Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Bella fething Swan.

Ooo... you may have won this thread. That is a tough entry to beat! I never understood why that character warranted such effort from the vampires and werewolves around her.


I'll nominate Newt Scamander from Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Throughout the entire film I cared very little for Newt, his love interest, Porpentina, or his "mission." I found the supporting characters infinitely more likable and interesting, and wished the film would leave Newt behind and follow the No-Maj Jacob around instead. Jacob at least had a compelling story. Newt was just an donkey-cave with smuggled contraband who set off a series of calamities when he arrived in New York.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

I'll nominate Newt Scamander from Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Throughout the entire film I cared very little for Newt, his love interest, Porpentina, or his "mission." I found the supporting characters infinitely more likable and interesting, and wished the film would leave Newt behind and follow the No-Maj Jacob around instead. Jacob at least had a compelling story. Newt was just an donkey-cave with smuggled contraband who set off a series of calamities when he arrived in New York.

I must admit, I rather liked how incompetent Newt was. After 8 films of Harry Potter being the Best At Everything Ever Chosen One (and/or taking credit from his much more talented friends and allies) it was nice to have a lead who did get things pretty spectacularly wrong. I think he had enough charm that he was still likeable despite his shortcomings, and it was also refreshing to have a movie lead with some dark secret or edgy past, he's just a regular, slightly useless guy trying to get by.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
I never understood why that character warranted such effort from the vampires and werewolves around her.

Now this is based on no actual knowledge of the series but ... isn't that the point? I mean of the character as well as the entire series? It's a vehicle for the target demographic to vicariously live out the fantasy of being the center of attention.

 Cheesecat wrote:
Kylo Ren is great one of the best things about that movie, a moody angst filled Sith who is obsessed with power but doesn't have the patience and self control to get there that's a fun concept, he's more interesting and has more personality than any Rogue One non character.

So much correctness concentrated into a single post ... not sure if Dakka Dakka can take this ...

 Paradigm wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

I'll nominate Newt Scamander from Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Throughout the entire film I cared very little for Newt, his love interest, Porpentina, or his "mission." I found the supporting characters infinitely more likable and interesting, and wished the film would leave Newt behind and follow the No-Maj Jacob around instead. Jacob at least had a compelling story. Newt was just an donkey-cave with smuggled contraband who set off a series of calamities when he arrived in New York.

I must admit, I rather liked how incompetent Newt was. After 8 films of Harry Potter being the Best At Everything Ever Chosen One (and/or taking credit from his much more talented friends and allies) it was nice to have a lead who did get things pretty spectacularly wrong. I think he had enough charm that he was still likeable despite his shortcomings, and it was also refreshing to have a movie lead with some dark secret or edgy past, he's just a regular, slightly useless guy trying to get by.

His incompetence bothered me less than his characterization. He was just not likable. I've read that the character may be on the autism spectrum which would explain some of his social difficulties, but even that doesn't completely explain just how awful I felt he was on screen. I just didn't care about his story at all and the seeding of a potential love story between Newt and Propentina just seemed forced.

I can deal with a slightly useless guy trying to get by. That is interesting! I really liked Jacob's character and would have preferred to have the movie built around his sudden collision with the wizarding world. He was pretty useless, but the character had a charm and chutzpah that made me want to follow him to the end of the story. Newt could have pissed off half way through and I wouldn't have minded.

 Manchu wrote:

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
I never understood why that character warranted such effort from the vampires and werewolves around her.

Now this is based on no actual knowledge of the series but ... isn't that the point? I mean of the character as well as the entire series? It's a vehicle for the target demographic to vicariously live out the fantasy of being the center of attention.

Yes, she is an avatar for the reader, but at a certain point in the series you need to establish something for why centuries old creatures are so enamored with such a dull, lifeless twit to the point where they will risk their very existences to protect her. I'll admit I've only seen the movies, so perhaps the books give some indication why Bella is so alluring, but the movies sure didn't provide any sort of explanation that I can remember.

I think the Sookie Stackhouse series of books (which became True Blood on HBO) did a better job of playing with the idea of a naive woman entering into a hidden supernatural world. Granted, Sookie is supernatural herself in that she can read minds, but she begins both the book and TV series ignorant of the hidden societies of supernatural creatures around her, and yet still allows the reader/viewer to experience those worlds with fresh eyes, while still offering something of significance to the powerful creatures fighting over her. She still acts as a vehicle for readers/viewers to indulge in fantasies of sex and romance with vampires, werewolves, fairies, weretigers, and perhaps a few other types of supernaturals I am forgetting (Sookie kept busy!), while still offering a passable explanation as to why all those unique creatures give a damn about her.

Bella is just a stick in the mud.

 Manchu wrote:
Now this is based on no actual knowledge of the series but ... isn't that the point? I mean of the character as well as the entire series? It's a vehicle for the target demographic to vicariously live out the fantasy of being the center of attention.

As smeone who is knowledgeable to the series, basically yes The series is escapism in its purist form with little regard for authenticity or basic sense. EDIT: It also bodes very poorly for the quality of your fan fiction when your book is basically bad fan fiction, or at least has all of its greatest hallmarks, which is how we ended up with 50 Shades of Gray whose protagonist probably also belongs here XD

 Blackie wrote:
... basically a Darth Vader parody, ....

That's pretty much the entire point of Kylo Ren.




The Lord of the Rings movies make it really hard to like Frodo for any length of time. Whiny git...


Book-wise, my vote goes to Thomas Covenant. I tried really hard to like that character just enough to persevere with the books, but didn't make it through the first one.

 Manchu wrote:
Now this is podracing!

I don't like sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere.

From my point of view, the Jedi are evil.

I'll grant you Prequel Anakin. Thankfully, Clone Wars did that character a much needed favour!

Twilight? So many films about a nearly-a-woman girl's difficult coming of age decision between Bestiality and Necrophilia - I mean, we've all been there, right! And I won't go into a Vampire around 100 years old still going to school to pick up chicks....

The of course there's a variety of late 90's early 00's where the Scientist protagonist valiantly saves mankind from a horror of their own making that even a five year old could've told you was a bad idea in the first place. I mean, seriously. You unleashed it, you bloody well stop it. That's not being our hero. That's doing the least you can. Now if you then funded the funerals and compensation and rebuilding costs of your 'whoopsies' rampage, ok, you're a hero now....barely (ref Tony Stark, who at least tries to look after the aftermath)

 Cheesecat wrote:
Kylo Ren is great one of the best things about that movie, a moody angst filled Sith who is obsessed with power but doesn't have the patience and self control to get there that's a fun concept, he's more interesting and has more personality than any Rogue One non character.

IMO the problem is that he's portrayed as obnoxious and incompetent and yet somehow none of the officers burdened with dealing with him decide to toss the whiny emo teenager out the airlock and get on with the business of restoring the Empire. He's not at all compelling as a villain, and it's a complete contrast with the respect and power he's given because the "plot" (so far as any such thing exists in the movie) requires him to have it.

Kylo Ren is shown to be mentally unstable but very powerful so I don't think chucking him out an airlock will work because he would sense it coming a mile away. Guy stopped a blaster mid shot and was shown to have some telepathic ability. The Imperial officers didn't like Vader either but were also, essentially, to scared to do anything about it. Stormtroopers loved Vader, though, so he had that going for him.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:
Kylo Ren is great one of the best things about that movie, a moody angst filled Sith who is obsessed with power but doesn't have the patience and self control to get there that's a fun concept, he's more interesting and has more personality than any Rogue One non character.

IMO the problem is that he's portrayed as obnoxious and incompetent and yet somehow none of the officers burdened with dealing with him decide to toss the whiny emo teenager out the airlock and get on with the business of restoring the Empire. He's not at all compelling as a villain, and it's a complete contrast with the respect and power he's given because the "plot" (so far as any such thing exists in the movie) requires him to have it.

Yet to me that speaks volumes about The First Order.

They're all pretty young - certainly none shown to be much more than 30.

They're child soldiers, especially the Storm Troopers, who it's confirmed were abducted as kids and brainwashed/mental conditioned to be loyal. Were it not for Starkiller, they'd be a very poor joke.

Kylo Ren's torment comes from his lack of total devotion to the cause. And I hope that's something they build upon in VIII and IX - let's learn more about Snoke, expose him for the abusive jerk he clearly is, abducting and brainwashing kids (including Ren it might seem, perhaps not the abduction bit) to fulfil his own agenda.

And I still don't think they built Starkiller....I suspect it was the Emperor's secret weapon - something which I'm leaning towards having read the first two Aftermath books (remnants banding together, at least one of them has Palpatine's Big Book Of Secrets)

 Ahtman wrote:
The Imperial officers didn't like Vader either but were also, essentially, to scared to do anything about it.

The difference, IMO, is that Vader is a compelling villain. He's ruthless and powerful, but not a raging lunatic who can't even control his own emotions. As a symbol of authority he works. Kylo Ren, on the other hand, isn't. He might be powerful against one blaster bolt, but can he stop a hail of blaster fire from a whole squad of stormtroopers killing him in his sleep? Or the captain of the ship simply venting his quarters into space? Or a friendly fire "accident" destroying his shuttle? He sure doesn't ever seem to demonstrate the kind of psychic awareness and precognition that would allow him to avoid a crew that is determined to get rid of the incompetent clown they're forced to serve under.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Yet to me that speaks volumes about The First Order.

They're all pretty young - certainly none shown to be much more than 30.

They're child soldiers, especially the Storm Troopers, who it's confirmed were abducted as kids and brainwashed/mental conditioned to be loyal. Were it not for Starkiller, they'd be a very poor joke.

I think this is a pretty big world-building failure. You don't get this in the movie, you have to go read some random EU novel to even know that this isn't a real Empire yet. And really, it just transfers some of the "terrible protagonist" problem from Kylo Ren to the New Empire as a whole. If they're all a bunch of equally incompetent children playing around with surplus uniforms then why didn't the Republic simply arrest them all and end the problem? How did they get control of the manufacturing capacity to build all those star destroyers/new TIE fighters/etc? If they have this Supreme Leader guy who is so important why couldn't he convince any veteran officers to come back and fight? None of it makes any sense, because it's just a flimsy excuse to justify the CGI spectacle and sell the latest Star Wars toys.

 insaniak wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
... basically a Darth Vader parody, ....

That's pretty much the entire point of Kylo Ren.




The Lord of the Rings movies make it really hard to like Frodo for any length of time. Whiny git...


Book-wise, my vote goes to Thomas Covenant. I tried really hard to like that character just enough to persevere with the books, but didn't make it through the first one.

The White Gold Wielder is just an angryish disbelieving real world human thrown into a fantasy environment. Its only when he gets in the groove that he starts to become worthy of it all.
Frankly the books are only slightly about him.

Also the wars in the books are something completely different then any other fantasy. Its brutal and magic is really just power.

 Peregrine wrote:

The difference, IMO, is that Vader is a compelling villain. He's ruthless and powerful, but not a raging lunatic who can't even control his own emotions.

Vader slaughtered many younglings in an emo rage, not to mention how he killed all the Tuskens; many of whom were children....then there's the Obi-wan fight.

 Peregrine wrote:

As a symbol of authority he works. Kylo Ren, on the other hand, isn't. He might be powerful against one blaster bolt, but can he stop a hail of blaster fire from a whole squad of stormtroopers killing him in his sleep? Or the captain of the ship simply venting his quarters into space? Or a friendly fire "accident" destroying his shuttle? He sure doesn't ever seem to demonstrate the kind of psychic awareness and precognition that would allow him to avoid a crew that is determined to get rid of the incompetent clown they're forced to serve under.

When did Vader do any of those things in movies?

Why would Stormtroopers fire on Ren? They loved Vader because he lead from the front and was with them on the ground. Kylo is shown doing pretty much the same thing. The officers don't like Kylo probably but they would have to deal with him if they screwed up an assassination attempt and even if it worked they would have to face Snoke, the leader of the whole thing who is also Kylo's Master/mentor, and the Stormtroopers to boot.

It's really interesting that Kylo Ren is being debated in a thread about film protagonists when he is - on a superficial level - the principal antagonist of TFA. I think it makes more sense to think of him as a protagonist because he has a very strong arc and its development is driving the story at a high level (like RotJ Vader). He reminds me of Zuko from Avatar in that show's first season. Like Zuko, I expect he will become more obviously a protagonist as the trilogy proceeds. He's "bad Luke" really - chasing after the dream of an mythical father-figure whose legacy turns out to be more complex. Whereas young Luke identified with the legend of Anakin, young Ben identifies with the legend of Vader.

As to why FO underlings don't murder Kylo Ren - people who think they would seem to be missing the point of the FO. Even just within the scope of what is presented on screen, they are bunch of fanatics. They are the kind of weirdos who like the idea of being led by a dude in a black cape who waves around a red laser sword. Of all the things to criticize or even nitpick about TFA, this is hardly a puzzling aspect of the movie.

Regarding Bella - if the plot were to concede that something, anything about her is remarkable, wouldn't that break the spell the whole contrivance weaves on its intended audience? Compare her to Katniss Everdeen, another girl-at-the-center-of-attention fantasy character. Like Bella, Katniss is initially portrayed as a normal girl. But Katniss ultimately proves to be exceptionally skilled, for whatever reason. There is an obvious (if not particularly compelling) reason why she gradually becomes the focus of her entire world. As I understand it, Bella isn't special at all. Her salient feature, the thing that makes her work in her story, is her singular vacuity.

I guess the issue is, Twilight is actually erotica: Bella personifies the female body anticipating the male body. In a story about a girl being nervous about sex, this is probably a smart move.

 insaniak wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
... basically a Darth Vader parody, ....

That's pretty much the entire point of Kylo Ren.




The Lord of the Rings movies make it really hard to like Frodo for any length of time. Whiny git...


Book-wise, my vote goes to Thomas Covenant. I tried really hard to like that character just enough to persevere with the books, but didn't make it through the first one.

I made it through to the second...and he only got worse. I didn't finish the first Flashman because of the eponymous character, though. Also, in the original Princess Bride novel, Buttercup and Wesley are completely unlikeable characters apparently by design, and the father character (replaced by Peter Faulk as his father) is a total douche. Neither Generro (proto-John McLane) nor Hans Gruber have any personality in Roderick Thorpe's Nothing Lasts Forever (Die Hard).

As for movies, pretty much every human who wasn't a financially-struggling sailor in Peter Jackson's King Kong has blood on her or his hands, but the film tries to play them off as sympathetic. Jurassic Park 2 had much the same issue. And don't get me started on Super 8.

 Manchu wrote:


Regarding Bella - if the plot were to concede that something, anything about her is remarkable, wouldn't that break the spell the whole contrivance weaves on its intended audience? Compare her to Katniss Everdeen, another girl-at-the-center-of-attention fantasy character. Like Bella, Katniss is initially portrayed as a normal girl. But Katniss ultimately proves to be exceptionally skilled, for whatever reason. There is an obvious (if not particularly compelling) reason why she gradually becomes the focus of her entire world. As I understand it, Bella isn't special at all. Her salient feature, the thing that makes her work in her story, is her singular vacuity.

I can't remember if the films bring it up, but the only things that set Bella apart from most people is 1) she had a very powerful "power" that was strong enough to be active when she was simply human, and 2) she apparently smells really delicious. The former actually explains at least why Edward is initially interested in her, but beyond that the story unilaterally fails to explain why everyone else likes her so much and doesn't just eat here, let alone why so many men and women become obsessed with her fate. She's an incredibly unlikable person on multiple levels, but then so are many other members of cast.

And yeah it probably would defeat the story itself, but the story itself is pretty bad so the excuse doesn't really fly for me XD As you often put it, the story is very much "plot by fiat."

Well again, it's erotica right? Don't need arc in porn, really.

You do if it's a whodunnit.

Is Twilight a mystery, he asked, setting up others for obvious punchlines even though he was asking seriously.

Every one of the non-characters in Inception - which is a terrible movie in its own right - but it does work hard to be that bad - same as Wanted.

Same can be said of the non-characters in the Star Wars pre-equals - well Natalie Portman is pretty but non-else has anything going for them or reason to make you care if they live or die.

Worst Antagonist - Off hand I can't think of a worse one than "Loopy" Lex Luthor in Batman versus Superman - awful throughout and turns the movie to crap every moment he is on screen.

 Manchu wrote:
Is Twilight a mystery, he asked, setting up others for obvious punchlines even though he was asking seriously.

Do you mean my comment? That was just a bad pun.

Although Inthought you were looking to read novels intended for audiences other than yourself. Twilight fits that bill, does it not? No excuses now.

 Manchu wrote:
Is Twilight a mystery, he asked, setting up others for obvious punchlines even though he was asking seriously.

Not that I am aware of.

If it was intended to be a mystery it was a pretty bad one. LOL. Although, that baseball scene was a mystery to me. Like, "Why the feth is this scene in the movie?"

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I thought you were looking to read novels intended for audiences other than yourself.

Tried and failed, with Mercedes Lackey.

 dogma wrote:
Vader slaughtered many younglings in an emo rage, not to mention how he killed all the Tuskens; many of whom were children....then there's the Obi-wan fight.

That is non-canon fanfiction.

When did Vader do any of those things in movies?

Uh, what? I have no idea what you're asking here.

I saw Twilight for free through someone who got the Rifftrax and I still wanted my money back; it was a terrible movie with awful characters; I'd rather watch Manos: The Hands of Fate.

Also how is Vader killing kids, Sand People, or fighting Obi-Wan fan-faction when it was in a canon movie by the creator of the series? The prequels were awful but they are (sadly) canon.

I'm going to watch Conan The Barbarian to experience a movie with an AWESOME protagonist to cleanse my palete of having to think about Twilight.

 Peregrine wrote:

 dogma wrote:
Vader slaughtered many younglings in an emo rage, not to mention how he killed all the Tuskens; many of whom were children....then there's the Obi-wan fight.

That is non-canon fanfiction.

Non-canon? I could have sworn I saw all three of those things in the prequel movies.

 Breotan wrote:
I could have sworn I saw all three of those things in the prequel movies.

Don't let me stop you from blocking the memories but yes all of that was in the prequels.

 Ahtman wrote:
cleanse my palete of having to think about Twilight.

having not seen the movies, for me it is just an excuse to ponder the peculiar attractiveness of Kristen Stewart

JJ Abrams' Douche Kirk is another bad protagonist. Would Seinfeld and co count? Because they are certainly terrible people.

 Manchu wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I thought you were looking to read novels intended for audiences other than yourself.

Tried and failed, with Mercedes Lackey.

If it's not too off topic, what put you off Mercedes Lackey?

I've had similar issues trying to read Mystery/Thrillers. Couldn't get into Pendergast, Freaky Deaky, Hammet, Brown, or any of the others I tried. But Parker's Spenser series? Such a payoff that it made the previous attempts feel worth it.

I suppose one of these days I'll have to read some Nora Roberts or Zane just to try them.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
If it's not too off topic, what put you off Mercedes Lackey?

Ha! As a matter of fact, it is absolutely ON TOPIC: the protagonist is nothing more or less than a reader-vehicle character, which I guess is what people also say about Bella. In the case of Arrows of the Queen, Talia is snatched out of her FLDS upbringing to become a knight errant because ... the story needs to happen.* And feminism? Or just wish fulfillment. Feminism and wish fulfillment are synonymous in this instance. But I think it was originally more about the latter. When I first set out on this doomed venture, I learned that Lackey absolutely forbids her fans from writing fan fiction on the grounds that it could cause legal problems for her. But, seeing what happened with Twilight and 50 Shades, I can't help but wonder if the real reason is, what if customers cannot actually distinguish the fan fiction from the "real thing"? (I honestly think Ed Greedwood has the same problem, although he deals with it a bit differently.)

*So yeah, this also applies to Rey in The Force Awakens BUT the big difference is Daisy Ridley is there to breath charisma into her flat character whereas a character in a novel is limited by the author alone.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Because they are certainly terrible people.

I am a bit confused - is the issue that (a) the character is morally reprehensible and therefore unsympathetic or (b) that the character is not an effective protagonist?

I mean, I can understand instances of where (a) contributes to (b) but just theoretically a protagonist can be unsympathetic. Attack of the Clones Anakin is a prime example. I mean, he is a terrible protagonist as well - but not because he is unsympathetic (even considering that he is totally unsympathetic).