>>Re the Disney villains - too much of a muchness, they all look the same to me.<<
That's basically how I felt too.
>>To be fair, that's a problem I have in everyday life - so-called beautiful people don't make that much of an impact on me, I prefer people with their own faces and I find beauty in different shapes.<<
I agree. It's hard enough for me to recognize people without them trying to look all alike.
>>I can't be unbiased about Cap'n Hook - he will always look like Dustin Hoffman in my eyes since the movie Hook.<<
I loved that movie.
>>My phrase is that they 'own their own faces'. They are recognisable because they have more than beauty and youth - they have character and enough to share.<<
Well said. I think that's a key thing -- people who insist on being themselves, not trying to be someone else. It's really where I wanted to go with this poem too.
Re: Yes...technoshamanNovember 14 2013, 04:13:42 UTC
*nods* Hmmm. You know......
While the "good guys" always have the toys, the bad guys always get the *lines*... OTOH, they're almost always (here being a notable exception) played as less dimensional than the hero. The "bad guys" above are *interesting*... wonder if you could do more with that? Wonder if it would sell in big markets??
(That's what I like about Dave Weber's Honorverse. The "bad guys" are *interesting*. :)
>> OTOH, they're almost always (here being a notable exception) played as less dimensional than the hero. <<
Usually the bad guys are just there to make the hero look good. This bores me. I prefer cases where the hero and villain have opposed goals that both have some merit, the villain has plausible motives, and/or their traits are either mirrored or matching. It helps when the villain has layers of personality and isn't just a one-trick pony. I really love Dr. Infanta in "Lifeyears" because she's such a mix of good and evil, it depends on how people meet her whether they think of her as a superhero or supervillain. Also, I find that it's a lot easier to balance a plot when the hero and villain are equally matched.
>> The "bad guys" above are *interesting*... wonder if you could do more with that? Wonder if it would sell in big markets?? ... )
By sheer chance I've been rereading Disney's Illusion of Life - the book's out of print and I got hold of a used copy recently so I haven't seen it in 10 years.
The more I think about it, the more I think a truer version of "Disney villains made conventionally attractive" wouldn't actually make them look all that different from the movies, because nearly all their traits are caricatures - they're designed as really broad and cartoony because it's easier to tell stories through cartoonier characters. So making them "more conventionally attractive" wouldn't be a big change - Facillier would have a gap between his front teeth rather than a GAP, Jafar would still have a curved nose, Ursula would still be fat, just not caricaturish, that stuff.
Comments 9
Reply
That's basically how I felt too.
>>To be fair, that's a problem I have in everyday life - so-called beautiful people don't make that much of an impact on me, I prefer people with their own faces and I find beauty in different shapes.<<
I agree. It's hard enough for me to recognize people without them trying to look all alike.
>>I can't be unbiased about Cap'n Hook - he will always look like Dustin Hoffman in my eyes since the movie Hook.<<
I loved that movie.
>>My phrase is that they 'own their own faces'. They are recognisable because they have more than beauty and youth - they have character and enough to share.<<
Well said. I think that's a key thing -- people who insist on being themselves, not trying to be someone else. It's really where I wanted to go with this poem too.
Reply
While the "good guys" always have the toys, the bad guys always get the *lines*... OTOH, they're almost always (here being a notable exception) played as less dimensional than the hero. The "bad guys" above are *interesting*... wonder if you could do more with that? Wonder if it would sell in big markets??
(That's what I like about Dave Weber's Honorverse. The "bad guys" are *interesting*. :)
Reply
"Where does he get those marvelous toys?"
>> the bad guys always get the *lines*... <<
Often true.
>> OTOH, they're almost always (here being a notable exception) played as less dimensional than the hero. <<
Usually the bad guys are just there to make the hero look good. This bores me. I prefer cases where the hero and villain have opposed goals that both have some merit, the villain has plausible motives, and/or their traits are either mirrored or matching. It helps when the villain has layers of personality and isn't just a one-trick pony. I really love Dr. Infanta in "Lifeyears" because she's such a mix of good and evil, it depends on how people meet her whether they think of her as a superhero or supervillain. Also, I find that it's a lot easier to balance a plot when the hero and villain are equally matched.
>> The "bad guys" above are *interesting*... wonder if you could do more with that? Wonder if it would sell in big markets?? ... )
Reply
Reply
...I can't help but wonder about Gaston. I presume he's off laughing as he clutches his employment contracts for brooding romantic heroes.
--Miranda
Reply
By sheer chance I've been rereading Disney's Illusion of Life - the book's out of print and I got hold of a used copy recently so I haven't seen it in 10 years.
The more I think about it, the more I think a truer version of "Disney villains made conventionally attractive" wouldn't actually make them look all that different from the movies, because nearly all their traits are caricatures - they're designed as really broad and cartoony because it's easier to tell stories through cartoonier characters. So making them "more conventionally attractive" wouldn't be a big change - Facillier would have a gap between his front teeth rather than a GAP, Jafar would still have a curved nose, Ursula would still be fat, just not caricaturish, that stuff.
Reply
Leave a comment