I like your magic water idea. I should probably start watching Once Upon a Time, especially since I teach a course involving fairy tales!
Re. the prompt--interesting how every single one of those sleeping/spacial intimacies has been explored in Merlin fanfiction, and that most of them are very popular tropes.
Have a lovely day! And you need never apologize about whining. You rarely do, and when you do it's for good reason. Also, it's your LJ and you can whine if you want to, right? <3 X
Magic water idea is from Once Upon a Time. Not mine. This is why I write fanfic:)
Yes, you should watch it! What they do with the fairy tales is very interesting. It's also got my three favorite tropes: destiny, identity, and relationships:D
It will be interesting to try to write something that doesn't feel overdone. I have done ride sharing when I had Merlin and Arthur ride on Kilgharrah for the merlinadvent series.
Thanks! Looking forward to going nowhere today. It's been a hella busy week.
I don't mind villains who have no chance at redemption. Although I suppose there's a question of whether anybody really has no chance at redemption.
It gives them a bit of a bland distant future. But their present and their past stay interesting to me. If they're past redemption, why are they? That's a hard place to get to! And what must being in that kind of situation be like, what must it do to a person's mind? How would they act, and why? Oooo, the possibilities.
I don't mind that kind of villain :) So long as their character still has depth.
DH and I attempted to have a chat about villains last night, but we don't have many fictional villains we know in common, so it was kind of hard to chat about it in the abstract.
In regard to villains, I don't think that being redeemable is a criterion for an interesting villain. In some cases, it can be a serious drawback, because it sets significant limits on how effective a villain a character can really be, lest their ultimate redemption seem hollow. (If the villain has been torturing people and kicking puppies, how much are you really going to buy an eleventh-hour change of heart?)
I would say that to be interesting, a villain has to have significant qualities that are (a) admirable and/or (b) enviable and/or (c) sympathetic. By admirable, I mean things like being handsome, dapper, or possessing a scrupulous sense of honor -- qualities that would be admired regardless of whether the character was a villain or not. Enviable, in contrast, means that the villain does or says things that the audience wishes they could (even if they never would).
An interesting villain doesn't have to fall into all three categories. For instance, Gordon Gekko in the original Wall Street is not what I'd call admirable -- he'
( ... )
I was thinking of two pairs of villains from tv shows I watch. DH and I were chatting about it last night and I was saying that I prefer villains who are ambiguous. He said, "you mean human"?:D
Do you watch tv? I am watching Once Upon a Time (how this conversation originated) and I am thinking about The Evil Queen vs Rumplestiltskin. EQ is just evil. We know every time we see her that she's going to do something nasty. It's gotten boring (although her most recent actions caused something happy, completely unintentionally on her part, so that is interesting).
Rumpy/Mr Gold is much more ambiguous. We think he's evil, but he does things and it's hard to understand his motivations. I'm always curious to see what he does.
(and now I'm falling asleep, so I have no idea if this has made any sense).
I haven't seen anything but the posters for Once, but I see what you're saying. The premise of the show reminds me a lot of the Bill Willingham comic series Fables, which I think is probably conceptually very similar, if perhaps broader.
One the conceits of Fables is the idea that similar characters in different stories were really the same character; Prince Charming, therefore, is a handsome cad who's romanced and then jilted Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and a bunch of others. Among these integrated characters is the old witch from Hansel and Gretal and a number of similar fairy tales, who now calls herself Frau Totenkinder. She's an ally of the other exiled Fables, ostensibly because Snow White, not knowing who she was, saved her after Hansel and Gretal threw her in the fire. However, she's still a rather sinister figure, and there are sometimes indications that she's playing a much larger game of her own. It makes her one of the more interesting characters in the series, because every time she appears, you wonder what she's up to
( ... )
Yes, for me, I think that what you say at the end there is exactly the point.
It makes her one of the more interesting characters in the series, because every time she appears, you wonder what she's up to.
I think the point is that a good villain needs to be fun to watch: they're cathartic (like Gordon Gekko from Wall Street or his spiritual antecedent, J.R. Ewing on Dallas), they're funny, they're intriguing, etc.
I find villains with backstory and a real reason for doing what they are doing to be very interesting. Uther was a perfect example of a villain but someone who loved their son and thought they were doing the right thing.
A villain with nothing but evil is boring to watch.
However, I'm not sure redemption makes them more interesting. I didn't care if Uther would be redeemed because he was already a great character. Darth Vader in Star Wars was 'redeemed' and he wasn't nearly as interesting to me as Luke or even Palpatine/Darth Sidious. I think, too, the redemption if used has to be believable. Vader shows up in the Force later for saving his son but he'd killed billions so it didn't work for me.
Oh, that is an excellent point. Backstories are very good.
Uther was one of the people I had in mind for an interesting villain, actually.
Hm, very good point. I didn't care if Uther was redeemed in the end either. Plus, it doesn't erase the evil things he did. Maybe redemption isn't the right idea because now that I think about it, I'm not sure I care if a character is redeemed if they've lived an evil life (not wanting to get into religion here, but I don't believe it religiously either).
Was Luke evil? I think I saw the first prequel and then gave up after that and I was never hugely into Star Wars.
Yes, it seems like the redemption has to be done right. Oooh, this is a very interesting idea.
Comments 16
Re. the prompt--interesting how every single one of those sleeping/spacial intimacies has been explored in Merlin fanfiction, and that most of them are very popular tropes.
Have a lovely day! And you need never apologize about whining. You rarely do, and when you do it's for good reason. Also, it's your LJ and you can whine if you want to, right?
<3
X
Reply
Yes, you should watch it! What they do with the fairy tales is very interesting. It's also got my three favorite tropes: destiny, identity, and relationships:D
It will be interesting to try to write something that doesn't feel overdone. I have done ride sharing when I had Merlin and Arthur ride on Kilgharrah for the merlinadvent series.
Thanks! Looking forward to going nowhere today. It's been a hella busy week.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
It gives them a bit of a bland distant future. But their present and their past stay interesting to me. If they're past redemption, why are they? That's a hard place to get to! And what must being in that kind of situation be like, what must it do to a person's mind? How would they act, and why? Oooo, the possibilities.
I don't mind that kind of villain :) So long as their character still has depth.
Reply
DH and I attempted to have a chat about villains last night, but we don't have many fictional villains we know in common, so it was kind of hard to chat about it in the abstract.
Reply
I would say that to be interesting, a villain has to have significant qualities that are (a) admirable and/or (b) enviable and/or (c) sympathetic. By admirable, I mean things like being handsome, dapper, or possessing a scrupulous sense of honor -- qualities that would be admired regardless of whether the character was a villain or not. Enviable, in contrast, means that the villain does or says things that the audience wishes they could (even if they never would).
An interesting villain doesn't have to fall into all three categories. For instance, Gordon Gekko in the original Wall Street is not what I'd call admirable -- he' ( ... )
Reply
Do you watch tv? I am watching Once Upon a Time (how this conversation originated) and I am thinking about The Evil Queen vs Rumplestiltskin. EQ is just evil. We know every time we see her that she's going to do something nasty. It's gotten boring (although her most recent actions caused something happy, completely unintentionally on her part, so that is interesting).
Rumpy/Mr Gold is much more ambiguous. We think he's evil, but he does things and it's hard to understand his motivations. I'm always curious to see what he does.
(and now I'm falling asleep, so I have no idea if this has made any sense).
*waves* Nice to see you:D
Reply
One the conceits of Fables is the idea that similar characters in different stories were really the same character; Prince Charming, therefore, is a handsome cad who's romanced and then jilted Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and a bunch of others. Among these integrated characters is the old witch from Hansel and Gretal and a number of similar fairy tales, who now calls herself Frau Totenkinder. She's an ally of the other exiled Fables, ostensibly because Snow White, not knowing who she was, saved her after Hansel and Gretal threw her in the fire. However, she's still a rather sinister figure, and there are sometimes indications that she's playing a much larger game of her own. It makes her one of the more interesting characters in the series, because every time she appears, you wonder what she's up to ( ... )
Reply
It makes her one of the more interesting characters in the series, because every time she appears, you wonder what she's up to.
I think the point is that a good villain needs to be fun to watch: they're cathartic (like Gordon Gekko from Wall Street or his spiritual antecedent, J.R. Ewing on Dallas), they're funny, they're intriguing, etc.
This bit here. Yes. I can't say it any better.
Reply
A villain with nothing but evil is boring to watch.
However, I'm not sure redemption makes them more interesting. I didn't care if Uther would be redeemed because he was already a great character. Darth Vader in Star Wars was 'redeemed' and he wasn't nearly as interesting to me as Luke or even Palpatine/Darth Sidious. I think, too, the redemption if used has to be believable. Vader shows up in the Force later for saving his son but he'd killed billions so it didn't work for me.
Reply
Uther was one of the people I had in mind for an interesting villain, actually.
Hm, very good point. I didn't care if Uther was redeemed in the end either. Plus, it doesn't erase the evil things he did. Maybe redemption isn't the right idea because now that I think about it, I'm not sure I care if a character is redeemed if they've lived an evil life (not wanting to get into religion here, but I don't believe it religiously either).
Was Luke evil? I think I saw the first prequel and then gave up after that and I was never hugely into Star Wars.
Yes, it seems like the redemption has to be done right. Oooh, this is a very interesting idea.
Reply
Reply
Also, Vader wasn't redeemed by his own actions, right?
Reply
Leave a comment