sympathetic antagonist

3

Mego’s 1976 Nubia doll, Wonder Woman’s cool silver-streak haired opponent and counterpart, who is basically Faith to Wonder Woman’s Buffy: a sympathetic antagonist. Compare it to the doll in the current Wonder Woman series, as compared to the current reissue. The comic character did not have Nubia’s silver streak hair or love of silver, which makes the doll cool looking.

Not friendly at all reminder that “you have to learn that not every person can be saved” is a garbage moral.

You, personally, are not obligated to save everyone you meet. But “some people just inherently cannot be saved, by you, themselves, or anyone” is garbage.

Can we please stop acting like pure evil irredeemable villains are novel or interesting. They’re not. They’re literally the norm, and they’re frequently absurd grotesque caricatures, often of mentally ill people and often of people who have experienced trauma.

I feel like I cannot make a post of any kind of even vaguely sympathetic read on any antagonistic character without at least one person jumping on the post like “but Clockie, can’t we just have someone with no morals, qualms, or sad backstory that we can just hate and watch the heroes demean and attack without any remorse?”

I really absolutely promise it is possible to feel bad for someone and want them to do better without justifying all of their behavior. It is actually completely possible to hold “you sure did kill that guy” and “you sure are coming from an awful place that hurt you a lot” at the same time without one devaluing the other. 

You know, if I could change ONE thing about Moffat’s Doctor Who run, just one thing that I think would honestly make it more watchable (though certainly not save it completely) 

-Do not make River Song and Melody Pond the same person. 


Like, I know Moffat thinks that this twist was really clever. But it’s not.

River Song: Badass time traveler who meets the Doctor out of order and they have a flirty, whirlwind romance? Really fun idea.

Melody Pond: The child of his companions, stolen in infancy, raised to be an assassin? Maybe a little harder to sell, but has potential to be a real sympathetic antagonist. 

But meshing them into the same person? Totally defangs Melody’s potential as an antagonist AND makes River’s romance weird and gross. 

But I guess having more than 2 recurring female characters in the cast wouldn’t have been wibbly wobbly enough for DipShit McGee. 

takashi-allura  asked:

i know you didn't like the third season very much (neither did I for obvious reasons), but what did you like and what are looking forward to season 4.

i’m really glad you asked this because i’ve been meaning to do a positive post about S3 so HERE IT IS:

things i liked about S3, in no particular order:

  • episode 7. just… the whole thing was glorious okay. i loved it. i mean…
    • WE GOT LORE?!?! WORLDBUILDING?!?!! INFO ABOUT THE LIONS?!?!?! FINALLY?!!?!?
    • the fact that Alfor was a huge nerd with zero chill is hilarious to me
    • Alfor: “…oh dear” GOD WHAT A MOOD
    • ZARGAR IS FRIKKING CANON I CANNOT HECKIN BELIEVE MY DUDES that was such a crackship and it’s canon?!?!?
    • Zarkon was actually a huge dork who didn’t know how to talk to pretty people and i love that
    • for all the talk that Lotor was gonna be this “sympathetic antagonist” i actually ended up feeling most sympathy for Zarkon. i mean he’s still an evil asshole but the Zargar storyline was so tragic and sad like i did not expect to have these feels about Zargar BUT I DO
    • the fact that Zarkon now has this incredible depth which was only hinted at before just makes him so much more complex. he was always interesting to me as a villain but even more so now
    • Honerva: my cat is sick better break all the ethical codes of science to keep him alive
    • THE OG PALADINS I LOVE ALL OF THEM Blaytz is my fave i want him to hug me in his big blue bara arms
    • ALFOR
    • DID
    • THE
    • PALADIN
    • EYE
    • GLOW
    • I HAVE SCREAMED SO MUCH ABOUT THIS but that was highkey the most exciting thing about S3 for me like HOLY HECK
    • the fact that Altean Shiro is so much closer to being canon now is afksdhgaiefjsdfkldf
  • Also: Lotor! “you might have mixed feelings about him!” nah fam he’s just a huge manipulative evil asshole AND I LOVE IT he’s like Purple Loki fam i can’t get enough miss me with the redemption arcs just let him be gloriously evil that’s all i ask
  • lbr i’m never gonna be a fan of lion switching but Allura yelling: “Hunk! I’m a leg!” and Hunk going “Pretty cool, right?” was the cutest thing
  • the fact that everyone struggled in the Lions was something i wanted to see before S3 and i’m glad that paid off
  • everyone missed Shiro?!? and talked about what he meant to them?! and i was very upset but also i am glad they talked about it
  • ALLURA!!!!! WORE PINK!!!!!!! TO HONOUR SHIRO!!!!!!!!!!!!
    • be still my shipper heart I CAN’T IT HURTS TOO MUCH
  • not a huge fan of episode 4 but Sven and AU Slav were adorable
  • Lotor’s generals were also awesome
    • Axca: [exists]
    • Me: please punch me in the face
  • Lance and Hunk are doing?? so well???? they were both really mature and competent and good at things this season and i really liked that. Lance in particular was way more than just “the flirty guy” and i really appreciated his emotional maturity and his scenes with Allura and just… in general Lance made me proud this season
  • FLEXIBLE BAYARDS IS CANON i love that so much
    • Lance fully becoming the team’s sharpshooter? AMAZING
    • and it adds so much weight to that line at the end of Beta Traz when Shiro says “that’s why we bring our sharpshooter” because Shiro believed that Lance was the team sharpshooter BEFORE ANYONE ELSE DID and now… that’s who Lance is and i just… i cry a lot okay it means a lot to me
  • i always loved Allura and thought her role was great and powerful but seeing her as a Paladin did let us see a different side of her and that was fun. i’m not gonna say it was “better” cos i think that devalues what she contributed before, but we saw her in a different light, and gripes about her not being Black’s pilot aside i thought she did some cool things as a Paladin
    • her impression of Lance is iconic 
    • we saw her strength in pushing down her emotions and hurt in order to continue with the mission and UGH MY HEART

In terms of what i’m looking forward to in S4… mostly what i want is to find out what happened to Real Shiro and GET HIM BACK, THANK YOU. i’m kinda curious about how the whole stuff about the comet is going to work out but mostly i’m still stuck in “but where is Shiro?!” mode lol

anonymous asked:

What are your thoughts on Luke Castellans character?

he’s a well crafted, interesting, and sympathetic antagonist. he serves a great narrative purpose, particularly in relation to percy (he’s simultaneously a mirror and a foil which is very difficult to do within the same character bc they’re literary opposites). his motivations are compelling, his backstory is sympathetically tragic, his redemption arc is well-established and has a lot of buildup, and his role as a victim really adds a compelling component to his antagonism.

luke himself i fucking hate. the consequences of his actions are far reaching and catastrophic, and sometimes things are just too little too late. and his relationship with annabeth is…horrifying, and completely inexcusable in any context. my sympathy for you is always maxed out once you start inflicting your own suffering on other people. and i am like forever done with fawning over white male cis straight characters with complicated backstories.

100 Warrior Cat Challenge: 26. Hollyleaf

She’s beauty, she’s grace, she-deserved-so-much-better-like-how-can-you-fuck-her-arc-up-she-was-literally-giftwrapped-to-becoming-a-future-leader-or-an-awesome-sympathetic-and-intimitating-antagonist-like-how-is-it-even-possible-that-you-ignored-all-that-and-gave-her-a-half-assed-redemption arc-when-all-that-potential-was-smacking-you-in-the-face

Unpopular Opinion: no the books are not always better


I loved “Legend of the Seeker”; despite its flaws there was a strong streak of humour, badass women, a sympathetic antagonist, and was a fun fantasy romp.
What was not fun was the books they were based on. I tried, I really tried to read the first book. It was awful. Trite. Dull. And when I skipped ahead to meet Denna, who was amazing in the show, it was bunch of Mary-Sue-esque bull.

Same for the “Shannara Chronicles”; falling in love with Eretria in particular I thought I’d check out book two which the series is based on…her story is completely different.

Is there more depth to the “Harry Potter” novels? Yes but you can’t put all of Neville’s story onscreen, it wouldn’t work, much as I wish we’d seen more of him. (And they kept the epilogue I hated so I side-eye both of them.) On the other hand, adaptations of Michael Crichton novels tend to be less casually sexist than his books.

Sometimes the books and adaptation have little in common beyond the names (Eragon, anyone?). “Queen of the Damned” bears little relation to the Anne Rice novel.
And I’m forever grateful that “True Blood” let Lafeyette live and focussed on something other than Sookie. Likewise I’m two novels into the “Midnight, Texas” Harris series and the trailer looks ten times more exciting than both of them put together, the books plodding along teasing character reveals at a glacial pace.

So when people bang on how “the books are better”…in my experience they often are not. Maybe we need to consider them as separate entities.

anonymous asked:

The things that bothers me is the fact that Derek never got an apology from Stiles and Scott for accusing him of murdering his sister! He never seemed to get a peptalk from anyone the way Scott always did, and that dumbass writer only make Derek seem he was only useful when he was sleeping with random women and getting tortured.

Yeah, what’s completely insane to me, anon, is that apparently JD did not expect people to like Derek. He wrote this guy with this haunting, tragic backstory, starts off the show with his sister being murdered, shows an entire season of him doing everything possible to keep these oblivious, infuriating teens alive while hunters and Alphas lurk around every corner, then have the season climax with him being imprisoned and tortured by his abuser, and forced to kill his last living family member to protect the town despite how much we saw him aching to be able to stand with him, to have family again… and he wasn’t supposed to be likable?? This is something that will never not confuse me, anon, but I guess it explains why Derek didn’t get any kind of support in season one. He was apparently meant to be a flat out antagonist and JD & the writers just missed the mark by a half-dozen ballparks.

*sighs*

…I do have to wonder if there’s something to the fact that I was just slightly older than the intended audience? I was in my early twenties watching this show, and found Scott’s obsession with lacrosse and Allison instead of, you know, survival, infuriating. But I was talking to someone at one point who was in her mid-teens when the show started and did identify with Scott’s issues, and did find Derek to be an antagonistic character, because she was seeing things through Scott’s perspective and that’s how Scott saw him. Since then (as she’s gotten older) she’s rewatched the first season and has ended up seeing things in a more similar way to how I’ve always viewed them, so I’m really curious if there is just an age element at play (or possibly an “emotional distancing from high school drama” at play) that separates the people who saw Derek as sympathetic vs antagonistic in season one.

Thoughts?

anonymous asked:

Hi Dye, do you have any advice for making characters more dynamic? I tend to see things in black and white (it's a bad habit I'm trying to break) and I think it reflects a lot in my writing, especially when trying to make protagonists flawed and antagonists sympathetic. I think my own feelings of wanting to defend the protagonist and dislike the antagonist get in the way. How do you separate yourself from your characters?

This is a really great question! This is an important thing to think about, and here are some of my opinions that can hopefully get you started:

  • Pull from your own experiences: When has someone you loved (hero) made a mistake that really hurt you? When has someone you disliked (villain) done something sweet to you or revealed a really good reason for acting the way they do?
  • Also keep in mind the difference between what makes someone a hero or villain. Heroes and villains are both flawed, but a hero will ultimately apologize and/or improve, while a villain will eventually make excuses and continue hurting people. This step isn’t immediate, a protagonist can struggle to improve for their entire story, but ultimately what makes them someone worthy of being the main character?
  • This last point is more of a personal preference, but I think the goal isn’t  (and shouldn’t be) to make sympathetic villains, but realistic villains. As a writer, your job isn’t to force sympathy onto anyone. Creators actually don’t have 100% control on who audiences will like– embrace that. Your goal shouldn’t be to write a sympathetic villain, but one who makes sense and has their own sense of logic and reason.

anonymous asked:

Question on the ice crew au- how would Kent Parson treat his ice crew? ((((can we expect him in the pt. 2?))))

So, tbh, I had not thought about Kent Parson in the Ice Crew AU world bc in my head he sort of doesn’t exist…

But, let’s assume he does exist (though he and Jack didn’t play together on the Q) and going with more my canon thoughts on Parse, I would have to say that Kent Parson may be one of the loneliest people in the whole world.

Except, very very differently from Jack. Jack never saw the point of putting on a mask of happiness, of caring about anything other than hockey, of pretending but–

Kent Parson is probably buddies with all the members of his team. He probably goes out to lunch after practice and goes out to bars after games and he is the most charismatic hockey-bro to ever exist and as such, he doesn’t really talk to his ice crew at all. If he sees them in the hallway, he probably gives them a “hey, what’s up, man?” because everyone passing Kent Parson in the hallway gets a “hey, what’s up, man?” but Parse never slows down to hear the answer (and if they manage to say “good you?” Parse will keep walking and smiling and say some variation of “awesome” or “going good!” or “ready for this next one!”)

(Parson always keeps walking and smiling. He’s always awesome.)

So the ice crew of the Aces likes Kent Parson the way everyone in Las Vegas likes Kent Parson. He’s funny and personable and great at hockey and, dear god, he’s so fucking lonely he doesn’t know what to do, but he knows to hide it.

(He has to hide it. No one can know.)

Kent Parson sleeps with girls when he can’t get out of it. He flirts with them always. He “dates” supermodels for a few months at a time to get people off his case and tells reporters (with a smile and an bashful head duck that he knows is adorable) that his “ideal night” is “doing something small and romantic with a beautiful woman who can make me laugh and doesn’t mind my terrible cooking.”

(Really, his ideal night is staying out until 3am with his teammates and then going home and snuggling up with his cat and passing out before he can think about how empty his apartment is.)

(He doesn’t let himself think about what his actual ideal night would be. Never.)

Kent Parson doesn’t let himself take those type of risks. He doesn’t get too drunk in front of his teammates. He doesn’t try to sneak to gay bars and hook up that way. He wipes his computer history every time he watches porn (and never saves any of it) and jokes just the right amount about his “bromance” with his teammates and prays, prays, prays that no one will ever figure out how rehearsed it all is. How rehearsed he is. 

(He whispered it aloud to Kitt Purson once. At 11am in the morning on his day off as she purred against his chest and for no real reason, tears were pricking against his eyelids, he’d just said it: I’m gay. I’m gay and I hate this. He hadn’t let himself cry for long, had blinked in tears until they cooled the stripe of heat behind his eyes and stared at the ceiling and willed the headache to go away and she’d stayed and let him hold her a little too tightly and he thinks that maybe its all for the best, that he couldn’t love anyone as much as he loves her in that moment.)

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

Reading fics with galra/altean Keith that were written before s2, it seems like a lot of them were like "You're Galra, which is bad, but you're also Altean, which is good! So it cancels out" which is kinda. I want to say childish but that's kind of an insult to children's book series that do treat issues of heritage with more nuance than that.

I mean, I find that personally pretty hilarious since now that we have a canon half-galra half-altean, like…

The writers have been saying for a while now that Lotor’s going to be kind of relatable and sympathetic as an antagonist, that he has a sense of honor, like three hundred counts of “he’s not like his father” that he’s going to be “complicated” and nuanced and in practice, one of his immediate subordinates worked with Keith and Hunk and then went on to spare Keith and leave him with most of the scaultrite- and said subordinate is part of a group of women Lotor’s putting in highly influential positions, one of whom is disabled, and all of whom would seem to be half-galra hybrids and potentially looked down upon by the empire.

All of this suggests Lotor is probably going to be straddling that antihero/antivillain line, except, way more than Sendak or Zarkon or Haggar I’ve seen a lot of people gleefully talking about how much they want Lotor to be beaten up, humiliated, mocked, threatened, etc.

Which, like… is in really bad taste considering one of the pretty dang common elements of Lotor’s character is that Zarkon’s an abusive parent and Lotor half the time can barely stand him.

So not only does Altean lineage redeem a character from that Inherently Evil Galra Heritage but it apparently only does that when they’re your fave…

No yeah my all time least favorite trope is definitely “members of x race are Inherently Good or Inherently Evil and any exceptions to that prove absolutely nothing.”

I’m seriously tempted to start up a tag of “Thace Didn’t Die For This” on posts of people acting like the galra as a species are uniformly vicious and awful, and it isn’t a product of Zarkon being a tyrant for the last ten thousand years and pushing his ideas about how they should be onto them.

One of these days I’m gonna rant about how underused Nikolaj Coster-Waldau’s talent is when it comes to Jaime Lannister because we know he can pull off the morally-grey sympathetic antagonist thing given his season 2/3 arc and it’s fucking killing me that Benioff and Weiss went back on that arc completely and have been beating the same dead horse of a plot for fucking ever and I am so. done. 

heya i’m heart and i think i’ll jump on the su crit bandwagon because i love facilitating discussion and have noticed a drop in the quality of su. by no means do i dislike the show - i very much enjoy it - but like i said, i’ve noticed a dip in quality and stimulating discussion will hopefully help everyone a bit more!! here are some of my relevant opinions

- i love bismuth and find her sympathetic, she deserved better
- amethyst is my favorite character
- i’m also very interested in lapis as a complex, morally gray character. she’s a character i see a lot of wasted potential in so i might spend a lot of time exploring what could have been
- i think navy is a sympathetic antagonist and i’m rooting for her
- favorite fusions are sugilite, stevonnie, and smokey quartz
- i’m not too worried about the colors - in my personal subjective opinion i enjoy bright colors - but the height inconsistencies bother me
- although i do like darker blue lapis redesigns, ESPECIALLY with gold accents! lapis is one of my favorite gemstones in real life

i also might post some rwby crit from time to time ALTHOUGH rwby is my special interest making it harder for me to criticize & i’d rather avoid actual hate, only constructive criticism

anonymous asked:

Hi! i'm not really sure how to state my question but could you please write a meta about Caroline, Elena, Hayley and Camille turning into a vampire and dealing/teaching with that? like the attitude to special snowflakes and to our baby Caroline?

Disclaimer: This post is anti-Hayley, anti-Camille, anti-Elena and anti-TO/TVD, read at your own discretion!

Originally posted by shameless-stella

Right, I get it, so a general meta on why TVD and TO sucks ass with their female characters and why Caroline is the best? You phrased it fine by the way.

Also this was written late, late into the night and most likely contains grammatical errors I missed in my read through. Sorry. Please enjoy my 6000+ word vomit. I love all of you.


Obviously we all know that the writers and producers have no idea what feminism is or what it means, so I think it’s important to state that I can barely recall main female characters on the show that actively chose to become a vampire. Some are: Katherine, Lily Salvatore, Aurora de Martel, Valerie Tulle.

Even the ones that did turn out of their own free will, did not do it because they wanted to be vampires, but out of a need for survival, trauma, or a man. The only exceptions I can think of are Nadia and Gia.

You know what they all have in common, no matter how obscure or small their roles were? They were all treated as antagonists. Even if they were sympathetic antagonists. (Gia who wasn’t at all one, was treated in an antagonistic way, as she was a plot device in the relationship between Hayley/Elijah, which is why existed in the first place)

I can’t actually recall a female character other than Nadia and Gia, that turned for themselves (from a clear and sound mind), not because a man motivated them in some way. (Maybe my mind’s just blanking. If anyone remembers some, message me and I’ll update this).

The important thing this shows, is that female’s that were forced to turn, are often pitied, and those who turned themselves, are treated as villains. This is because in this show woman are inherently valued for their vulnerability and their humanity, and what they can do to redeem or care for the male character. 

Even in the later seasons Caroline’s vampirism and her love of vampirism was an insignificant part of her character as she was mostly focused on living a human motherly life with Alaric . If a female vampire reveled, enjoyed or was overly dark in her vampirism she is often treated as an antagonist, although it’s these exact traits which make male characters like Klaus, or Damon desirable to their specific fandom.

An example of a vampire like this is Rebekah. Too be clear, I’m not talking about the characters likability from the fandom, just the treatment and the light in which the show wanted to portray them.

The showrunners might have done this subconsciously but it does imply that women are inherently weaker to deal with vampirism, and even if they choose it, they are often evil, because no good, functioning healthy female would ever choose a path, of death, immortality and infertility. It implies that females are happier as humans and have more to gain from human lives than they do from vampire ones. It also shows that would rarely choose this out of their own free will, because it’s what they want.

Originally posted by kalifornias-style

Even female vampires, like Katherine, Lily, Hayley and Valerie, were at some point mothers/pregnant, which fuels their storylines considerably, and people like Caroline even in vampirism, were given the ability to have a child. Other than Klaus, a male vampire characters storyline wasn’t fueled by children or parenthood, showing that they deliberately placed high importance on the aspect of parenthood in females, showing once again that women are inherently there to nurture.

Characters like Elena and Rebekah have repeatedly spoken of the fact that they want children and a family. Characters such as Isobel, who didn’t want children, and who gave Elena up for adoption, are also treated as antagonists.

Ironically Katherine, Aurora, Nadia, Gia etc. are some of my favorite females vamps on the show. Specifically because no one pitied them. Maybe because they were villains, but mostly because they owned who and what they were, and they didn’t need to be pitied because even though they weren’t human, their lives weren’t over. They didn’t pity themselves either or cry about how unfair life was to them. It’s a fair reaction, initially, but don’t let it define the character development.

So this next part I’ll break into talking about Hayley, Camille, Elena and Caroline’s experiences with Vampirism 

Keep reading

father and son, master and servant

We will say then, that Quasimodo loved the archdeacon as never a dog, never a horse, never an elephant loved his master. - Notre Dame de Paris, Vol. I, Book IV, Chap II

At the outset, Victor Hugo makes it clear that “although the visage of his adopted father was often clouded or severe, although his speech was habitually curt, harsh, imperious,” Quasimodo loves Frollo in the book. After all, the reasons for Frollo taking in the abandoned Quasimodo were altruistic, if not completely selfless, and he raised Quasimodo as best as he could. Thus stems Quasimodo’s devotion to Frollo, to the extent that if it so pleases Frollo, he will “hurl himself headlong from the summit of Notre-Dame.” This line will be revisited later on.

(enseeseven gave me this prompt to compare the relationship between Quasimodo and Frollo in the novel and that in the movie I hope this is ok! Under Read More for length.)

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

I didn't like how anti climatic the Star vs. movie felt throughout several acts of the special, such as the particular scene between (Young) Moon & Toffee - in which could've been a perfect opportunity to adhere to Toffee's moral standing/ reasoning behind his issues centered on the royal family's prejudice stance towards monsters such as he. Instead we were given a lizard dressed as a lawyer who had zero fucks to give towards anyone but his finger - which is a damn shame.

i guess its just easier to paint toffee as a generic anime villain instead of a sympathetic antagonist

such is what happens when your fantasy story has a clear racial tension allegory but 90% of your writing staff is white

i’m sorry. you can’t work as close as you do to gerard, see what he’s capable of ( after this ep, you know she’s seen some fucked up things ) and still agree to work with him without being fucked up yourself. without being kinda problematic and gross. he kept a fucking TROPHY of a kid (monster, whatever) in his armory. he didn’t care if nolan died in the zoo. what makes monroe think he cares if she dies? i really hope she turns on him and realizes the mess she’s making, but idk. this creature amplifies fear, but it’s how people ACT on fear that shows who they really are, and monroe should see by now that the pack hasn’t killed her, or anyone else that she works with yet. they’ve had plenty of chances. maybe they’re not the monsters she thinks they are :| and i just have a really hard time with the fact that she’s turning kids into killers and doesn’t seem to care.