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.
Ok, I just posted about a cheep'n'cheerful movie i kinda like that was just full of chiche'd memes, the ridiculously eeeviiiilllll bad guy who is right next to victory then throws it away because he's just ssoooo eeeevillll he can't avoid doing something idiotic and self destructive when the good guys defy him.
That meme crops up over and over again in story after story. In the first honor harrington novel you had the ridiculously evil and incompetent captain of a major warship beat the snot out of harrington's ship that was fitten with short range experimental weapons, and all he had t do was keep going after her ship was too damaged to pursue him and basically dead in space.
But Nooooooooo! He ordered his ship to go back and finish off harrington's wrecked ship, because she's dared defy him, and had actually damaged his precious ship and for that he had to "see that die!" so he had his ship close in to finish her at point blank range, got into the range of her ship's experimental weapon and....guess what.
Jame Bond villains are famous for the "I have to gloat in your face before I kill you Mr. Bond!"
The pure, ridiculously evil villain that has victory in his grasp, has acted in an intelligent, competent manner until the penultimate moment then in a fit of childish rage throws reason out the window and ends up basically defeating himself is a very old trope and while I know audiences keep falling for it I'm more than a little tired of it.
I'd like to see more reasonable, competent villains,or just antagonists, who have amassed wealth and power thru ability and competence and who don't come unglued at the first sign of opposition.
Anyway, that's one tired old trope I find annoying in "geek" and other media. Are there any you'd like to see take a long vacation? Discuss!
"But the universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed..."
that trope is something that Ifind works or doesn't depending on how consistant it is with the character. if it's someone who previously has acted like say.. Thrawn, dispassionate coldly caluclating etc and then suddenly throws his victory away in a egotistical fit, that can seem odd, at the same time, if it's someone whose been eistablished right from the start as very prideful and prone to letting that influence his actions, then it seems a natural progression.
in short an antagonists mistakes should fit the character
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
"Hahah Mr. Hero I win. *points gun at hero* I'm so sure of Victory.. let me stand here explaining my evil plan in great detail because NOTHING could possibly happen now to make me loose..."
Ohh yeah buddy I feels ya.. I think its just such an easy cop out trope to put at the end and lacks imagination for the most part. And ultimately it makes little sense.
Im no expert on writing.. But I think its a big of a swing and miss for a lot of writers for some reason. A lot writers seem to use this device without understanding how to do it properly. I.e. They will slot this trope in to try and build some suspense/unexpectedness. But this is always right at the end of the film so you just know the hero will win/has to win therefore you have no suspense and you are fully expecting the dumb villain move so the device is in itself counter productive.
But I this can work potentially to various degrees:
1. Comedic value - So if a film is not too serious and its cheese from start to finish, its only right that the villain ending will be cheesey...
2. A truly unexpected tragic outcome resulting in an emotional response like if the villain is explaining his master plan while the lancer character (i.e. Side kick/important secondary character the audience has invested in) will sacrifice themselves and either give the hero a way to kill the villain, or kill the villain themselves e.g. grab the villain and plunge them both into "the abyss of sure death". This would result in a tragic victory and therefore the vilain wins somewhat anyway despite ultimately loosing.
3. The hero uses the main negative character trait of the arch villain against them - Such as pride, arrogance or anger. Like the villain has won, and in his arrogance is walking away to press the doomsday button just as he is explaining everything to the hero, the hero has an earpiece the whole time in and as soon as he knows the villains no longer holds a hostage and has no other cards to play (because he has explained his evil plan). The hero then taunts the villain and uses his pride against him because he knows he will come back to finish him before pressing the doomsday button and goes super sayian and kills the villain.
The issue is that the fatal character flaws take away from the villain IMO. If the villain is truly this intelligent master mind, he would never make such a rookie mistake right? Therefore the villain just simply insist as scary and the hero victory seems so much more hollow because ultimately there was no real way he was ever going to loose.
Some of my favourite villains are in anime, where there's some bizzare events that previously made no sense and 20 episode arc where everything is set up and it all unrravales int he final showdown.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/22 23:26:02
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
Argive wrote: "Hahah Mr. Hero I win. *points gun at hero* I'm so sure of Victory.. let me stand here explaining my evil plan in great detail because NOTHING could possibly happen now to make me loose..."
Ohh yeah buddy I feels ya.. I think its just such an easy cop out trope to put at the end and lacks imagination for the most part. And ultimately it makes little sense.
Im no expert on writing.. But I think its a big of a swing and miss for a lot of writers for some reason.
A lot writers seem to use this device without understanding how to do it properly. I.e. They will slot this trope in to try and build some suspense/unexpectedness. But this is always right at the end of the film so you just know the hero will win/has to win therefore you have no suspense and you are fully expecting the dumb villain move so the device is in itself counter productive.
But I this can work potentially to various degrees:
1. Comedic value - So if a film is not too serious and its cheese from start to finish, its only right that the villain ending will be cheesey...
2. A truly unexpected tragic outcome resulting in an emotional response like if the villain is explaining his master plan while the lancer character (i.e. Side kick/important secondary character the audience has invested in) will sacrifice themselves and either give the hero a way to kill the villain, or kill the villain themselves e.g. grab the villain and plunge them both into "the abyss of sure death". This would result in a tragic victory and therefore the vilain wins somewhat anyway despite ultimately loosing.
3. The hero uses the main negative character trait of the arch villain against them - Such as pride, arrogance or anger. Like the villain has won, and in his arrogance is walking away to press the doomsday button just as he is explaining everything to the hero, the hero has an earpiece the whole time in and as soon as he knows the villains no longer holds a hostage and has no other cards to play (because he has explained his evil plan). The hero then taunts the villain and uses his pride against him because he knows he will come back to finish him before pressing the doomsday button and goes super sayian and kills the villain.
The issue is that the fatal character flaws take away from the villain IMO.
If the villain is truly this intelligent master mind, he would never make such a rookie mistake right? Therefore the villain just simply insist as scary and the hero victory seems so much more hollow because ultimately there was no real way he was ever going to loose.
Some of my favourite villains are in anime, where there's some bizzare events that previously made no sense and 20 episode arc where everything is set up and it all unrravales int he final showdown.
Yeah, I see what you guys are saying about it working sometimes. I mean I give trek a lot of breaks and ST2 is no exception. Khan had genesis, he had reliant, he could have cut and run, but kirk knew khan was arrogant so goaded him with his "laughing at the superior intellect" line.
Thru the movie khan had made it crystal clear he was obsessed with getting kirk, over and over. So yeah, him falling into that trope was pretty telegraphed and established.
Still in a lot of cases you see the super villain lose it at the slightest taunt or setback and just think "How'd this dipstick ever get to be in charge of an organization like that?" (I'm looking at you, cobra commander.)
Kylo Ren was the epitmoe of that trope, but if the sequels did anything right it was portraying him as incompetent but was in his position thru force magic and palpatine's desire to corrupt another skywalker. (Hey, put the flamethrowers down, guys. I'm just saying the sequels did one thing right, just one. It's not like I'm defending them.)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/22 23:36:56
"But the universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed..."
I think it doesn't work 90% of the time though.. The thing is outside of exploiting that "fatal character flaw" of the "evil twin antagonist" who is the "dark reflection of the hero" is as you say always telegraphed so even if it works its usually very meh because we know its coming..
Its by far one of the worse things about people concluding villains stories. Its like they got to the end and they just didn't know what else to do to they lean back on the common trope.
Im like if the villain is really so ruthless and villainous.. why has he not shot/killed the villain on sight now.. I mean that's what Id do... And im not even an evil genius lol.
Ohh he wants to play with him and make him suffer minutes before executing his ploy for world domination ? He wants the henchment to take him away and kill him out of sight ?? Ok great.. cool.. cool...
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/11/22 23:45:50
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
Argive wrote: I think it doesn't work 90% of the time though.. The thing is outside of exploiting that "fatal character flaw" of the "evil twin antagonist" who is the "dark reflection of the hero" is as you say always telegraphed so even if it works its usually very meh because we know its coming..
Its by far one of the worse things about people concluding villains stories. Its like they got to the end and they just didn't know what else to do to they lean back on the common trope.
Im like if the villain is really so ruthless and villainous.. why has he not shot/killed the villain on sight now.. I mean that's what Id do... And im not even an evil genius lol.
Ohh he wants to play with him and make him suffer minutes before executing his ploy for world domination ? He wants the henchment to take him away and kill him out of sight ?? Ok great.. cool.. cool...
yeah, you're right about that 90% thing.
A partner trope to this is the competent and intelligent underling who suffers under the inept rule of the total whacko. Destro under cobra commandr, Joachim under khan, the second in command of the Sirius in the first harrington novel who should have shot his idiot captain in the back of the head and taken command when he endangered a vital mission over his little hissy fit, etc.
Again, not to defend the ghawdawful sequels, but at least one person in the F.O. realized kylo ren was a radioactive toxic waste trainwreck and took action to make him fail. Of course that was just a deus ex to save the heroes from certain doom and i saw it coming 12 parsecs away, but I have to admit I could see someone basically deciding that kylo had to go given his disastrous record and the fact he got to the command by killing snoke.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/23 00:17:06
"But the universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed..."
Yeah, this has been around a while, still full of good advice tho.
On a similar line has anyone ranked the competency of famous evil villain masterminds?
Hmm, I'm trying to think of competent evil overlord types. Incompetent ones are a dime a dozen. Cobra commander leaps to mind.
Damn, harder than i thought....
As much as i hate the JJA debacles i will admit that Admiral Marcus seemed fairly competent, if ridiculously evil, in star trek into darkness. His plan to use khan's superbrain to create an unstoppable warship, provoke the klingons into attacking and using the vengeance to destroy their fleet ship by ship was fairly intelligent and seems to have had a chance of working in the context of the universe he was in. (Which was actually pretty stupid.)
Hannibal lecter was always hypercompetent, but not really an overlord type....
LaChiffe was pretty competent in casino royale, His plans were fairly intelligent, but didn't factor in the bond wild card effect or the innate unpredictably of a deck of cards. Still he beat bond, but felix lighter gave bond a second shot at him.
The daleks in "Victory of the daleks" were the most intelligent and competent daleks ever seen, and one must admit they flat out played the doctor like a fiddle and beat him like a drum.
"But the universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed..."
I really liked Aizen from Bleach. I thought he was an incredible mastermind arch-villain.
Zod in man of steel was also an incredible villain, he essentially manipulated superman into handing himself in. and only really got defeated because he wa sup against superman and wasnt quite used to his powers IMO. And even in defeat he like levelled a city killed thousands of people and made superman commit the ultimate sin.
I would say thanos from the MCU because he actually won...
I do love deliciously evil characters.. but competent ones are indeed hard to come by lol.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
Competent evil overlords or villains are harder to write stories for. It can be done, of course, but then you have to throw away the scrappy hero for a brute force approach (good guy has an army and powerful artifacts too), not the clever exploitation of the villain's ego/weak spot.
John Prins wrote: Competent evil overlords or villains are harder to write stories for. It can be done, of course, but then you have to throw away the scrappy hero for a brute force approach (good guy has an army and powerful artifacts too), not the clever exploitation of the villain's ego/weak spot.
Or the hero has to be so OP by himself, so by the end of the confrontation there's no real sense of "suspense"
I think "luck" can be a good middle ground.
The hero just happens to have the right rare genetic blood line/ rare disease/artefact so that hes all but immune to being detected/harmed by the villain+ his forces so can get close enough to win against the odds.
This approach though usually comes at great costs so the victory will usually be a tragic one which falls into the "subverting expectations" pit that we are currently plagued with..
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
Matt Swain wrote: Ok, I just posted about a cheep'n'cheerful movie i kinda like that was just full of chiche'd memes, the ridiculously eeeviiiilllll bad guy who is right next to victory then throws it away because he's just ssoooo eeeevillll he can't avoid doing something idiotic and self destructive when the good guys defy him.
That meme crops up over and over again in story after story. In the first honor harrington novel you had the ridiculously evil and incompetent captain of a major warship beat the snot out of harrington's ship that was fitten with short range experimental weapons, and all he had t do was keep going after her ship was too damaged to pursue him and basically dead in space.
But Nooooooooo! He ordered his ship to go back and finish off harrington's wrecked ship, because she's dared defy him, and had actually damaged his precious ship and for that he had to "see that die!" so he had his ship close in to finish her at point blank range, got into the range of her ship's experimental weapon and....guess what.
Jame Bond villains are famous for the "I have to gloat in your face before I kill you Mr. Bond!"
The pure, ridiculously evil villain that has victory in his grasp, has acted in an intelligent, competent manner until the penultimate moment then in a fit of childish rage throws reason out the window and ends up basically defeating himself is a very old trope and while I know audiences keep falling for it I'm more than a little tired of it.
I'd like to see more reasonable, competent villains,or just antagonists, who have amassed wealth and power thru ability and competence and who don't come unglued at the first sign of opposition.
Anyway, that's one tired old trope I find annoying in "geek" and other media. Are there any you'd like to see take a long vacation? Discuss!
There's a reason the Evil Overlord list is a thing...
Another trope I want to see die is the near mystical attributes associated with the term "ion" in SF.
I try not to get mad at this, as it may have started with an episode of star trek, a terrible one, involving an ion powered starship being so awesomely powerful.
And yes, ion engines may be superior for in-space drives in many ways, but they are actually terribly weak and accelerate terribly slowly, however due to greater efficiency they can accelerate a spacecraft up to greater speeds than comparable mass rocket engines, over time, but they have serious limits.
Oh, and Evil Overlords who keep an incompetent or Disloyal henchman around.
Say, Starscream, perhaps? Galvatron did the right thing straight off the bat - annihilate him before he can backstab and otherwise screw up a perfectly good plan due to their own delusions of adequacy.
By all means, keep someone ambitious around who can help spot potential flaws in your plans, that can work. But they’re on “plan to undermine and overthrow #3”, they’re just not worth the bother. Be like any boss, and fire them. Or be an evil boss and kill them.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Matt Swain wrote: Ok, I just posted about a cheep'n'cheerful movie i kinda like that was just full of chiche'd memes, the ridiculously eeeviiiilllll bad guy who is right next to victory then throws it away because he's just ssoooo eeeevillll he can't avoid doing something idiotic and self destructive when the good guys defy him.
That meme crops up over and over again in story after story. In the first honor harrington novel you had the ridiculously evil and incompetent captain of a major warship beat the snot out of harrington's ship that was fitten with short range experimental weapons, and all he had t do was keep going after her ship was too damaged to pursue him and basically dead in space.
But Nooooooooo! He ordered his ship to go back and finish off harrington's wrecked ship, because she's dared defy him, and had actually damaged his precious ship and for that he had to "see that die!" so he had his ship close in to finish her at point blank range, got into the range of her ship's experimental weapon and....guess what.
Jame Bond villains are famous for the "I have to gloat in your face before I kill you Mr. Bond!"
The pure, ridiculously evil villain that has victory in his grasp, has acted in an intelligent, competent manner until the penultimate moment then in a fit of childish rage throws reason out the window and ends up basically defeating himself is a very old trope and while I know audiences keep falling for it I'm more than a little tired of it.
I'd like to see more reasonable, competent villains,or just antagonists, who have amassed wealth and power thru ability and competence and who don't come unglued at the first sign of opposition.
Anyway, that's one tired old trope I find annoying in "geek" and other media. Are there any you'd like to see take a long vacation? Discuss!
That because non of those wannabe villains understood the real sadistic purpose of the "coming back strategy" (but also of the "slow and odd killing strategy"): torture the hero's mind, let him slowly understood he doesn't have any chance of salvation, in order to feel the sweet taste of his pain, his desperation, his agony, before to kill his body.
But fortunately there are still some real villains, able to redeem their category:
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/11/23 09:03:50
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Oh, and Evil Overlords who keep an incompetent or Disloyal henchman around.
Say, Starscream, perhaps? Galvatron did the right thing straight off the bat - annihilate him before he can backstab and otherwise screw up a perfectly good plan due to their own delusions of adequacy.
By all means, keep someone ambitious around who can help spot potential flaws in your plans, that can work. But they’re on “plan to undermine and overthrow #3”, they’re just not worth the bother. Be like any boss, and fire them. Or be an evil boss and kill them.
The usual excuse here is "He keeps me on my toes, from becoming too complacent."
Real pricks like to keep underlings like this around just to torment them, like palpatine and vader. (And man, palatine was such a prick!)
Speaking of starscream, when serpentor took over cobra he almost offed cobra commander (Voice of starscream) for pretty much the reason you cite, but CC, in what may have been his most intelligent moment, gave serpentor a reason to keep him around. He told serpentor he'd need someone to blame things on when the joes defeated him again. Having just has his...tail handed to him by the joes, serpentor realized having a fall guy to take the blame might just be useful.
AIR, CC sometimes aided the joes, covertly, of course, to keep serpentor needing excuses for his defeats.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2020/11/23 09:17:20
"But the universe is a big place, and whatever happens, you will not be missed..."
I won't argue that it isn't an overused trope in fiction at this point. But the villain who fails because of his own overconfidence / sadism / inability to resist showing off / just making really dumb decisions is actually pretty realisticIMO.
There are a lot more sociopaths rotting in prison than there are running the world. Serial killers more often get caught due to their own mistakes than through good police work. Hitler invaded the USSR while still fighting on the Western Front. And then there's the past 4 years in a certain democratic republic I won't name for forum rules reasons. Torpedoing your own evil plans by bragging about them in public is not a thing only fictional villains do.
Evil is often incompetent, because the character traits that make one a villain are often self-defeating. Greed, arrogance, selfishness, sadism and a deep psychological need to have other people recognise your *cough* stable genius are all potentially crippling weaknesses. And if you're capable of resisting those impulses, then why are you a villain in the first place?
If you're tired of this particular trope, though, and want an example of a successful psychopathic villain who avoids making these sorts of self-defeating mistakes, I strongly suggest reading R. Scott Bakker's Neuropath.
A little bit of righteous anger now and then is good, actually. Don't trust a person who never gets angry.
I could agree, but there is a huge difference among a villain who made a critical mistake, due to his overconfidence or because his lack of competence and the trope of the villains who made a critical mistake only because the writers have the necessity to let the hero win, but they aren't able to solve properly the situation in which they put the hero and if I haven't misinterpreted the opening post of Matt Swain, he was talking about this late case.
BrianDavion wrote: that trope is something that Ifind works or doesn't depending on how consistant it is with the character. if it's someone who previously has acted like say.. Thrawn, dispassionate coldly caluclating etc and then suddenly throws his victory away in a egotistical fit, that can seem odd, at the same time, if it's someone whose been eistablished right from the start as very prideful and prone to letting that influence his actions, then it seems a natural progression.
in short an antagonists mistakes should fit the character
It's also a matter of setup. If the villain is presented as capable and in control, but then starts getting just that little bit angrier every time his underlings fail to stop the hero (tm), him finally snapping when they do come face to face makes a lot more sense. Hans Gruber springs to mind.
And of course, different strokes for different folks. Some villains are just bound to be defeated by their own hubris more than anything else.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Oh, and Evil Overlords who keep an incompetent or Disloyal henchman around.
Say, Starscream, perhaps? Galvatron did the right thing straight off the bat - annihilate him before he can backstab and otherwise screw up a perfectly good plan due to their own delusions of adequacy.
By all means, keep someone ambitious around who can help spot potential flaws in your plans, that can work. But they’re on “plan to undermine and overthrow #3”, they’re just not worth the bother. Be like any boss, and fire them. Or be an evil boss and kill them.
The usual excuse here is "He keeps me on my toes, from becoming too complacent."
Real pricks like to keep underlings like this around just to torment them, like palpatine and vader. (And man, palatine was such a prick!)
Speaking of starscream, when serpentor took over cobra he almost offed cobra commander (Voice of starscream) for pretty much the reason you cite, but CC, in what may have been his most intelligent moment, gave serpentor a reason to keep him around. He told serpentor he'd need someone to blame things on when the joes defeated him again. Having just has his...tail handed to him by the joes, serpentor realized having a fall guy to take the blame might just be useful.
AIR, CC sometimes aided the joes, covertly, of course, to keep serpentor needing excuses for his defeats.
A naysmith, someone’s who’s role is to challenge and test your plans is an important asset - you just need the wisdom to listen to them, and take on board their critiques.
But Starscream is just an incompetent ego maniac, more interested in seeing Megatron fail so he could usurp him.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
As an evil corporate goon, I can say from experience that it is no fun winning if no one really realizes the intricate steps you have taken to set-up your win over your opponent.
It is even WORSE when your opponent does not even realize you have WON in the first place!
Therefore, I totally understand why a villain does those types of things. After all, villainy is the embrace of the Ego! With no recognition, there is no true victory FOR the Ego.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/23 15:44:54
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
I'd just like to remind people that Starscream was actually the most intelligent/competent Decepticon outside of Soundwave and Shockwave, neither of whom had any real initiative. Starscream was also pretty powerful in his own right and, at least in G1, Megatron couldn't afford to throw away any talent. His roster was full of idiots.
I'll defend Starscream too as he's simply the best of G1. Starscream was powerful, violent and daring. He constantly sought the advantage through aggressive initiative, commanded an elite team through fear and respect, and epitomised the ethos of the Deception cause. Megatron was an excellent leader in that he knew how to exploit him while controlling him, and could use him as a foil to keep his men in line.
Galvatron had enough resources that he didn't need a pain in the ass lieutenant and believed he had enough power to control the rest of the Deception.
Starscream is how you write a really good bad guy.
Tiny wee lass' somehow smacking down goons twice their size, Buffy and River get a pass for more or less being Supers, but otherwise
Assassins who don't assassinate, see Black Widow, White Canary, Gamorra, Nebula, also crap assassin goons who's kill-fu is based on narrative requirements rather than any pointy poke or fisticuffs ability
"AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME...SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED."
Easy E wrote: I am tired of "heroes" using torture to get correct and right information.
Heroes should not use torture..... full stop.
Depends on how evil the vilain is and how messed up the setting is
I like my heroes to be quite raw and not perfect personally.
Only superman can ever be above reproach and incorruptable. Everyone else is just doing what they can..
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
The hostage situation trope where the villain grabs either the damsel in distress, the vulnerable child or friend, gets the hero to drop their weapon and doesn't shoot/kill them straight away when they have the chance but waste the time to gloat. Hell, just kill the hostage and then kill the hero right after.
die!" so he had his ship close in to finish her at point blank range, got into the range of her ship's experimental weapon and....guess what.
Eldar- 4436 pts
