posted
I think a lot of the strife in the world is directly reflected in the fact thatthe vast majority of villains are sympathetic to someone, while a miniscule number are sympathetic to everyone.
Edit: and maybe the most sympathetic "villain" I've seen is Homer's dad in October Sky, masterfully played by Chris Cooper.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: vonk: OK but enough that you think the sheer magnitude of everything he did was mostly if not fully justified? For me I just think the majority of what he did was still a result of his decisions that he was able to make freely just like anybody esle.
Maybe not justified, but certainly understandable. Again, I don't think he made good, or just, decisions, but I understand why he made them and I sympathise with his plight. I don't think he made the decisions he made "freely." I think he made them under extreme mental duress brought on by deep psychological issues stemming from his childhood. His calm demeanor could indicate that he is thinking clearly and sanely, or it could be another defense mechanism to hide his emotional state, as I think is evidenced by the depiction of him when he enters the home for boys.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Several characters in Battlestar Galactica come to mind:
Gaius Baltar, if you forgive him for his overly developed sense of self-preservation.
Boomer, from season one, when she didn't know whether or not she was a Cylon...
Then I recall the early episodes of Heroes, in which the audience was led to assume that Noah Bennett was a villain. Eventually, we got to see that most of his motivation stemmed from trying to save his adopted daughter from those that would misuse and/or kill her.
Posts: 1099 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Then I recall the early episodes of Heroes, in which the audience was led to assume that Noah Bennett was a villain. Eventually, we got to see that most of his motivation stemmed from trying to save his adopted daughter from those that would misuse and/or kill her.
Nope, Snape was my first, "good guy who acts like a coniving, scheming, jerk." When I saw Mr. Bennet I got the exact same vibe so I never believed he was REALLY a bad guy.
edit: Note this is Snape in reference to the first Harry Potter book only.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Someday, someone is going to write a story with a villain who acts like a conniving, scheming jerk, and your head will a splode.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Someday, someone is going to write a story with a villain who acts like a conniving, scheming jerk, and your head will a splode.
I'll just write the book myself, I'll call him Porter but his forum name will be mr_porteiro_head. He will prowl like a lion seeking whom he can destroy, and back injury will be is ultimate demise.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I mean look at what he could accomplish when he was focused. He became a doctor AND managed to track down, stalk, and kill every single one of the 4 men. He kept saying, "I can't stop, I made a promise to my dead sister." Can you imagine that line coming out of the Hopkinesk Hannibal? He could have put a bullet in the head of the last man and run off with Gong Li but no he had to stay and carve into the guys chest and to eat him.
Hannibal is NOT a sympathetic villain to me, interesting yes, efficient yes, tortured yes, forced to be who he is no.
Boy BlackBlade, it's like you watched a different movie than I did. In the movie I watched, Hannibal was basically driven insane/turned into a monster by his experiences in Lithuania towards the end of WWII. After that, sure academically speaking he could have exerted superhuman intellectual and emotional power and, I dunno, overcome his insanity by sheer will alone, but that was never really in the cards.
Then he discovers that a) he ate his sister as well (and thus fell under the shadow of his promise to his sister), and b) had one more person left to track down and kill before he could ever hope to kill himself and still keep his vow.
He didn't torture and kill the last man because he crossed Hannibal, he tortured and killed him because he murdered and ate his sister. Now, my theory (and it's been too long since I read the books to remember): he was never able to find the last murderer, the one who lived in Canada. Never able to track him down, he was never able to jump the last hurdle between him and his oath to Mischa. My theory is that had he found the last guy, he would've killed him and shortly after himself.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Rakeesh: There could be ALOT of difference how the movie presented the books material. I have not read the book, I've only seen the movies, hence my comments are strictly related to the movies portrayal.
In the movie Hannibal is deeply effected by the incident, (he is rendered mute) but he also does not remember exactly what happened. Lady Murasaki takes him in and gets him to speak again as well as refining him. He flourishes under her influence. He kills the butcher for insulting Lady Murasaki which is purely an act of sadism. He gets an initial jog to his memory by injecting himself with sodium thiopental, he does it on purpose. He then slowly gets his memory back by interogating the men one by one just prior to eating them. In the movie he incapacitates the last guy and while Madam Murasaki begs him to come with her he decides to stay and slowly eat the man alive.
I'm just saying Hannibal may have been emotionally scarred, but he didn't just make bad choices, he made the worst choices possible in several scenarios.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm going to second magneto. I'm surprised he didn't come up earlier. The opening scene to the first X-men movie should give the viewer a really deep understanding to why he's chosen the path and the methods he has.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
In all fairness though, the men who ate Lecter's sister were in a pretty desperate situation themselve. Perhaps our symapathies should go to them as well.
Posts: 722 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I totally second Coffey from the Abyss. I didn't realize it so much in the movie itself but in the book you can see that he's a dedicated excellent officer who is doing his very best under the circumstances.
For a moment at the very end, I thought the narrator was going to be revealed as Coffey, that the aliens saved him and healed him, and he was telling the story, including his terrible mistakes, himself. It would have been so powerful and deep if that had been the case, such a tale of remorse and redemption. I almost wish Uncle Orson had ended it like that. But as it was, it was still a great story.
I loved how technically accurate and feasible all the technology was. That made the story come to life for me, and be wonderfully real. But Uncle Orson's back-stories for all the characters made it much more than just an action adventure tale. I really love that book. Thanks to Deany for introducing me to it. I had thought that a movie novelization would not be allowed to be good. In this case I was much mistaken.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Starscream: I mean, come on, his boss is a non-appreciative jerk, his co-workers are all bullies who dislike him, he hasn't had a date, ever, since the only female decepticons are ones that want to disect you. Finally, the Universe gave him a voice that could shred titanium. No wonder he turned to evil. How sympathetic can you be.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm just saying Hannibal may have been emotionally scarred, but he didn't just make bad choices, he made the worst choices possible in several scenarios.
Which times were those, BlackBlade? I'm just curious.
the_Somalian,
No, I'm afraid your reasoning doesn't bear out. If you remember why those men happened to be in the area, why they even knew the Lecters for example, and what they did afterwards...they were all awful, horrible men who blundered on their own into a terrible situation.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm just saying Hannibal may have been emotionally scarred, but he didn't just make bad choices, he made the worst choices possible in several scenarios.
Which times were those, BlackBlade? I'm just curious.
the_Somalian,
No, I'm afraid your reasoning doesn't bear out. If you remember why those men happened to be in the area, why they even knew the Lecters for example, and what they did afterwards...they were all awful, horrible men who blundered on their own into a terrible situation.
They were just making the best of a horrible situation. It was either collaborate with Nazis...or die.
Posts: 722 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:They were just making the best of a horrible situation. It was either collaborate with Nazis...or die.
They didn't just collaborate, they were enthusiastically attempting to advance themselves.
"We'll give you Nazis all the food and fuel we have," is forced collaboration.
"We'll fight by your side and murder some undesireables to gain entry into the SS," isn't collaboration. It's alliance.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
