Best "Villains in Name Only"?
- Thread starter Relish in Chaos
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Grigori: Dragon's Dogma
Anyone who has played the game can tell you why. Grigori is a great dragon that causes a great deal of death and destruction and is shown to posess the power to end the world but unlike Alduin from Skyrim, has no intention of following through with that power. The only time he will flex that might ONLY if the Arisen fails to kill him in combat. Now here is the big in name only part, the people in the world Dragon's Dogma takes place in portray Grigori as pure evil. In reality, Grigori takes orders from higher up the celestial ladder as opposed to down the ladder. Yes! Grigori is an angel of God and as such has no say in what happens.
Anyone who has played the game can tell you why. Grigori is a great dragon that causes a great deal of death and destruction and is shown to posess the power to end the world but unlike Alduin from Skyrim, has no intention of following through with that power. The only time he will flex that might ONLY if the Arisen fails to kill him in combat. Now here is the big in name only part, the people in the world Dragon's Dogma takes place in portray Grigori as pure evil. In reality, Grigori takes orders from higher up the celestial ladder as opposed to down the ladder. Yes! Grigori is an angel of God and as such has no say in what happens.
I'm still clinging to the idea that Revan in KoTOR 1 was never truly evil.
He ventured into the unknown, encountered the Sith army and realized he couldn't beat them alone.
He returned to an extremely weakened Republic with corrupt politicians and lazy Jedi.
Realizing that no one would believe a story about ancient evil bogeymen ready to invade at any moment, Revan determined that the best course of action would be to quickly take control by force and get the Republic's military strong enough to repel the impending invasion.
In KoTOR 2 they hint at this saying that during Revan's reign there were signs that he left obviously valuable strategic positions and structures alone.
The thing is, he might've been right.
Revan's war against the Republic was so one-sided, that both armies barely had time to do any major damage to each other. If it weren't for Malak's betrayal, Revan would've taken control of the Republic easily, giving him years to prepare for the "true" Sith's arrival.
However, because of one idiot's lust for power, well, the events of KoTOR happened.
But anyways, I understand this isn't cannon, I just like to believe that Revan was one of those intelligent villains that was simply doing everything in his power to protect the people he cared about.
(Also, yes, I realize Revan could be a she. I simply think of him as a guy)
He ventured into the unknown, encountered the Sith army and realized he couldn't beat them alone.
He returned to an extremely weakened Republic with corrupt politicians and lazy Jedi.
Realizing that no one would believe a story about ancient evil bogeymen ready to invade at any moment, Revan determined that the best course of action would be to quickly take control by force and get the Republic's military strong enough to repel the impending invasion.
In KoTOR 2 they hint at this saying that during Revan's reign there were signs that he left obviously valuable strategic positions and structures alone.
The thing is, he might've been right.
Revan's war against the Republic was so one-sided, that both armies barely had time to do any major damage to each other. If it weren't for Malak's betrayal, Revan would've taken control of the Republic easily, giving him years to prepare for the "true" Sith's arrival.
However, because of one idiot's lust for power, well, the events of KoTOR happened.
But anyways, I understand this isn't cannon, I just like to believe that Revan was one of those intelligent villains that was simply doing everything in his power to protect the people he cared about.
(Also, yes, I realize Revan could be a she. I simply think of him as a guy)
GLaDOS, all she wants is SCIENCE!
Sweeny Todd he wants revenge for the man that (correct me if I'm wrong, haven't seen it in a while.) raped his wife, or killed his wife, or, something with a wife, and sent him a way.
There's a point here, I'm just to tired to find it.
EDIT: Ok, he banished him, raped his wife, and kidnapped his daughter.
There we go.
Sweeny Todd he wants revenge for the man that (correct me if I'm wrong, haven't seen it in a while.) raped his wife, or killed his wife, or, something with a wife, and sent him a way.
There's a point here, I'm just to tired to find it.
EDIT: Ok, he banished him, raped his wife, and kidnapped his daughter.
There we go.
I actually had to shove my fist into my mouth to stifle my laughter. I don't want to wake my roommate. :Csoes757 said:
OT: I'm gonna go with Red Hood. Shit, poor guy's just fucked up. I mean Christ, he was killed, then resurrected and then Batman, both his mentor and father figure, can't (or won't) do anything to the man who actually killed him. Plus, Red Hood actually cleans up a lot of crime... just does it with a lot of killing in the process...
Hrathen from Elantris perhaps? Although I suppose he?s not the ?real? villain
He is trying to take over and convert the city in the least violent way he can. He only has 3 months until they get invaded and slaughtered for being heretics if he fails and he knows there is no way they will win aganist the armys of his nation. Using the Elantrians as scapegoats is terrible but he didn?t want that to become a slaughter, regrets having to do it due to the time limit and at one point prevents a riot. He believes his religion to be true, thinks that he is ?leading people to the light? and that if everyone converts to his religion his god will come down and rule. Even though Sarene is working against him he doesn?t want to get her killed and respects her. He was involved in the violent overturning of the government in another nation but regrets the mistakes he made that lead to that. He is actually a pretty reasonable guy.
I think this writer like to do this. Mistborn had the Lord Ruler who, while I would not classify him as a villain in name only he was the lesser of two evils and much of what he seemed to be to try and fix his original screw ups.
I would mention people for Games of Thrones but that would be a long list and I suppose that is the point.
The real villains are Dalif and Wyrn.
I think this writer like to do this. Mistborn had the Lord Ruler who, while I would not classify him as a villain in name only he was the lesser of two evils and much of what he seemed to be to try and fix his original screw ups.
I would mention people for Games of Thrones but that would be a long list and I suppose that is the point.
It's common for children of career criminals to be taken into custody by the state. What else do you expect? They just wander the streets alone or get involved with other criminal associated of their parents? No, it's custody till foster parents are found.GunsmithKitten said:
I can't see how there could be a governor who WOULDN'T want the Williamson gang or Dutch's gang to be pacified. It's nonsense that he was the architect as in if ANYONE ELSE had that position of responsibility they wouldn't try to stop the gang.
"(John Marston) was employed because the governor didn't want to risk making Dutch, Bill, Javier, and John martyrs"
Nonsense.
They called in the Army later when Marston's negotiations failed. That clearly shows their priority was a peaceful stand-down and using military force only as a last resort.
And when they are brought Javier alive to be executed by government prison guards, that blows apart your whole "don't involve the government in their deaths".
And there was NO CHANCE the general population would side with or feel sympathy for these maniac killers. The average person were in mortal fear of the very suggestion of their presence.
"it would be a story of betrayal, not of martyrdom by a gang of folk heroes."
Again, Nonsense.
Jesse James is a folk hero - well known by 1911 - to spite famously being killed by an old friend shooting him in the back of the head.
But there were no Jesse James cults, because as much as people may write songs about them they still know they are out of control killers and not to seriously be considered. 1910's the government had absolutely no problem killing any outlaw gangs and their folk hero status was only ever fleeting because at the end of the day, it's psychos like Dutch who took young women as human shields to then execute them anyway to spite every cooperation.
"you really, REALLY think that Allende would have been defiant for the sake of one bandit?"
No. That's not what I said.
I said the US GOVERNMENT would be defiant of sending troops south of the border and risking a large scale war for one bandit. They did send troops over later, but only after Mexican bandits repeatedly crossed into American territory and killed US Servicemen.
This game tries and UTTERLY FAILS to make the story more "interesting" by making the government the bad guy but it wants to have it both ways and utterly contradicts itself. They never showed the government doing anything particularly bad. They COULD have, they could have shown their complicity in racist lynchings of the day, associated the governor with the KKK, with the Confederacy, and so on.
Red Dead Revolver did a real good job of showing the Governor as a Villain, but Redemption just assumed we'd hate him "because herp a derp, he's part of the system derp". Yeah part of the system that gave me guns, dynamite, livery for my horse and so much else.
But how can you tell the difference between not SHOWING or being DICTATED by emotions, and not having emotions.Abandon4093 said:
I still don't see how you can call Obi Wan's character emotionally hollow considering how quietly jovial and warm he is, smiling and showing concern, making witty remarks and observations.
Please, explain how he is "emotionally hollow".
Especially to an extent that this proves that the Jedi are in fact the bad guys while the Sith aren't really villainous to spite doing shit like this:
Meta Knight. Despite being a high-end boss in almost every game he appears in, he's never 'evil'. The only time he's been an antagonist[footnote]Not against his will- he's been possessed and manipulated plenty of times.[/footnote] was when he was working towards what he believed was the greater good, in an 'ends justify the means' kind of way.
Well the Sith aren't inherently evil... when was that ever said? Luke's Jedi Mission was ENTIRELY BASED on the Sith Lord Darth Vader not being entirely evil but that there is good in him.Abandon4093 said:
The Emperor was obviously very bad, and the empire as a whole was on the whole "bad" with their whole blowing up planets and wiping out villages. Sith are defined more by "expressing emotion" but extreme avarice, greed and sadistic indulgence and oppressive control. Only two Sith are seen in the entire original trilogy, one being a de-facto slave to Palpatine probably by Palpatine using his dark arts to perpetuate Vader's life.
"bury your feelings deep"
Wise advice considering how badly his last encounter - a rashful one - was with Darth Vader. More worryingly, how Luke may have even joined Vader given the right pressure.
In Star Wars the Sith are a cult/religion. It does not encompass all force users outside the Jedi order (another religion), For a time it was a huge number of force users and their servants, later this was slimmed down to a much smaller number of force users (2). The Empire was the corruption of a democratic republic by Palpatine.
Jedi don't completely ban all emotion just do not it to control them and suppress those that they find often lead to issues. The Sith encourage anything in the pursuit of either their personal power or in the power of the Sith.
The fact that there is some good in someone does not prevent them from being a Villan.....
while there are arguments that in some extended universe stories the Sith are not the Villans anyone suggesting the Sith in the Movies are anything but villans is deluded.
Jedi don't completely ban all emotion just do not it to control them and suppress those that they find often lead to issues. The Sith encourage anything in the pursuit of either their personal power or in the power of the Sith.
The fact that there is some good in someone does not prevent them from being a Villan.....
while there are arguments that in some extended universe stories the Sith are not the Villans anyone suggesting the Sith in the Movies are anything but villans is deluded.
Sounds like you are citing the awful awful AWFUL prequel trilogy again with Yoda's 6-degrees of separation with emotions bullshit.Abandon4093 said:
No. Just god dammit NO! Ignore the Prequel Trilogy, they make no sense, never let anything that happened in them affect you impression of the series. Just forget it.
Look, the Jedi in the prequel Trilogy were COMPLETELY fucked, nothing made sense they were COMPLETELY at odds with the Jedi shown in the Original trilogy. There are contradictions everywhere, not just with the Jedi.
Yes I can.Abandon4093 said:
We managed FIFTEEN YEARS from the original Trilogy to the prequel trilogy without the latter being in the canon. THEY ARE NOT the basis of the expanded universe, that was written between Return of the Jedi and Phantom Menace and Lucas ignored THE ENTIRE expanded universe!
Why should the insane money-grubbing Lucas be able to decide what is an is not canon? You think I respect him? NOPE! He has voided that.
Some copyright owner can't simply declare "this is canon" and in one stroke ruin EVERYTHING! WE have that power! The power to consider and value above what a piece of paper with copyright says.