Redeeming Villains in Stories - Right or Wrong?

[Convincing John]

Of course, when you create a story, it's up to you whether or not the bad guy should or shouldn't redeem themselves. Depending on what story you're doing, it might or might not work.

Doc Hopper eventually hired an assassin to kill Kermit. The Skeksis were always cruel and evil. Nicky Holiday sort of redeemed himself, but it was too late by the end of the story. Jareth is a different type of villain...

If Doc redeemed himself at the end of TMM, the story wouldn't have that same climax. Plus, we wouldn't have gotten that cool scene of Animal crashing through the roof!

Sometimes it's just fun to write about villains who stay bad throughout the whole story. When I wrote "The Best Neighbor", it was fun to create a nasty, rotten, mean, filthy, heartless villain. It's just a story though, it's all in good fun.

Convincing John

 

[GonzoLeaper]

This is why "Return of the Jedi" is my favorite of all the movies because we have such a clear picture of redemption. And as a Christian, it really resonates with me as a picture of the redemption Jesus offers to everyone through His death and Resurrection.
I will have to post the link later, but if you look on Youtube.com for this, you can find a great video that illustrates what I'm talking about really well. Someone did an incredible job putting together a Star Wars video set to the awesome song by Relient K, "Deathbed". That song is truly epic and it's a great picture of how Jesus can save everyone, no matter what they've done or where they've been.
And that video shows Luke as the Christ figure who continually pursues Darth Vader and shows love to him. "I won't fight you," Luke says. "I know there is still good in you."

Here's the Relient K video I was talking about. This is just awesome! I love Relient K and I particularly love this song as it so clearly points out the love and forgiveness Jesus offers through His death and Resurrection- and the eternal hope we can all have in Him. And then to marry it with Star Wars, which I also love because of its strong redemption storyline and its own Christ figure in Luke- very fitting. I love it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJTWn1fazOk

And while I'm posting Star Wars-inspired videos, here's another cool one worth checking out- it's a song called "Bad Dad" by ApologetiX- a Christian band that specializes in parody (I know that's not everyone's thing- but if you can hang with it, it's pretty good stuff - this one is a parody of Daniel Powter's "Bad Day")- Anyway- the video uses imagery from "Jingle All the Way", the "Star Wars" movies and a few other sources- and it really comes together well. This one emphasizes the truth of Psalms 27:10- "Though my father and mother forsake me, The Lord will receive me."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYfKpbyQCk

Enjoy.

 

[CensoredAlso]

Thanks for sharing, GonzoLeaper, very moving and creative!

 

[GonzoLeaper]

Glad ya liked it, heralde.

 

[Gonzo's Hobbit]

I really think it depends on the character and how much it gets fleshed out. I think it works when you actually see the thought process of the villian and you see the gradual change that happens over time. I think it turns into a copout or a Deus ex Machina when a villian is evil one moment and then right in the midst of the conflict suddenly becomes a good guy. Those often don't work in my mind. The stories I like when this happens are ones where perhaps one particular villiam has a redeeming moment but there are other villians who don't. I like stories like that because it shows that people are capable of change as well as the fact that there are people who won't change.
An example of this whole process that I like was the Avatar series on Nick, the difference between Azula and Zuko. Zuko starts out being evil but through the coarse of the second season he undergoes a change that one can see start to happen even in the first season. It doesn't magically manifest on it's own though, it grows. Azula on the other hand, remains as the protagonizing force throughout the whole series, doesn't change and there is the feeling of satisfaction at the end when she is finaly taken down.
So to wrap up, for me it's a matter of, does it work? does it mean something? and is it fleshed out in the right way?

 

[D'Snowth]

Convincing John's point about creating stories, and determining a character's fate in your own eyes actually reminded me of something that I have done with a specific character of mine...

This character was indeed a recurring villain in a cartoon/comic series I did from 1999 to 2003: the character was evil and diabolical during the first two "seasons" of the series, even going so far as to try and kill the protagonists at one point. However, by Season Three, I attempted an experiment where the character was suddenly a "good guy", and actually helped the protagonists on a couple of occasions. By the final fourth season, however, the character attempts to kill the protagonists again (once with an accomplise, and the other where all my series' villains tag-team to wipe out the protagonists); it is during this season where the character admits that she lied when she said she went straight, in an attempt to build up their trust, so she can try and wipe them out again.

Now, since I ended the series, all of those characters essentially were retired, however, this specific character I actually decided to revive, in puppet form, so she can be an antogonist in one of my puppet sitcoms that hasn't gone into production yet; however, I don't know if I can rightfully refer to the character as a "villain" in this case: for this series, she is not necessarily "evil" or "diabolical" as she is selfish and demeaning (wanting the main protagonist to give up her life goals to be her protege instead).

 

[minor muppetz]

Doc Hopper eventually hired an assassin to kill Kermit. The Skeksis were always cruel and evil. Nicky Holiday sort of redeemed himself, but it was too late by the end of the story. Jareth is a different type of villain...

If Doc redeemed himself at the end of TMM, the story wouldn't have that same climax. Plus, we wouldn't have gotten that cool scene of Animal crashing through the roof!

I have kind of wondered what the point was of having Doc Hopper not redeem himself. I guess they were making some kind of point by having him still want Kermit dead, after that speech and initially looking like he'd have a change of heart before ordering his men to kill him, but still. I don't know what you mean by the story not having the same climax.

It is kind of interesting how in both Sesame Street movies, it's hard to determine if the bad guys learned their lessons. In Follow That Bird Big Bird escapes, they get pulled over, and it's implied they'd at least go to court. Sam seemed to take it fairly well while Sid started crying. And in Elmo in Grouchland Huxley seemed to redeem himself after Bug decided to end their friendship, and Huxley kept saying that he'd give things back... But Bug made the statement "Less talking, more giving" and then Huxley started berating him or something, as if Huxley didn't really mean it or changed back.

Seems like it's sometimes good for villians to become good, and sometimes not. I don't really like the twist at the end of Dr. Evil in Goldmember, where it's revealed Austin Powers and Dr. Evil are really brothers, and then Dr. Evil becomes good. Dr. Evil was very funny as a villian. At least they didn't make any more sequels showing Dr. Evil as a good guy.

 

[Drtooth]

Seems like it's sometimes good for villians to become good, and sometimes not. I don't really like the twist at the end of Dr. Evil in Goldmember, where it's revealed Austin Powers and Dr. Evil are really brothers, and then Dr. Evil becomes good. Dr. Evil was very funny as a villian. At least they didn't make any more sequels showing Dr. Evil as a good guy.

Well, I think it was time with the third movie to let Austin Powers ride off into the sunset. Anything else would have been overkill. They did consider an animated series for HBO with the original voice cast, but then they did the third movie instead (as far as I can remember... this was years ago after they made the second one when they reported it).

As for bad guys going good... I remember reading an interview between Akira Toryama (Dragonball) and Eiichiro Oda (One Piece) about characters becoming good. If I can remember it, Akira said something to the extent of it may be a cliche but it feels so good when you do it.

 

[CensoredAlso]

OK here's a slightly different example. I've noticed that fans (and um, non-fans) of the film Ferris Bueller's Day Off, often seem to disagree on whether the character of Ferris Bueller is a hero or a villain.

Apparently there was this essay written online about how Ferris shows all the classic signs of being a psychopath (yes, this is what people do on the Internet in their spare time. ). He's irresponsible, manipulative and doesn't except the consequences of his actions, etc. He risks getting his best friend into trouble just to satisfy his own needs. Yet everyone still worships him because he's so charming. Basically someone like Ferris would be considered a bad person in real life and the movie is just glorifying bad behavior.

But still others insist that if you think Ferris is a psychopath, you're missing the point of the movie. That ultimately, Ferris' goal for the day was to force his best friend to stand up for himself. So his intentions were good, even if his methods were questionable.

Plus there's the whole "it's only a movie!" thing.

 

[GonzoLeaper]

Great example with Ferris Bueller's Day Off - if not for all the language, it would be a great movie. I don't care for some of those aspects of it- but otherwise I love the movie. "Ferris Bueller, you're my hero."