn’t apply. It mere applies to reality
“Heroes are right in action
Villains are right in reason”- wise guy
Action > Thought
@@someone-wo5nu False. You have to think before you act.
That’s not always true. Some villains are simply just evil or irrational
The amount of times you bring up Grendal and Beowulf makes me think this was a video made for either a High school or college presentation lol
13:51 "This prison...to HOLD ME?"
Beat me to it.
3:00 I believe he does that purely to punish Puss' arrogance as he leaves him alone once he sees that he stopped being like that.
19:07 that hard cut between the two characters was so satisfying. Masterful editing right there. Peace ❤️
I think Tai Lung stopped being right the moment he destroyed and razed a village just because they told him "no".
No one disagrees with you here man.
*>"If you complete this brutal training for many years & manage to beat these nigh-impossible tests, you will be rewarded."*
*>"No. You did everything we said but we changed our mind. Go fkk yourself."*
Nah. Tai Lung was right and it was his masters that failed him, not the other way around.
Justified in his anger, but the actions he took afterwards were nowhere near justified
It was way more than being told no. Edit: Not saying he’s completely justified but it’s more than simply not getting what you want.
Society is a double-sided contract. Once it was violated by lying aboit guaranteed status, the guy voided the contract. The normal reaction would be to find a "appropriate response for a minor violation" but that does not exist in fictional worlds.
When you mentioned Dr. Doof i lost it lol it caught me off guard with the line up you had going 😂
"There is no right, only the least wrong." is a quote i feel fits this sort of topic really well.
Is what the vile people preach to make their villainy seem less. Of course there is right and wrong in "things" the issue is there are too many "things."
It's a rhetoric that works only to an extent, as it can easily be used as an excuse for questionable behavior, a sentiment of adapting to harsh situations by making questionable decisions twisted into one about dismissing the possibility of there ever being better solutions, that moral lines can simply be not just thin or blurred but erased completely when it becomes inconvenient to uphold them.
In moderation, it suggests courage and humility to be willing to do things people may not want to, but in excess, it encourages cynicism intellectual and emotional laziness.
For me I saw "There is no right, only who is left."
And it was from a Roblox game of all things.
@@therandomscout6590 dw bro some roblox games drop some crazy quotes every now and then
@@therandomscout6590 That's also a pun. Don't know if it's intentional, but it is one.
The cool thing about Dracula is that he gave the humans who killed his wife many, many years to apologies and they never did, only then did he attack them after they celebrated the murder of his wife
He gave them one year to say sorry. Not multiple.
@everythingsalright1121 oh my bad I thought I remembered one of the towns people looking really old after, I haven't watched the show in awhile so thanks
He make me think of Davy Jones.
His motivation: unjust death of a loved one. Understandable.
His goal: Redemption for said loved one. Also understandable.
But it fails, which brings us to:
His method: Uncontrolled violence. Not understandable.
@@HappyBeezerStudios He straight up lost his mind IMO.
It took the confrontation with Alucard for him to snap back to being the person who he had become after meeting his wife and realize what he had done and how wrong it was.
The one thing that bugged me was that she ended up in hell. Nothing she ever did in any way was portrayed as anything but what would earn one a place in heaven. Healer, "reformer of monsters" and scholar to name the few we were shown.
Though if you think about it if she had gone to the "good place" then they would have been separated in such a way he would never be able to be with her again.
The more you grow, the more you understand villains
Great video, especially the end segment, its such a perfectly put together Formula of the 3 choices. 18:44
That transition in 19:09 was increidble. Great editing
I am currently writing a novel about antagonists who've learned of their ultimate fate before the story even begins, but are trapped by the machinations of the narrative to thread the same path towards destruction. No matter how many good deeds they've done, they will always be villain in the eye of the world and the protagonists.
This video cannot come at a better moment. The timing is so perfect it almost feels predestined.
Genuinely thought my youtube was glitching out, this deserves at least hundreds of thousands of views.
Keeping Beowolf as a comparative narrative thread is top tier video essay story telling. Fantastic video!
Wow, thanks! :)
@@scrawlswhat about Zemo from the MCU and Damien Anderson from Creed 3 were their actions justified?
That transition between Miguel and Wolf was 👌🤌
According to a friend:
A villain is only a hero from which you don't know the story
@@cameron6740 Nope.
@@bloodrinker Fascinating argument, captain.
Right? Like that can be eadily disputed@@bloodrinker
2 things,
First, Miguel doesnt have vampire fangs, he has spider fangs, and some spiders have really big fangs.
Second, that transition at 19:08 was IMMACULATE. 🤌🏿🤌🏿 Bravo.
Nice essay! I love hearing about villains who sorta have a point
the transition at 19:08 was insane keep on with those clean edits
What separates a villain from an antagonist is their actions. An antagonist can be good or have a clear moral, while a villain must cross the line in some form. For example, in Arcane, Jinx is a villain because while her motives are sympathetic, her action of destroying the building window and risking innocent lives goes beyond being angry at the system and into indiscriminate cruelty. Meanwhile, Miguel may be angry at the world for his choice to try and find his daughter, but he never tries to murder Miles or threaten the life of his family out of spite. He tries to protect the multiverse and that's it.
I saw a video, where i saw a really good definition of the protagonist/antagonist: The main problem/issue/situation that drives the story forward is the agon, and the characters on either side of the agon are protagonist/ antagonist, depends on your perspective.
A 'villain', on the other hand, is someone who has evil goals and evil intentions.
Silco was the protagonist of Arcane.
@@SomeGuy1234X Really? I didn't know that. I thought it was Vi.
19:07 the transition is just chef kisses ❤❤❤
You just start talking about Beowulf, very convenient since one of my classes in school happens to be reading Beowulf. Thanks for helping me on a test :D
The transition at 19:05 was really well done. One villain to another, both giving almost the same look. I hope someone else noticed it. Great video overall too :)
1:42 i thought it was the immortal snail
Another legendary villain in the right
9:19 "Fathers, masters, gods and kings should not go by unquestioned" what a nice quote, where is it from? I couldn't find a source. If it's original, I like it, that's some nice writing right there.
Agreed
When I heard that my first thought was that it was metal
I think it's less that they were right and more that they had a point. I mean, Tai Lung wasn't right to go on the rampage that he did, but his world DID kinda get turned upside down. I mean, imagine being told that you were gonna be someone great when you were old enough, and you worked your ass off to be worthy of that greatness, only to get told "Nah, bad vibes." I would be pissed too.
19:01 had the coldest transition I’ve ever seen
11:43
correction: she DID NOT choose to kill him. It was an accident caused by a deep emotional outburst, since Jinx's mind is so screwed up with trauma. She immediately tried to apologize and hoped he would stay with her, but it failed.
In actuality, the "nation of Zaun" deal wasn't really complete, anyway. Silco still had to agree to hand Jinx to the authorities in order to have that, but at this point he didn't trust them. His own words, "everyone else betrays us", "it's only us", that us being him and Jinx.
If there was one person he was expecting would make that change was JINX. She, in his mind, embodied the chaos, the tragedy, the loneliness, the madness and the power of the undercity. It's a big reason why he loved her at first sight as a daughter. So much so he couldn't hand her away to seal the independence deal. "Is there anything so undoing as a daughter?"
And, shockingly, his decision to save her was apparently RIGHT: in bombing the council, now we see in the teaser trailer Caitlyn call the undercity "Zaun" instead of the undercity or the Fissures or bottom. JINX MADE THE CHANGE HAPPEN.
... can you tell I love this show?
Yes I can tell
You NEED to check out schnee's analyses of Arcane. I started with his "How Arcane Writes Women" and "...Men" and I'm hooked on his analysis of anything now.
@@Xenozfan2 buddy... I am ALREADY hooked on Schnee's stuff! All his videos on Arcane are legendary, basically. Heck, of anything in general. It's so in-depth and just keeps your brain blasting again and again and again!
To be honest one villain I almost cried at when there story ended was transformers armada series star scream to put it simple he goes through the story questioning what he is and who he should be for the end to find his purpose and he sacrifices himself to show where unicron is and fires the most powerful attack he has using his minicon in the process. And right before unicron attacks and ends him he throws the star saber and ejects his minicon and then falls. And all megatron can say is what a hero he was and takes the time to morn. The lost of him even stops fighting the autobots to cope with the loss and when the other desipicons start saying how useless stars team was megatron tells them that he was the best warrior he new and helps fight unicron in star screams name. That’s how I remember star scream starting a villain and sacrificing himself as a hero. That a villain I love to see.
This video is a great piece. I do understand more and more the viewpoint of a villain. The main point is that villains are not born. They are made. This is a never ending cycle in existence. Great job.
I feel this question was best demonstrated well in My Hero especially the concept of a society that creates villains, who determines evil & the philosophies therein.
I had to drop my hero because the paper thin motivation of the villains and the author kept trying to make us be sympathetic to straight up evil characters.
Then the ending came and we find out that the entire fight was useless because society overall has not changed or healed at all, thus in the future another Tomura Shigaraki, another All for One, and another League of Villains will be created and rejected by a flawed and corrupt society. Not to mention the quirk singularity theory means that human extinction is inevitable, prolly in a couple generations.
@@anusaukko6792except society did change otherwise granny would have made the same mistake with that kid that escaped his family's basement and we wouldn't have Uraraka pushing for better quirk counseling to prevent more Togas being born. And the fact that the manga literally stated that villains have been rising less and less to the point that fewer heroes are needed. How about you actually read the ending before spreading misinformation. And you can't realistically expect everything to be perfect in a small time frame of eight years
@@Drums_of_Liberation Maybe read MHA instead of a fanfic dude. None of that happened.
And to a degree that works, as in an effort to create order, enforce law and civility, there are still constant imperfections that attempting to stomp out completely risks an excess of order, an oppressive system with harsh punishment of anything that doesn't fit inside it.
But on the opposite extreme, there being no limitations, no restrictions, no order at all, an excess of freedom devolving into chaos, is even more overtly destructive and savage, in My Hero Acadamia's case, the various Quirks seeking to destroy society to make a world that suits only them at the expense of everyone else (and technically themselves, as they may have great powers, but that doesn't mean they'd be able survive or thrive in a world of supernaturally powered criminals fighting and destroying everything).
Both are extremes, both are excesses, and villains in various stories often embody one of these extremes, the flaws of the system and the flaws within the individual, and how harmful they can be to others.
Heroes meanwhile either fight to protect the balance in that system or seek to remove as many of its flaws as they can however they can.
Either way, its a characters relationship with that system, how they respond to its discontents, that is often what decides wether they are a hero or a villain, and beyond that, what kind of hero or villain they are.
And yes, I just described the Alignment Chart in Dungeons & Dragons.
It’s definitely too early for us to say Miguel is right or wrong.
Also Beowulf is English, not specifically Nordic. It takes heavy inspiration from Nordic tales, but it isn’t Nordic itself. Grendel is an awful, evil villain, even if his mother mourns him.
Miguel is clearly wrong. The fact that the three spider people tasked to chase miles at the end all don’t have “canon” Spider-Man stories is enough to know that the writers are critiquing his world view.
The fact HE caused that other reality to crumble, TELLS us he did, and expects us to take his side is just dumb.
@@mylesiswhite4122 no, Miguel could be right, that fact only means that they haven’t had their canon event yet. It’s entirely possible that Miles is the only exception, due to his entire existence as a spider-man being an anomaly. We also don’t even know if Miles is an exception either, even if we expect a good ending, we may not see one.
@@nexus_keeper Miguel got his powers from a failed experiment (and literally doesn’t have spider sense), Ben Reilly is a clone, spider woman is the creation of the high evolutionary by splicing different genes in an embryo. None of these are canon Spider-Man origin stories yet they claim miles to be the anomaly??
@@mylesiswhite4122 1) We don’t know if any of those stories are accurate to these versions.
2) Yeah, that still makes miles an anomaly. He got the powers that were supposed to go to another universes spider-man, which is clearly an anomaly on a completely different scale than the other examples you provided. The other examples stay in-universe, and we don’t know what classifies an anomaly, but if Miles isn’t one, than there are no anomalies.
Side note: miguel not having spider sense, or most of the spider powers isn’t a big deal. Variation in character, powers and even who spider-man’s true identity is are very common.
dude this some epic stuff, u earned a sub mate. 1:10 was 🔥 🔥
"... I hope you enjoy..." AREEE YOUUU KIDDING ME!!!! This is gold! This has to be very best video I've seen this year...
Incredible video man, I’m so glad this popped up on my feed. This is why I love stories. Don’t get me wrong, a good ol good vs. bad can be amazing to watch, but as I’ve grown as a person it’s so cool to dive into stories where the villains are relatable and the heroes are flawed. I find a certain comfort in seeing myself in these characters, knowing that my flaws are valid and I’m doing my best. Art is such a cool thing, thanks for your deep dive into these characters!
This reminds me of my favorite book, Lady Midnight. The villian they're chasing is trying to bring their lost love back from the dead, and when they realize they they have a whole discussion on how if it was them they're not sure if they'd do any different. The villian is killing people to fuel necromancy, but they still question if they're in the right because they sympathize with them.
15:45 Technically that dude aint even spiderman. he genetically enhanced himself into a spider-vampire hybrid and took the old mantle of his spiderman from his world.
well someone had to take the role of spiderman in his universe.. in earth 42, prowler miles' universe, theres no spiderman and everything descends into chaos
That is incorrect.
A. Miguel did not take the mantle of a pre-existing Spider-Man from his world(unless you mean Peter Parker from over 80 years before), that is a fan theory and not yet confirmed to be canon(insert 2099 sound effect).
B. Genetic enhancement is exactly how Miguel becomes Spider-Man in the comics and in all other source material in which he is a hero.
C. Other Spider-Beings like Jessica Drew, Ben Reilly, or Pavitr Prabhakar are clones or got their powers from magic, and they're still Spider-Man/Woman.
Don't mean to be disrespectful, this just seems to be a common misconception.
Technically, he is and always has been.
That makes him way better than all of the carbon copies.
😅
Honestly, this is the best video I’ve ever seen. Depicting villains, who are the other side of the story, in a way that makes us feel as if they deserve more than just being thrown away by society. Monsters who are literally just doing what they were made to do, it’s like when a hero is right just cause he gets to defend the people from the villain, but in this case, the hero was never there to for the up and coming villain to stop him from going down the WRONG path.
So it’s always a question of who is right and who is wrong, but never a, Is the hero just as wrong for not wanting/ not being able to save everybody?’
In a story the antagonist doesn’t have to be a villain.
Reminds me of the "sympathy for the monster" video someone did reguarding shin godzilla
Haven’t watched that one, but I was definitely inspired by the creator of that vid! Curious Archive I believe
@@scrawls yeah, I think you should give it a watch
when i watched miguel o'hara explain canon events, he suddenly didn't feel like a villain, and i didn't know who to root for. for the rest of the movie, i was unsure, almost, about whether miguel was in the wrong.
Prepare for trouble
Don't root for anyone
He's in the wrong because it's a subversion of the entirety of spider-man's story, you don't sit there and let the villain run past, because the promoter screws you out of money, with great power comes great responsibility. You always TRY to save them and sometimes you fail, and then you get back up and try again.
The talk of different perspectives on things and the story of Sisyphus reminds me of a quote I heard, "For even in the story of Sisyphus there is the chance to find a hero. Because the difference between an indomitable hero and a tragic victim is one has hope and the other despair. And it all rest in the mind of Sisyphus." I don't recall where I heard it and probably not completely accurate but gets the point across.
So many things are a matter of perspective. As the same thing can happen to multiple people but those who get back up and push forward in hope after such events we see as heroes. While those who use that pain and anger to lash out at the world seeking to cause pain we see as villains. And lastly those who retreat into despair closing off from the world we see as victims.
I can't help but think Miguel caused Miles to become Spider-man because HE left his universe just so he could have a family. He's probably just projecting all his guilt and shame onto Miles.
Oh dang thats a good theory
I would say you are wrong there. Miles is literally willing to risk having billions die for the chance that he can save his dad. That is literally the same thing King Pin did in the last movie.
@epicsavagebros7400 true but that's what Miguel for his family, he destroyed a entire universe because he was selfish and couldn't handle the death of his wife and child
@@jamesvest1306at that point Miguel didn’t know that would happen (I could be remembering wrong)
But does this really apply to miles. We have to remember that he technically isn't his worlds original Spiderman who died in the first film. With this in mind, does the canon events still apply to him?
The way I see it is that just because a villain is right doesn't necessarily mean they are in the right
Villains who have good intention but do bad things are always the most interesting ones
Debatable
And sometimes you can get villiians like Emperor Palpatine who loves rolling around in evil, violence and chaos like a pig rolling around in slop and he can still be just as good
Only few villains have truly good intentions (the anti-villains), but the most times is more an wrong intentions or a radical and fake view of the world who is reputed right and realistic by the spectator
One of the best youtube videos I've ever encountered, one that reminds me of the depth of our childhood 😍