old villains were the best, they did NOT fuck around.
and Alba can’t even be seen as a proper antagonist because she was a sympathetic, redeemable character defined by her understandable trauma. it’s like this all over Pixar and much of Disney these days; they can’t commit to a fucking villain. Turning Red, Encanto, Strange World, Toy Story 4; none of these had real villains and they all arguably suffered for it. hell, the last real villain in recent memory in Pixar or Disney, besides the generally unremarkable villains in Marvel, was Evelyn Deavor in Incredibles 2, and she fucking rocked.
I get you, and I don’t want ALL stories to lack a proper classic villain- that said, most people will never or very very rarely face “cartoon evil” in real life. In real life villains tend to be a matter of perspective, most are human and have relatable attributes or sympathetic bents when viewed from certain lighting. The classic villain with their plots and clearly defined and often “irredeemable evil” to make clear they are just wrong in every way and absolve us of any feelings of guilt or sympathy so that they can be served their fate and we cheer- that’s unrealistic generally. In real life that way of thinking is generally quite harmful and dangerous. So I
Do appreciate these “everyday villains” in everyday stories people can relate to. The villain is generally a broad abstract-
Someone who based on their traits or generic motivations like greed or a love of cruelty we can project any face we want on to them. Often the villain isn’t even a person but a concept, often a…
.. shadow of the hero and a tell of what the hero must overcome or change in themselves. A villain might embody the concept of pollution, or perhaps hate or fear. Aladdin was greedy and a thief, Jaffar was greedy and a thief. They both wanted the lamp, they both wanted to power, they both were after the princess with it- but Jaffar and Aladdin are shown to have different hearts and circumstances. They went about things differently even if their overall paths were lined up. Scar was irresponsible- the pride lands were a mess under him. Samba was irresponsible. Each killed the ruler to gain power. Scar was cruel and ambitious. Simba was kind but lacked all ambition. Had scar been tempered he could have as easily been the hero- had he done what he did to try and better things and learned a lesson about being less ambitious and more understanding perhaps. If the pride
Lands weren’t ruined as they were, Simba wouldn’t likely have returned, and if he did- he’d be a guy out for revenge on..
.. a changed and benevolent ruler. Totally different movie when a deposed dictators kid goes on a wild break abandoning his people and years later comes back to revenge kill the man that overthrew his father and then oversaw a prosperous reformation or averted mass catastrophe due to over spending of resources or such. So perspective and all that. Many Disney villains could be sympathetic and some were even successfully (or not) retconned to be so simply by adding some backstory or giving them a later story with a “redemption arc,” because many of the heroes could arguably be villains and are perhaps less sympathetic than they seem when we remove over the top cartoon villains to make them look good. Without scar and genocide- Simba looks bad. Without the guy trying to use the lamp to take over the world, Aladdin is a f&ck boi that tricked a woman into dating him with lie after lie and flashy displays.
These new stories, if you take away the “villain” you’re left with largely “normal” and “relatable” people in often fantastic circumstances. They generally look no worse than when the “villain” was there. It’s also a lot easier to puzzle out the ability and how the message might be relevant in your life if you are dealing with an overbearing family member and watch a film about an overbearing family member than picking up the subtext of how a fight against a demon who wants to unravel reality because it hates laughter relates to how to deal with depression. So I will say there is a more “real” and portable element to these newer stories. They’re perhaps more “personal,” and a general message that the “villain” isn’t someone to kill or hope they slip and fall off a building so that bings can wrap up nickels but is a person to deal with and confront is perhaps a good lesson for kids.
But gravity falls was great and I still think we should have “proper” villain stories and stories with high stakes and less relatable or more fantastic back bones. They are fun, they do have value, and I like fiction that takes me to places I can’t go in this world easily or at all, places that maybe don’t exist. There is also value in stories that aren’t too personal. Asides being able to speak to a larger group, they also can be easier for those with certain traumas or sensitivities to have a lens to safely work through some things or absorb some concepts where something “too close to home” might be too much to process.
and Alba can’t even be seen as a proper antagonist because she was a sympathetic, redeemable character defined by her understandable trauma. it’s like this all over Pixar and much of Disney these days; they can’t commit to a fucking villain. Turning Red, Encanto, Strange World, Toy Story 4; none of these had real villains and they all arguably suffered for it. hell, the last real villain in recent memory in Pixar or Disney, besides the generally unremarkable villains in Marvel, was Evelyn Deavor in Incredibles 2, and she fucking rocked.
Do appreciate these “everyday villains” in everyday stories people can relate to. The villain is generally a broad abstract-
Someone who based on their traits or generic motivations like greed or a love of cruelty we can project any face we want on to them. Often the villain isn’t even a person but a concept, often a…
Lands weren’t ruined as they were, Simba wouldn’t likely have returned, and if he did- he’d be a guy out for revenge on..