Death wasn't doing his job, because it wasn't the time for Puss to die yet, he had still one life left, Death was simply hunting down Puss because he was disgusted by the fact Puss never valued all the lives that have been gifted to him and never valued them enough, so for Death was just simply personal hunting.
@@dandycrow2821 Death taking away Puss’ lives when they’re wasted shows he’s doing what he has to do; if Puss isn’t taking care of his lives, Death has to take it away. Death is just an antagonist to me, since what he does is in nature of what he does; and thankfully, Death gave Puss a wake-up call to not be reckless; and I for one welcome this depiction of Death.
@@robbiewalker2831 Death has to take away Puss' lives when this dies, for Death it was just personal, even one of Puss' lives in the cave of the Dark Forest tells him "YOU'RE CHEATING!" before being shut, and Puss' points out to Death that he was still alive, Death himself admitted it was personal, because "Puss In Boots LAUGHS in the face of Death", making "a favor to both of them" instead of just waiting for Puss' time to come. Only when Puss stopped to be afraid of Death this latter renounced to his hunting and to torment Puss.
Hi there, nive video, just one little addendum: I truly think that having Death fight after the destruction of the wish is not a good idea, simply from a thematic point. The movie is all about Puss's growth in understanding the value of life, especially his last life. If the wish is destroyed before his fight with Death, then has no choice, but to fight for his life, he can't make a decision. The reason why that scene is so cathartic is because he has the wish, but he still chooses to abandon it and stick to his last life. This is what gives real weight to his decision.
This is one of the best movies I've seen in a really long time. It does so many things well while blending comedy and tragedy. Also the Excalibur joke is absolutely banger.
One thing that I like about him killing his bakers dozen is that he’s not doing it to show off how intimidating he is. Instead when they die he just goes “Well shucks, there goes another one”
A lot of reactors didn’t even know who jack Horner was which is exactly why he said he’s been forgotten and cast aside lol. The Meta nature of that is clever.
He reminds me of Freiza in dragon ball z. He was a tyrant and didn't care for his soldiers. He sat back and wondering what kind of wine to have. (I know dbza but still) Jack is just that. "Oh my people are dying eh so what am I going to have for lunch." I actually love this. I am evil without saying I am evil.
4:40 Actually complete disagree. Thanks to the fact of the final fight with death, the last people who still would be motivated to go after the map: Puss and Kitty; pretty much lost interest in the map and thus decided to rip it in shreds. Also they only team up for real because everything was sorted out pretty much right after the fight with Death. Otherwise they would still be fighting over the map itself.
If you destroy the wish before the confrontation with death, it undermine Puss understanding of the value of life. If he had no other choice is harder to justify him understanding rather the resign himself to the fact
Yeah I agree 100%, flip Jack's fight with Wolf's fight and it would've been just a little bit better imo. Specially since I can visualize the thing you said about Jack falling and then comes the whistle and sends a shiver down my spine. Still I can also comprehend why it was made this way too, since the arc is done and defeating Jack demonstrates how well Team Friendship works.
I'd argue that death is neither 100% evil nor is he doing his job. He literally says that he's coming to take Puss' last life prematurely, and when one of the pass Puss lives says "that's cheating", death says "ssshhh. Don't tell anyone" or something along those lines. He's going after Puss not because it is his job, but because he finds Puss arrogant and decided he's going to end the legend. So when Puss accepts that he will only have 1 life and is ready to finally value his life to the fullest, Death no longer wants to kill him because the legend he want's to kill is dead. He even exclaims in frustration how he shouldn't play with his food because he didn't get the chance to kill the legend before Puss did.
I'm not sure I really consider Goldylocks and the Three bears to be villains. They're antagonistic in that they go against Puss and his goals, but they're not evil. They're really more of a rival faction. Overall though I really liked your analysis of Jack Horner and can't agree more on that. Very well thought out and very nice seeing a power motivated villain who still manages to be interesting.
While I agree that Jack Horner after the scene with Death and Puss feels overdone, I think it’s really important that Puss chooses to decline the wish himself because he shows in a way that we can actually see and feel that he has changed and that this last life of his is truly one that he will cherish. I disagree that it shows pride, quite the contrary in fact. Since Puss recognizes and acknowledges death, and that he is not exempt from it, Puss shows humility in his acceptance of his own mortality.
Big Jack Horner is pure evil done right he doesn't care about anyone unless they can serve him but even then he won't go out of his way to save or to have his pawns meet horrible ends Just so happens to be how things turn out unlike some other badly written pure evil villains who kill perfectly good pawns just as a display of their evilness and not to serve a goal
I think that maybe the only reason Jack thought his spoiled life was useless and hated it probably stems from him being spoiled. If you think about it, he would have got everything he ever wanted growing up, except magic. It was likely the only thing as a spoiled kid growing up that his parents couldn't provide. So naturally, a rich, spoiled kid with access to large amounts of funds, and a thriving business to continue to provide said funds, that he would resort to collect magic items in his adult life to give himself what he was never able to get as a child. Maybe it's too analytical, but that's how I like to think his motivation comes from, which I think just adds to the evil because then it's all for selfish gain. On top of his already cruel mentality
To me, Jack _kind of_ has a legit origin story and it’s great bc of how simple it is: he was so privileged that he looked at the one, single thing he didn’t own (magic) and decided that he needed it. It’s funny and scary bc some people really are just that selfish 💀
Headcannon: his parents hired Mary Poppins to watch/discipline him as a boy which had the inverse effect of making him even more envious of magic. Unfortunately she had an “accident” and was forced to resign early, but little Jack took her bag as his first magic prize (Edit: typo)
@@damilolaowolabi6716a headcanon is canon that exists in your head. Meaning, since there's no evidence for or against that theory, it's just something they want to be canon, but it's just not until it is confirmed or denied.
Destroying the wish before the fight with Death would have completely undermined the theme. Puss needed to choose to fight for his last life not have no choice but to fight for his last life, otherwise he wouldn't have become the kind of hero that Death felt he should spare.
Thank you, I feel a lot of the movie went over their head. I've analysed the shit out of this movie and absolutely everything is correct. From a writing, visual and coherency pov.
strongly agree. i do understand the tonal shift complaint, but in order to change it, jack would have to die some other way. i prefer the scenes how they are though, i think it was made this way to ease tension after the final battle with death. comic relief eases audiences, and it's a fun ending while not being too emotionally intense. i hope jay films takes note of why the death fight was the way it was. it's startling to see it go over his head. he's got a great format going here and i'm rooting for him, but i think his actual analysis needs some work.
I disagree with this, because Puss already knows Death is after him that’s why he seeks out the last wish. Even if the wolf isn’t physically here he remains a threat to Puss and so he still has to make the choice of taking the lives or facing his fate.
Came here to say this, thank you for putting it so succinctly. Giving Puss NO CHOICE would have forced him to come to terms with a situation he can't control, but that means if ANOTHER way to prolong his life ever came along (not unlikely in a world this teeming with magic), he would chase after that instead, proving he'd learned nothing. Kind of reminds me of Frozen: Anna has two love interests, but instead of giving her the agency to choose, the writers just make one guy IRREDEEMABLY EVIL, so Anna ends up with the nice guy by default. Which is less a choice she made and more a reaction to inescapable circumstance. By contrast, making Puss come to terms with mortality when there was still a chance to escape it means he CHOSE it, and that demonstrates character growth. Character drives story, so Puss having the opportunity to make that choice is what MAKES the movie successful.
He's not in your face about like "argh I'm evil argh!" He's just like, "mhm I've killed 12 men, what a lovely Tuesday." That's why I think he works so well. He's the ultimate evil but he's nonchalant about it.
Excalibur still having the stone attached (essentially turning it into a club) has got to be one of the best fairytale gags from this franchise. Also the Fairy Godmother wand was a nice callback, I'm sure she'd be glad it ended up with such a corrupted person.
Jack stealing it could mean that Arthur's father worked for him or at least knew Jack. I don't know, it opens a lot of questions -unless the islands theory is real-
One thing I love about Jack as a character is that he's technically a competent villain, given that despite being as spoiled and ungrateful as he is, he was somehow competent enough to continue and build on his family business while also getting his hands on the magical relics, which while yeah he probably payed people off, but that probably isnt cheap given its magical objects and whatnot
A very competent villian, the only reason he lost honestly is because he didnt care for anyone but himself. And thus found himself outnumbered at the end. If he had all his henchmen at the end? he would have won easy peasy.
I would imagine he would need a large amount of money to buy tools, weapons, etc, things he needed for his adventures which would require money, so yea, since it was an easy option, he continued his family business, he may be spoiled, but he’s not stupid
@syadow No, he's the Disney Company. He's literally Dreamworks giving a big middle finger to the modern incarnation of the Disney Company. All of his magic items are references to classic Disney movies that have been exploited nowadays for cheap cash grabs. Jack is a giant, bloated, irredeemably, insatiably corrupt corporate monster who just wants to steal all the magic in the world. Sound familiar?
I haven’t started this video yet but I love that the movie was willing to have Jack be purely and unapologetically evil instead of trying to come up with some kind of excuse, sending the message that, yes, some people are just that bad.
I even love how jimney tries to do this by asking about his childhood. Which turned out to be extremely ideal. There is legit nothing to look for he is just a monster.
Definetely the best of Jack Horner is that he is essentially the classic style of villain. No sad backstory. No traumas. No redemption at the end. No plot twists. Just a purely dark hearted man that is 100% honest and only wants power, all of it
Seriously. Older movies gave us villains like Ursula, Jafar, and Anastasia’s Rasputin which all have amazing moments while being completely wicked and even horrifying at times.
@@josephmartin9737 I think after years and years of sympathetic villains with troubled backstories, trauma, and justification for their actions. It's nice to see just straight up dastardly rat bastard villains being evil cuz they're just genuine assholes. It's sort of a post ironic twist of expecting the villain to have a sympathetic twist that we've all sort of gotten used to.
@@OmegaTrooper1 At this point in everything I watch and read I look for those villains because I personally haven’t ever been super on board with sympathetic villains unless done really well. I think Thanos is a good villain because he shouldn’t be sympathetic. He’s a lunatic that only has “good intentions” if you ignore his end goal being half of all life going away. If half of everyone dies, they’ll still repopulate. Why not just double or triple the resources in the universe? That’s a good way to make someone almost sympathetic while still making a villain. An actual hood sympathetic villain is Goldie in this movie because she does bad things, has a wrong goal, sees what’s wrong with the goal, and changes. Sympathetic villains shouldn’t be people who just say “ends justify means” and are somehow purely good intentioned as they stab a small family to find what they want. Those roles of horrible acts should be filled by the people who would actually do them: completely psychotic unimaginably evil people. Sephiroth from the Final Fantasy series is also a great example of someone who as a twist isn’t an attempt at a sympathetic villain. He talks about achieving peace and saving the world through bad means for a good end, but he’s eventually clearly just evil and says that to get people to follow him so he doesn’t have to do everything himself because he’s horribly evil. There’s so much variation that can be done while still having compelling characters, and we lost that during everyone having to be sympathetic. Often times, if someone is doing such bad things, it is likely at a point that they are actually a bad person.
I think he is a great villian specifically becomes he contrasts the depth of the others. By himself, he'd score lower, but as part of the cast, he scores very high by adding the comically evil note that the other antagonists can't bring. It's all about how he fits in the story.
Well actually he fits his original pretty well. The original ryhme he is known for is the flashback except with a few changes. Essentially his story is meant as a warning against spoiling your kids. Because they turn out like sociopaths who think they can do anything because their to good to be told no or punished.
Jack Horner is a breath of fresh air. In a sea of sympathetic villains who might as well be antiheros, you have Jack Horner who would cross the street to kick a puppy and I love that.
It's not that sympathetic villains are necessarily bad, it's how they are executed. Straight up bad guys can be great villains, but they can also fall flat if they are executed poorly. Plus it kinda seems like we get both of these types of villains when one type saturates the market media too often, the other will start showing up more often.
Jacks funny and a joy to watch. He does his job perfectly. Also if puss destroyed the wish before death that would have been terrible lmao. His choice to put it down is what showcases just how much he grew.
If the wish is destroyed before death shows up, like you suggested, it removes a difficult decision for Puss that really establishes his development. He chose not to wish for more lives rather than having no choice at all.
@@jayfilms99 Let's be honest here, the wish needs to be destroyed somehow. It represents all the characters recognizing that they have everything they could ever wish for already. One of the strengths of the movie is that no one uses the wish and instead decide to accept and cherish what they already have. The being said, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to destroy the wish unless someone bad is after the wish. The fight with Death obviously requires the wish to still be there or else it loses next to all of its impact. Notably, the ending scene with Jack isn't really that much of a fight scene. The real fight with Jack ends when Kitty Softpaws pushed him into the bag. Giving him two Spanish splinters isn't a fight scene, he's just there to give everyone else a reason to destroy the wish.
I disagree with flipping the death and jack horner confrontation. The fact that Puss tosses the wish away when he still has it shows that he has grown while the alternative is growth but to a lesser extent, you would feel like puss didn't have a choice in the matter and had to accept it. It is why I am not a fan of showing Goldielocks being ok with her family after the wish is destroyed, I think it would have been more powerful if say Puss gave her the wish and she also turned it down, then the final confrontation is dealing with Jack who we can all agree nobody would want to have the wish. I can agree that it is a downgrade, the animation with puss against death is so amazing but its not bad by any means and seeing all the characters work together if feels like a good comedic climax where as the death fight was a drama climax.
Honestly, you have a real point. Cause if that was the way things played out, Goldie and the bears helping Puss fight Jack wouldn’t feel as abrupt as it did.
@@quoipi I think that was the intention but I don't think its quite strong enough. For example Goldie could have just come to the conclusion that it isn't worth sacrificing her current family for this new family, however I don't think that moment is quite a turning down the wish as their is still the possibility they could get the wish. It feels weaker
I agree. If you flip the fights then you have a big comedic fight, then a smaller scale but more intimate battle. I actually think it is better in the movie for the only reasoning being that Puss needed to accept that he is willing to face death, he needs to regain the blade that he abandoned, and that afterwards he needs to face a much more dangerous threat. I only refer to Jack being a more dangerous threat for the sake that he will wish to become essentially the most powerful sorcerer and has fun destroying anyone in his path as opposed to Death who is doing his job, although he does like striking fear into people. Jack got pretty darn close to becoming what he wanted, he would be quite an issue to deal with if his wish comes true.
@@JasperLane It’s why having her rush off to save Baby Bear, and after the Death fight and witnessing Puss and Kitty’s realizations that they have what they wanted, Goldie fully realizes she has what she wanted, no wish necessary. Which makes her turn down the wish of Puss was offer her it. Still a good movie, but an added minute or two could have made it all the better.
I love how they just couldn't decide if they wanted a silly cartoon villain, a serious villain or someone who's sympathetic so they just put all of the types into their movie and somehow it doesn't feel overcrowded
The script is unbelievably tight on this movie istg. It helps that the villains all (kinda) have the same goal and are going to the same destination, so there’s no jumping around or over-explaining each villain’s motives.
The fact that so many people still see the wolf as evil is honestly a testament to how sympathetic they make Puss, along with how subtle they make the reason for Wolf's sinister attitude. You have to remember, Puss is loveable, he's a hero and helps people...but he does it all for his image. He doesn't value anything at all in his life, including his life, he only ever values himself and he knows that. And as he's doing all this, he as the nerve, the absolute gall, to literally laugh in deaths face about his nine lives, and death followed him, having to put up with the constant irredeemable existence that this guy who is actively laughing at him is leading. Which is ultimately why he revels in finally being able to take Puss's life. Since death is a force of nature, he probably doesn't even speak to everyone else he has to reap. He probably doesn't even have to show himself or even take his blades out. Why does he act frustrated with not being able to take Puss's life at the end? Because suddenly becoming redeemable for the last ninth of your life doesn't change the fact that you were a terrible person for 8/9ths of the rest of it. It's also likely that death doesn't believe Puss can really change, but since Puss is showing signs of changing he has to stop actively pursuing his death and has to let it happen the natural way due to a moral code he likely has.
@@yellowpig1026 because imagine doing the very thing your existence is focused on. Now imagine someone decided that dying doesn’t kill them and laughs at you cause you can’t do anything about it. Now imagine having to watch this person lose life after life doing the absolute stupidest things simply cuz he has the life to do so. Would that not piss you off? I would me and I would go after him for his last life as well. He didn’t value his other lives so why not make this one short and interesting at the very least.
Death even went on to say "I came here to take the life of an arrogant warrior. But..... I don't see him now." He may be a force of nature, but he lives by his own code. Just like the saying give credit where credit is due, Puss managed to show Death that he was not the same as he was in his previous 8 lives. He was humbled by the fact of yes, he is going to die one day. Death recognised that, and yeah pretty upset over it, he still stuck by it and walked off. The look over his shoulder screamed "Y'know one day I will be back for you." And the look from Puss said "And I'll let you have me then." Was more than enough respect between the two
Doesn’t change the fact that he is evil just to take puss live before time, for you to be a “force of nature” you cannot have feelings, it’s just work and done, wolf let puss escape so many times because he enjoy the fear that’s pretty evil for me, hell even wolf didn’t attack puss while being with the old woman because he saw puss living something worse than death, for death to be and antagonist it would need to be that puss is death and he is taking him to hell, but puss has one life left, that strait up makes him a villain
I love Jack as a villain for THIS movie specifically. I just think he fills his role so well. If the Goldie gang was the only other one after the wish, I think it’d damper the urgency a bit. Goldie and Kittys’ wishes wouldn’t impact the whole Shrekverse, Puss’s wish would actively hinder his character development, but behind all these wishes is Jack, and if he gets the wish, he’d basically be the most powerful person in the Shrek universe. It makes the chase for the wish feel more full and interesting, so I think he was a needed addition. But the choice to not flesh him out was honestly really smart. If they did that, the movie would have been so cramped and all over the place, even though Jack was a needed addition, he couldn’t overstay his welcome. There is also more to a character than complex motives and development. I love one note baddies, as long as they leave an impact, whether it’s because of their demeanour, their humour, their design, or just plain being evil for the sake of it. I like sympathetic villains too, but especially in Jack’s case where giving him depth would have added a layer that I think could muddy the waters, going with a delightfully one note approach to him, focusing mainly on humour and camp, while somehow still tying him into the ‘death’ theme, was a fantastic decision. But I agree with you abt the Death vs the Jack climax. I didn’t even think about it but the death fight being the true finale might have given the Jack fight a bit more weight.
I think Jack being very simple in character makes it his biggest strength. He’s so despicable and self aware of it, haven’t seen a villain like him in a while
I like how the Shrekverse is a parody of Disney and that he keeps Jiminy Cricket around and flicks him off at the end lol Like we need kids movies that pull no punches and it's amazing that Dreamworks can make a villain off of a nursery rhyme character and make it work
You know what would’ve boosted the final fight with Jack Horner? If it ended with Death coming back and claiming Jack himself. Like, we don’t see the kill, but once Puss and everyone has escaped the arena, Jack’s left and he hears the whistle. He turns and sees Death, showing fear for the first time in the movie
Imagine this. Jack survives the star explosion and lays on the ground, broken and battered, never to move again. Death approaches Jack after everyone has left, looks him in the eyes, and says "I've got a few errands to run. Cleanup after all your fun. I won't be too long." And he walks away, whistling, as Jack struggles to lift an arm up and moan toward death.
@Duke k Dave maybe they could've saved on the arm thing or moaning but they could simply let jack lie motionless while death says that and it could still work.
@@idreadFell365 true, Cartman is more ruthless, but gotta give credit where is due.....Jack achieved the highest level of evil one can pull off while staying family friendly.
I totally agree that I really missed a good old fashioned irredeemable villain, I've been a little tired of all the "oh I'm the bad guy" followed immediately by the "but I'm not actually that bad of a guy because XYZ" so having someone who is so unabashedly just evil and revels in it was awesome. I think the fact that he's so hilariously unperturbed by it all and the fact that his """tragic""" backstory is just so absurdly unimportant makes it all the better. The fact that he's somewhat one-dimensional is a little bit of the point, which can be both good and bad, but it definitely plays into the strengths of the archetype he's very much designed around. Besides, even if Jack falls short in some villain aspects, there's always other characters to pick it up, and vice versa for the other villains.
@@monke811 Exactly this! He's not exactly one dimensional. He's actually entertaining and interesting to watch. His whole character isn't just evil, even though that's the main focus. He reacts in an oddly organic way to a lot of situations, and says things that a lot of us would also likely say. He still feels like a person despite being as morally terrible as he is.
@@burnt_0range319 I think this has a lot to do with his mannerism. Despite him being cartoonishly evil in his behavior, he isn't inherently angry or tragic in any particular way. He has a sort of sarcastic vibe to his actions, not really having any motivations for them or ultimate reason to do them. Not only is he evil unapologetically, he also doesn't seem to really notice that his behavior is evil. It's so absurd that it carries his entire character premise expertly. He absolutely steals every scene he's in, but when he's gone it doesn't feel like a piece of the puzzle is missing. He adds intensity to the stakes of acquiring the wish but in a lighthearted way. Death remains the main focus.
What I like most about Jack Horner is that he returns a character archetype (unapologetically evil) to the storytelling arsenal for writers by proving its viability among modern audiences. Sympathetic and complex villains are great and all, but not all villains need to be sympathetic and complex. Sometimes I want to see the heroes take down someone who is simply rotten down to their very core. And in regards to the order of the final battles with Death and Jack Horner, I think the Death and then Jack Horner sequence with the destruction of the final wish well after the final brush with Death was chosen so as to give Puss in Boots full agency in the duel… to choose between more lives or expressing his full appreciation of the life he still has left.
He's well written to be bidimensional, the fact that he does what he does just because he can really help to making him pure evil, i also love how despite being hilarious to the audience his crimes are still played for horror in the movie.
All death In the movie is either a 8 life flashback for Puss Or real time murder Jack is committing. He explodes his own men, gets them eaten by monster plants, burns them alive with a flame thrower, gets them plunged off of a cliff, flicks jimminy cricket so hard his wings come off, etc
Something I never hear anyone mention is that he plays into the message of appreciating what you have like the rest of the cast. He has so many things and none of it matters to him. While the others reflect and realise they have all they need, he's blinded by greed (and his own general awfulness) and that lead to his death.
I do agree with you, I actually missed these pure evil irredeemable villains in movies, complex villains are good, but we got way too many of them I'm kind of bored of it. Sometime all we need is a pure evil baster. Beside Big Jack Horner is one of the funnier villains in animation and Dreamwork, and he works great with the moral of the story, which is appreciate the life you have, and he show what would happen if we were too obsessed, you will consume by the things we seek and lost everything.
Why not both? Pure evil doesn't have to be simple. A famous criminal in my state just went around causing as much damage to anything and everything as he could out of pure hatred. No particular logic or order to his targets except accessibility. How a person's thoughts and experiences get them to that state my be complex, but how they act once there isn't necessarily.
Plus it’s not necessarily unrealistic. A lot of the worst things happening right now, irl, are driven by a sense of pure greed/entitlement that can’t be explained away by “I was sad once.”
I feel like Jack is the final hurdle for both groups at the end, if Puss lost the wish first than he isn't choosing to give it up and face death on his own terms and is just doing it because he has literally no other option. With both groups coming to realise they never needed the wish, the fight with Jack wraps up the wish plot and gives a nice send off of sometimes everything you wanted was always there and you just didn't see it and that if you focus too much on what you want you can end up like Jack, all fucked up and with nothing.
To me Jack’s fight after Puss defeats death makes a lot of sense from the perspective of the heroes journey (or as Dan Harmon describes it, the story circle). Puss crosses the threshold, gets sent on his journey by realizing he is mortal, so he enters a new world to find the solution: the wishing Star. 6 o’clock on the story circle, the bottom on the heroes journey, Puss finally gets what he was looking for. In classic story circle fashion though what was looking for wasn’t what he thought: not the wish to get 9 lives, but the sense of purpose and courage to fight for his current life. He learns this and defeats death. But at 7-8 o’clock on the story circle, when the heroes are trying to return to the world they came from (everything below 3 and 9 o’clock is the new world, everything above is the old world) there is always some conflict, some consequence, for having entered the new world. You don’t get to search for the thing for free, it has a cost: it’s why in movies the bad thing always happens right after they get the treasure. In this case the cost was Jack Horner trying to use the wish for his own gain.
Lord of the Rings does this well. Something the movies unfortunately doesn't capture. After Sauron is defeated, the Hobbit heroes final challenge is overthrowing a de-powered Sauroman who had conquered their home. Here it ends, by protecting and saving the home they left, not with the destruction of a grand evil.
03:17 I like "you are not going to shoot that puppy are you Jack?" "Yeah in the face why? Or "What did I do to deserve this?" "I mean what specifically?"
The backstory’s probably even more petty when you realize how successful he is compared to Pinocchio now(not sure how the latter is doing, but he seems to be living a normal life instead of a rich one).
He is the main villain of the movie! But DreamWorks once said that they want to create a villain with no tragic backstory. I mean a villain doesn't need a story they are evil because they are evil so easy. When u are power hungry u don't need to have a backstory ur just power hungry and that is the case with jack horner no-one bothered him he is just power hungry.
I disagree that the jack and death fights can be flipped. When Death approaches Puss he asks if he is going to run or fight, implying he could in theory make a break for it and make the wish, but it’s Puss’s CHOICE to stand and fight for his life that actually makes his arc complete
I’m glad that we’re finally introducing some villains in modern times who don’t have some sort of sob story or anything. The reality is that most real-life horrible people aren’t victims. They don’t have rational reasons for hurting others. They’re just rotten. I really think kids nowadays need to learn not to sympathize with villains so much. And Jack Horner was refreshing for that reason. The audience isn’t given any sort of excuse as to why all of the horrible things he did was okay.
Exactly, like if you're going for a redemption story, similar to Megamind, or Zuko or something, go all out. But a villain in a hero v. villain movie? Nah, none of that, just a pure evil asshole that revels in it. Is it a one dimensional trope? Sure, but it works for villains. They don't deserve sympathy, they are evil monsters at the end of the day. Showing that unabashed evil dickery makes you want to root for the hero in stopping them, even when they are funny as hell like Jack.
I disagree with the point about real life villains. In real life, many criminals are "Good intentions gone bad", "Products of an Environment" or "Hurt people hurt people " type of villains. There are Gangbangers who feed neighborhoods and hold turkey drives or back to school events. Passion crimes where a person just loses it, and acts out of their normal self. The reality is we all are some shade of gray. I do agree that we need to stop being so sympathetic to crimes and evil, not because all criminals are truly horrible, but because crime has a social cost that needs to be addressed, such as victims and their families, damaged communities, destroyed property, etc. But most "bad people" have a human side to them. This is why even in jail, some crimes are considered unacceptable.
@@koldraiynedownskayle5744 life is about choice, either choose good or bad, it doesn't matter how you "good inside" or how "the society forced you to choose" it came from the inside, knowingly doing something bad you need to have to deal with the consequence, nothing annoyed me more when people doing something bad and justified it by blaming others, goodness is a choice, it's not about who you are underneath, it's about what you do that defines you, so many people overcome trauma and became amazing, it's your choice to use it to do horrible thing in this world. IT'S YOUR CHOICE
@Apud Most villains in real life know your outlook is prevalent and have grown up actively manipulating that. Rarely are the intentions truly good, they only need to convince others of it. As an example, there is a video of a gang protecting a victim of bullying from a school. This makes them more sympathetic, but people forget the very same gang will kill entire families if they overheard something they shouldn't. Thus, the reasonable conclusion is that this is manipulation for recruiting, not actual empathy. There are of course different levels. At many points, they willfully took "wrong turns" in the crossroads in their lives. They do have reasons of course, much like Jack. Excuses don't count for much when the decisions are willful.
@4:35 No, you couldn't do the death fight AFTER the wish was destroyed. That would take away all of Puss' agency in making his own choice to fight for his remaining life. If he had to fight death with literally (as far as the movie is concerned) option, it just ends up becoming Puss trying to run away again. Maybe he's running away to a better choice, but because he would have been backed into a corner by circumstances he would have no power of his own to make the choice. The whole idea is that he had to give up the wish for the life he had left.
Honestly Jack Horner was one of my top 3 favourite characters in the movie. (Behind Only Purrito and Death) A truly unforgivable villain that cares for nobody but himself and his own greedy goals, yet also manages to provide plenty of very funny scenes with how cold hearted he is. xD
Your point about flipping the order of the final battle with Death and the final battle with Jack Horner is a very good one with many merits. It's an interesting balance of consideration between their roles as villains and what kind of presence each of them has. As a major in Screenwriting, I believe I can answer your question. In every properly written story, which Puss in Boots 2 certainly is, the protagonist must have their own journey, something about their character arc that acts as a catalyst for getting pulled into the conflict. And during the journey/conflict across the story, they must undergo a Transformation where they learn their lesson, evolve, and become something more. The protagonist is renewed and empowered, and they bring this to the story's climax as a show of who they have become. This is as important a victory for them as much as defeating the Bad Guy. In this story, Death appears and reminds Puss of his own mortality, which acts as the catalyst to begin Puss' journey; both for wanting to wish for more lives and his own gradual growth as a person. By finally facing Death at the end and finally overcoming his prior arrogance and fear, Puss is Transformed, and Death begrudgingly congratulates him for it. The same journey of Transformation goes for Softpaws and Goldilocks, none of them need the Wish anymore, the Moral of the Story is complete, and so Jack Horner's final reemergence acts as the final touch. Everyone now unites. A call to bring forth what they have learned and who they have become against the one character who is truly irredeemable and is therefore the true villain who must be stopped. The formula for this film was masterfully crafted and flawlessly executed!
I always see death as the secondary antagonist of the story and I like the idea that jack horner is the real main antagonist, because when I first saw the trailer I thought he was the main antagonist, but he turned out to be the secondary antagonist( to me). Also if death did met jack, would he be scared of death or just laugh at him because he thinks he's just the big bad wolf that dress up as grandma and blew down three house, I want to know what you think.
He’s a static character done really well! People always talk about how critical dynamic characters are - and it’s true, driving the plot is kind of hard if no characters evolve along with the challenges and events presented - but static characters who have very small or no character arcs can serve as pivot points and road blocks like no others. My English teachers used to press on this point in school, sometimes you WANT the character who will change for nothing & whose whole role is very straightforward & *static*.
The scene where the cricket calls him an unredeemable monster almost made me cry tears of joy, oh it was a funny scene on it's own but what really made me happy was seeing a complete monster villain in a big studio animated movie again. I'm solely dependant on Dreamworks to bring me this type of villain now since Disney doubled down on their "not evil just misunderstood" villains, but both DW's movies in the last year had unredeemable villains, I think they realized they can exploit the gap in the market left behind by disney.
4:32 while I do understand and partially agree with your point about the Jack fight seeming kinda wack being there, I have to disagree with the flipping part Cause if the map was ripped then Puss would have no real "choice" to make once Death corners him However when he has the map yet decides to toss it away to face Death, it develops his character and makes the scene 10x more raw "No. Just one." "I'm done running."
Puss in Boots: The Last Wish hits all 3 of the main villain types almost perfectly. Goldilocks, sympathetic/victim of circumstance. Death, Force of Nature. Big Jack Horner, pure evil. Such a great film. Also I would argue the Death fight being before Jack's makes sense for the story, Puss had to let go and having the wish still be an option and him choosing not to use it makes the conclusion of his arc just that impactful.
I think that Jack is a great personality (not a good person in the slightest but really fun on screen) and the people around him make up for him being one-note. Pairing him with *not* Jiminy Cricket worked so well and gave him a lot to play off of since He might have gotten a bit stale in the middle without such a morally good character surrounding him. I will say though in the climax the set pieces made it to where that was the best place to put his final fight since. If it happened before the death fight then it would take away from puss throwing away the wish to face his mortality and accept it, humbling himself. it also wraps up the wish plot point since jack was the only one that wanted the wish at this point and would not compromise, makes sense for him to be the last one interacting with the paper. It would also be pretty lame if they just left without doing anything about the wish.
Given that this is a part of the Shrek franchise, I'm pretty sure Jack is meant to be a response to the recent string of Disney antagonists who are either revealed at the very last minute, obstacles to our hero's journey, or barely even count as villains since they're tragic figures who have no idea how to properly communicate how troubled they are. Jack is none of those things, he's a petty psychopath with no shame in how monstrous he is. In fact, I think he'd fit right in alongside Bill Cipher, Lord Dominator, and tons of other DTVA villains.
i also agree with the fact death's actions are evil in this movie. he is going after Puss early. it isn't the right time to collect his soul yet but death doesn't care to watch Puss waist another life. while inadvertently giving puss a character arc that wasn't death's intention.
i kinda love him. his expressions are great and he reminds me of a lot of the villians you get in one piece like arlong and crocodile who are just totally merciless and have a goal they are putting everything towards
I think it was important for the Death fight to happen before the map is broken, because that fight is where Puss comes to terms with his mortality which is what allows him to let go of his wish
I think jack horner cold heartedly murdered the most people on screen out of any villain in any animated movie. What an absolute terror. I think the organization of jack, then death, then rematch with jack where they all work together to tear up the wish was the perfect arrangement.
I kinda like how he wants the magic to get back the attention he got, but when you look at the baker squad and how much they were trying there best for jack to litterly become a human bridge shows that he doesn’t care for the attention anymore but just wants the magic and power. Great villain.
He also technically gets his wish in a roundabout way (along with every other character) since he falls into what is presumed to essentially be liquid magic that has such immense power it can grant wishes.
I feel like jack horner has some additional character depth, although not as precisely noticeable as Goldilocks and Death. If you really look into it, he was a nobody growing up but just a mere nursery rhyme that was greatly overshadowed by myths, legends, and fairy tales. Especially fairytales, such as Pinocchio. The most common thing associated with fairy tales is magic. Since people are more attentive to fairy tales than nursery rhymes, Jack Horner subconsciously believes that he has to harness all the magic in the world for himself to be somebody. Over time his obsession with magic has grown to pure hatred and evilness, and not caring for anyone else but his own selfish needs. This is just my two cents on him, but I totally rather he is just a purely evil villain (no tragic backstory required).
2:32, I’m with you on this one. He’s Death but he’s not happening to Puss in the natural course of events when he’s dying and the Grim Reaper comes for his soul, he’s actively seeking to kill Puss.
I, for one, see death’s involvement as not so much maliciously trying to cut puss’s life short as much as it being half “scare them straight” and half “trial by fire” Which is to say he COULD have killed puss any time. But his beef with the cat is that he’s been frivolously wasting the gift of life. If puss did pick the sword back up at the bar, putting his pride before his life, he would absolutely be dead. I think the “I love the smell of fear” line isn’t just being menacing. It’s also genuine interest, because fear of death both gives him the joy of the hunt as well as seeing what a person’s will to live will bring out of them.
He's still a force of nature at the end of the day (which I feel is represented by the ending scene where he says that he'll come back for Puss later), but I would agree that he's coming after Puss for a personal reason for squandering his past lives. I mean, it feels less like some kind of personal vendetta and more like an annoyance that needs to be set right imo, but at the end of the day he's not just passively waiting for his final life to end.
I do like he's motive is so simple since he is a nursery rhyme character barely anyone knew that well. Of course he'd be hungry for magic, fame and recognition. A bit evil view of literally having he's men killed for he's goal but it does add to he's greedy morals and wants. That and he's funny.
Wolf is 100% gunning after Puss for his blatant disregard for his lives, doing his job on the side, up until he realizes he played with his food for too long and Puss is no longer on his "Kill _Now"_ list.
The thing that I like is that the ending when he was defeated, he's not clueless. "What have I done to deserve this" should be a line where most audience should say "maybe we've treated him too harsh" or "finally he realizes his wrong doings and wants to turn a new leaf" but then he adds up to it saying "I mean what specifically?" just makes the audience go "yep, he's definitely evil". Also I saw this comment from another video which adds another meta commentary on the cricket: "The cricket is just the embodiment of all naive audience who thinks that he's redeemable or that he could be changed to good" Couldn't say it better myself.
I actually think having his battle after deaths is good, because then puss in boots can choose between acceptance and fear, and I think it adds more depth to kitty soft paws trust. Because, if the wish is destroyed, we know he probably would have chosen it, and kitty soft paws wouldn’t have known it was his choice to be with her.
As megamind once said, what makes a great villain is presentation. Big Jack is solid proof that villains who have no tragic backstory or cheesy redemption can still work as long as they are entertaining. Evil for the sake of being evil. Thats sometimes all you need from a good villain. Heck a lot of past villains like that are still beloved to this day. I would even argue that Bill Cypher is that sort of villain. I'm glad this characters reminds people to appreciate the simple things a bit more.
I believe that the Bears and team friendships teamed up together in the end because they realized the great threat Jack was by stealing all the magic in the world (this could include stealing their consciousness because they are magic animals)
I believe Jack in the end is the villain with consequence on the entire theme of the movie, taking things for granted. As Goldie and Puss took what they have for granted (Life and Family) while Jack just recklessly use whatever magic thing he pulls from his bag (and said magic thing even ended him in a blazing glory)
They finally decided to bring Jimminy Cricket into the Shrek universe while Pinocchio was there from day one.... And the way they decided to use him was BRILLIANT! Jiminy just slowly just slowly loosing his mind more and more over the horrors Jack are doing with glee. ..... Can we take a moment to talk about how all of Jack's henchmen are literally only there for one purpose, to be KILLED. They all DIE. But! The death gags are dark and hilarious, but they are actually more than just gags... They are a constant and important reminder that death itself is always right behind Puss. Death is present even when he isn't seen. Death has taken all of these henchmen... He's here.... All the time. So it's not just a joke, it is that important reminder, and makes the audience constantly aware that yes... Puss could die. THESE guys are dead. For Puss to be scared of meeting the same fate as what he has just seen is very valid. And it works itself into that plot and the more emotional moments. That was STUPIDLY clever of this movie, and you don't even think about it until someone points it out. That just shows how clever it is.
This is my own slight criticism of the movie's otherwise amazing writing, but I feel as though the Ethical Bug (his WikiShrek name) didn't quite live up to his moral potential. He does a good job diligently voicing his concerns while attempting to reason with Jack Horner. But there's a moment specifically during the final battle where the last remaining baker (Buzzsaw Baker) was calling to Jack Horner for help at the Wishing Star. Unfortunately, Jack barely acknowledges her, and she is pulled into the magical vortex and presumably perishes. Up until this point, the Ethical Bug had spent the entirety of the movie espousing the value of life (and finding the good in people) while showing his extreme disapproval of the deaths of the Baker's Dozen. So...my criticism is that why did the writers, after going to all the effort of creating the Ethical Bug's character, not have him practice what he preached by actually *_saving_* a life for once by helping the last remaining baker? Because just moments later, the Ethical Bug is shown riding in on the phoenix and finally being proactive!...It's just too bad that time was only used to show the Ethical Bug announcing his resignation and burning the map fragment. The movie could have easily had him arrive just a bit earlier in time to save the last baker, making good on his supposed value of all life when he is now in a capable position to do so. He would have had time to burn the map fragment right after anyway! Also, Goldilocks and the Three Bears even talk about taking over Jack Horner's bakery after he is gone. Who else would be better suited to help them run the bakery than a now grateful and reformed, former employee at of that same bakery? Idk, it just seemed like a wasted opportunity.
I love how Puss in boots had all 3 villain archetypes. The neutral force that challenges the protagonists worldview (death), the sympathetic misguided villain with a relatable goal (goldy), and finally the irredeemable monster (big jack). And they executed this flawlessly without making it feel crowded!
Meh. I didn't find goldy sympathetic. she was too crude and mean like for that. very selfish and cold. You can only like her because she "redeems herself" at the end, which is.. come on... unrealistic and clichee as hell, let's be honest. In reality she would just have made the wish and be done with it... But hey. this is a fairy tale.
Death is going out of the way of his job to get revenge on a cocky guy wasting his own lives, even stopping when puss resigns his former self, until leaving when puss starts to change and value his life. Goldilocks (although didn't get as much) was orphan who found her way into another home, growing bonds she didn't fully understand at the time. By the end, she too realizes she already has her wish. Jack Horner. Jack was raised with loving parents, wealth, anything he could need and even says so himself. He eventually became less favored than the likes of Pinocchio, and sought after magical items excessively. He wants the last wish to have all the magic, and provides more than just opposition to puss, but the entirety of the Shrek universe(can't believe I'm genuinely speaking about the SCU rn). By the end, he alone suffers a death out of the antagonists, and his dying words are about his cruelty. He's also hilarious.
I kinda wished the analysis would analyze Jack in relation more to the themes of the movie rather than the story of the movie, since that's what I think is a more compelling topic, especially for this movie, in which all the villains each have unique themes, something I personally thought was really cool of the movie. Jack Horner is essentially a representation of capitalism, and I believe his actions and motive back this up. The biggest thing I can think of to support this is the scene where he tells the cricket he had a really good upbringing but in a way that made it seem like nothing. He's the head of a megacorporation and yet he wants more. The motive for his last wish has nothing to do with the fact that he wasn't popular but it's a critique on how capitalism and the mega rich always are out for more. More profits by any means necessary. Jack Horner's character is a really fun way to make a critique on capitalism without revolving the movie around it, without sucking the fun out of the movie, without being too preachy, and I think that makes his character really good.
I feel like Jack’s final scene had to come after the final fight with Death, because the final Death encounter was a final test for Puss, because he still hasn’t completely changed his mind, and if he already had that arc where they destroyed the wish, the final death fight wouldn’t be as important to the characters.
I really feel like the people who say that death isn't a villain because death is just "doing his job" are just repeating that sentence from other discussions without thinking about the reasoning behind that. The whole reason why the personification of Death is usually considered a neutral character is because they are only doing their job, treat everyone equally and keep the natural order going, they are often depicted as a force of nature that just does what is natural. However in this movie Death outright says he goes against the natural order out of spite for Puss, meaning he is not treating everyone equally, he is not just doing his job in this movie and he goes against the natural order and that makes him a villain in this movie specifically.
Jack is more of a cautionary tale. What happens when you care about chasing your own desires, instead cherishing what’s right in front of you. He’s the person who would disregard everything: not only his respect for life, but his wealth and THRIVING bakery business just to get what he wants. Goldie and Jack, thankfully, still had their humanity to pull them back from going down that same path. He’s a one note villain, yeah, but he served a purpose in the story.
Absolutely thought that the scenes should be flipped. As you know I'm a big furry now 😎 and Jack Horner being the big bad boss fight at the just didn't make much sense. Death kind of just amped the stakes so much so that the Jack Horner fight felt like the usual ending the storyboard writers fell back on to tie things up with Goldilocks and the others. Anways, I'm a big Death fan 😎.
4:31 I have to disagree because if Puss doesn't have the option to grant the wish then it wouldn't be as big of a choice for him to stop 'running away' as it were. If he has no real way of escaping death of course he's gonna fight, that's not really a meaningful choice if the only logical way for Puss to survive is to fight Death. I don't think he fought Death out of pride at the end either because that's what he tried to do when he first met Death and it didn't work. It was only when he was fighting for his last life instead of his status that he could put up a fight, he even aknowledges that he can't beat Death that doesn't sound like someone fighting for their 'pride'.
Check out my review of Goldilocks to see what score she gets compared to Jack and Death!
ua-cam.com/video/oXx9Ij2vfNg/v-deo.html
Death wasn't doing his job, because it wasn't the time for Puss to die yet, he had still one life left, Death was simply hunting down Puss because he was disgusted by the fact Puss never valued all the lives that have been gifted to him and never valued them enough, so for Death was just simply personal hunting.
@@dandycrow2821 Death taking away Puss’ lives when they’re wasted shows he’s doing what he has to do; if Puss isn’t taking care of his lives, Death has to take it away. Death is just an antagonist to me, since what he does is in nature of what he does; and thankfully, Death gave Puss a wake-up call to not be reckless; and I for one welcome this depiction of Death.
@@robbiewalker2831 Death has to take away Puss' lives when this dies, for Death it was just personal, even one of Puss' lives in the cave of the Dark Forest tells him "YOU'RE CHEATING!" before being shut, and Puss' points out to Death that he was still alive, Death himself admitted it was personal, because "Puss In Boots LAUGHS in the face of Death", making "a favor to both of them" instead of just waiting for Puss' time to come. Only when Puss stopped to be afraid of Death this latter renounced to his hunting and to torment Puss.
This is my opinion, but it would’ve been much cooler if death got rid of the sickles and had a safe and he was a skeleton
Hi there, nive video, just one little addendum: I truly think that having Death fight after the destruction of the wish is not a good idea, simply from a thematic point. The movie is all about Puss's growth in understanding the value of life, especially his last life.
If the wish is destroyed before his fight with Death, then has no choice, but to fight for his life, he can't make a decision. The reason why that scene is so cathartic is because he has the wish, but he still chooses to abandon it and stick to his last life. This is what gives real weight to his decision.
"You're not gonna shoot a puppy, are you?"
"Yeah, in the face. Why?"
I'm dead, Jack Horner is funny af
Great line
yeah this guy didn't event see what was wrong doing it. xDD
@@ocel6037 Oh he saw what was wrong, he just doesn’t care about anyone or anything but himself
jack horner is also dead inside
Wait until he shoots the wrong hitmans puppy.
This is one of the best movies I've seen in a really long time. It does so many things well while blending comedy and tragedy. Also the Excalibur joke is absolutely banger.
big jack horner is more of a comedic relief rather than a villian
One thing that I like about him killing his bakers dozen is that he’s not doing it to show off how intimidating he is. Instead when they die he just goes “Well shucks, there goes another one”
A lot of reactors didn’t even know who jack Horner was which is exactly why he said he’s been forgotten and cast aside lol. The Meta nature of that is clever.
He reminds me of Freiza in dragon ball z. He was a tyrant and didn't care for his soldiers. He sat back and wondering what kind of wine to have. (I know dbza but still) Jack is just that. "Oh my people are dying eh so what am I going to have for lunch." I actually love this. I am evil without saying I am evil.
4:40 Actually complete disagree. Thanks to the fact of the final fight with death, the last people who still would be motivated to go after the map: Puss and Kitty; pretty much lost interest in the map and thus decided to rip it in shreds. Also they only team up for real because everything was sorted out pretty much right after the fight with Death. Otherwise they would still be fighting over the map itself.
If you destroy the wish before the confrontation with death, it undermine Puss understanding of the value of life.
If he had no other choice is harder to justify him understanding rather the resign himself to the fact
He's one note, but that note sounds great and they knew how to play it.
Yeah I agree 100%, flip Jack's fight with Wolf's fight and it would've been just a little bit better imo. Specially since I can visualize the thing you said about Jack falling and then comes the whistle and sends a shiver down my spine. Still I can also comprehend why it was made this way too, since the arc is done and defeating Jack demonstrates how well Team Friendship works.
I'd argue that death is neither 100% evil nor is he doing his job. He literally says that he's coming to take Puss' last life prematurely, and when one of the pass Puss lives says "that's cheating", death says "ssshhh. Don't tell anyone" or something along those lines. He's going after Puss not because it is his job, but because he finds Puss arrogant and decided he's going to end the legend. So when Puss accepts that he will only have 1 life and is ready to finally value his life to the fullest, Death no longer wants to kill him because the legend he want's to kill is dead. He even exclaims in frustration how he shouldn't play with his food because he didn't get the chance to kill the legend before Puss did.
Now that you mention it flipping death and horner's final scene would have way more depth and purpose that in the movie
I'm not sure I really consider Goldylocks and the Three bears to be villains. They're antagonistic in that they go against Puss and his goals, but they're not evil. They're really more of a rival faction. Overall though I really liked your analysis of Jack Horner and can't agree more on that. Very well thought out and very nice seeing a power motivated villain who still manages to be interesting.
The Wolf 🐺 isn't Evil he is just a force of Nature
While I agree that Jack Horner after the scene with Death and Puss feels overdone, I think it’s really important that Puss chooses to decline the wish himself because he shows in a way that we can actually see and feel that he has changed and that this last life of his is truly one that he will cherish. I disagree that it shows pride, quite the contrary in fact. Since Puss recognizes and acknowledges death, and that he is not exempt from it, Puss shows humility in his acceptance of his own mortality.
Jack Horner is very likeable. Best character in the whole film. He even beat Death for me. Death was kinda straightforward.
Jack is a mood, he is so evil is funny
Best villain dream works : death
Evilest villain = Lord shen
Best movie in dreamworks : Kung fu panda all series
Big Jack Horner is pure evil done right he doesn't care about anyone unless they can serve him but even then he won't go out of his way to save or to have his pawns meet horrible ends Just so happens to be how things turn out unlike some other badly written pure evil villains who kill perfectly good pawns just as a display of their evilness and not to serve a goal
bro Death and Jack Horner are the legit best villians
You should do a review on Jack and Jill from the original puss and boots
I think that maybe the only reason Jack thought his spoiled life was useless and hated it probably stems from him being spoiled. If you think about it, he would have got everything he ever wanted growing up, except magic. It was likely the only thing as a spoiled kid growing up that his parents couldn't provide. So naturally, a rich, spoiled kid with access to large amounts of funds, and a thriving business to continue to provide said funds, that he would resort to collect magic items in his adult life to give himself what he was never able to get as a child. Maybe it's too analytical, but that's how I like to think his motivation comes from, which I think just adds to the evil because then it's all for selfish gain. On top of his already cruel mentality
To me, Jack _kind of_ has a legit origin story and it’s great bc of how simple it is: he was so privileged that he looked at the one, single thing he didn’t own (magic) and decided that he needed it. It’s funny and scary bc some people really are just that selfish 💀
Headcannon: his parents hired Mary Poppins to watch/discipline him as a boy which had the inverse effect of making him even more envious of magic. Unfortunately she had an “accident” and was forced to resign early, but little Jack took her bag as his first magic prize
(Edit: typo)
@@Luke_SkywaIker wow, how did you know that?
@@damilolaowolabi6716 it's just a theory, but it makes sense how Jack would have that carpet bag.
@@damilolaowolabi6716a headcanon is canon that exists in your head. Meaning, since there's no evidence for or against that theory, it's just something they want to be canon, but it's just not until it is confirmed or denied.
Destroying the wish before the fight with Death would have completely undermined the theme. Puss needed to choose to fight for his last life not have no choice but to fight for his last life, otherwise he wouldn't have become the kind of hero that Death felt he should spare.
Agreed
Thank you, I feel a lot of the movie went over their head. I've analysed the shit out of this movie and absolutely everything is correct. From a writing, visual and coherency pov.
strongly agree. i do understand the tonal shift complaint, but in order to change it, jack would have to die some other way. i prefer the scenes how they are though, i think it was made this way to ease tension after the final battle with death. comic relief eases audiences, and it's a fun ending while not being too emotionally intense.
i hope jay films takes note of why the death fight was the way it was. it's startling to see it go over his head. he's got a great format going here and i'm rooting for him, but i think his actual analysis needs some work.
I disagree with this, because Puss already knows Death is after him that’s why he seeks out the last wish. Even if the wolf isn’t physically here he remains a threat to Puss and so he still has to make the choice of taking the lives or facing his fate.
Came here to say this, thank you for putting it so succinctly. Giving Puss NO CHOICE would have forced him to come to terms with a situation he can't control, but that means if ANOTHER way to prolong his life ever came along (not unlikely in a world this teeming with magic), he would chase after that instead, proving he'd learned nothing.
Kind of reminds me of Frozen: Anna has two love interests, but instead of giving her the agency to choose, the writers just make one guy IRREDEEMABLY EVIL, so Anna ends up with the nice guy by default. Which is less a choice she made and more a reaction to inescapable circumstance. By contrast, making Puss come to terms with mortality when there was still a chance to escape it means he CHOSE it, and that demonstrates character growth. Character drives story, so Puss having the opportunity to make that choice is what MAKES the movie successful.
He's not in your face about like "argh I'm evil argh!" He's just like, "mhm I've killed 12 men, what a lovely Tuesday." That's why I think he works so well. He's the ultimate evil but he's nonchalant about it.
Excalibur still having the stone attached (essentially turning it into a club) has got to be one of the best fairytale gags from this franchise. Also the Fairy Godmother wand was a nice callback, I'm sure she'd be glad it ended up with such a corrupted person.
Yeah Excalibur was hilarious
Does that also make it a call back to Shrek the Third? (Edit: Even though I haven't seen a lot of love for the movie.)
Jack stealing it could mean that Arthur's father worked for him or at least knew Jack.
I don't know, it opens a lot of questions
-unless the islands theory is real-
@SlurgV2 I haven't seen a lot of love for the movie, so that's refreshing to hear!
While a great joke, it's a bit diminished by the fact that Ducktales 2017 did basically the exact same thing, just different delivery
One thing I love about Jack as a character is that he's technically a competent villain, given that despite being as spoiled and ungrateful as he is, he was somehow competent enough to continue and build on his family business while also getting his hands on the magical relics, which while yeah he probably payed people off, but that probably isnt cheap given its magical objects and whatnot
A very competent villian, the only reason he lost honestly is because he didnt care for anyone but himself. And thus found himself outnumbered at the end.
If he had all his henchmen at the end? he would have won easy peasy.
@syadow Nice reach
@syadow this singlehandedly gave me more hope
I would imagine he would need a large amount of money to buy tools, weapons, etc, things he needed for his adventures which would require money, so yea, since it was an easy option, he continued his family business, he may be spoiled, but he’s not stupid
@syadow No, he's the Disney Company. He's literally Dreamworks giving a big middle finger to the modern incarnation of the Disney Company. All of his magic items are references to classic Disney movies that have been exploited nowadays for cheap cash grabs. Jack is a giant, bloated, irredeemably, insatiably corrupt corporate monster who just wants to steal all the magic in the world. Sound familiar?
I haven’t started this video yet but I love that the movie was willing to have Jack be purely and unapologetically evil instead of trying to come up with some kind of excuse, sending the message that, yes, some people are just that bad.
He exists to balance out the redeemable three bears gang and the more neutral evil of Death.
@@nileshkumaraswamy2711 death is less neutral evil and more chaotic neutral
Exactly, Jack Horner is so many people out there, just evil people with no remorse
I even love how jimney tries to do this by asking about his childhood. Which turned out to be extremely ideal. There is legit nothing to look for he is just a monster.
everyone has an origin story, some are complex, some are just consumed by a singular, all consuming spite. jack is the latter.
Definetely the best of Jack Horner is that he is essentially the classic style of villain. No sad backstory. No traumas. No redemption at the end. No plot twists. Just a purely dark hearted man that is 100% honest and only wants power, all of it
Seriously. Older movies gave us villains like Ursula, Jafar, and Anastasia’s Rasputin which all have amazing moments while being completely wicked and even horrifying at times.
@@josephmartin9737 I think after years and years of sympathetic villains with troubled backstories, trauma, and justification for their actions. It's nice to see just straight up dastardly rat bastard villains being evil cuz they're just genuine assholes. It's sort of a post ironic twist of expecting the villain to have a sympathetic twist that we've all sort of gotten used to.
@@OmegaTrooper1 At this point in everything I watch and read I look for those villains because I personally haven’t ever been super on board with sympathetic villains unless done really well. I think Thanos is a good villain because he shouldn’t be sympathetic. He’s a lunatic that only has “good intentions” if you ignore his end goal being half of all life going away. If half of everyone dies, they’ll still repopulate. Why not just double or triple the resources in the universe? That’s a good way to make someone almost sympathetic while still making a villain. An actual hood sympathetic villain is Goldie in this movie because she does bad things, has a wrong goal, sees what’s wrong with the goal, and changes. Sympathetic villains shouldn’t be people who just say “ends justify means” and are somehow purely good intentioned as they stab a small family to find what they want. Those roles of horrible acts should be filled by the people who would actually do them: completely psychotic unimaginably evil people. Sephiroth from the Final Fantasy series is also a great example of someone who as a twist isn’t an attempt at a sympathetic villain. He talks about achieving peace and saving the world through bad means for a good end, but he’s eventually clearly just evil and says that to get people to follow him so he doesn’t have to do everything himself because he’s horribly evil. There’s so much variation that can be done while still having compelling characters, and we lost that during everyone having to be sympathetic. Often times, if someone is doing such bad things, it is likely at a point that they are actually a bad person.
Wow that was long
reminds me a little of sauron, the unreasonable force of evil
I think he is a great villian specifically becomes he contrasts the depth of the others. By himself, he'd score lower, but as part of the cast, he scores very high by adding the comically evil note that the other antagonists can't bring. It's all about how he fits in the story.
Couldn’t agree more
I think Jack Horner’s eviler than Rumpelstiltskin!
@@evanholloway1692agreed
Well actually he fits his original pretty well. The original ryhme he is known for is the flashback except with a few changes. Essentially his story is meant as a warning against spoiling your kids. Because they turn out like sociopaths who think they can do anything because their to good to be told no or punished.
@@evanholloway1692 jack horner is more evil than some villains from movies for a more mature audience
"What did I do Wrong!? I mean what specifically?!"
I've never loved the last words of a villain more than Jack Horner's
Jack Horner is a breath of fresh air. In a sea of sympathetic villains who might as well be antiheros, you have Jack Horner who would cross the street to kick a puppy and I love that.
Then there's characters who have lied so damn well to the point that audience swallows the stupid pills in acid without even thinking.
Twist villains are far worse.
Ahah yeah exactly, I agree!
*shoot a puppy
It's not that sympathetic villains are necessarily bad, it's how they are executed. Straight up bad guys can be great villains, but they can also fall flat if they are executed poorly. Plus it kinda seems like we get both of these types of villains when one type saturates the market media too often, the other will start showing up more often.
People talk a lot of the Wolf but Jack Horner is the perfect mix of menacing and sadistically funny.
So not only Pinocchio stole jack attention
But the wolf did as well
@@josiahtekira5114 "What's so great about death, I kill people all the time!"
@@adambennett4207 I’m calling the police
he is literally one of my favorite villains
@@josiahtekira5114It was a quote
Jacks funny and a joy to watch. He does his job perfectly. Also if puss destroyed the wish before death that would have been terrible lmao. His choice to put it down is what showcases just how much he grew.
Jack is basically Elgar from In Space
If the wish is destroyed before death shows up, like you suggested, it removes a difficult decision for Puss that really establishes his development. He chose not to wish for more lives rather than having no choice at all.
Who says Jack has to destroy wish?
@@jayfilms99 Let's be honest here, the wish needs to be destroyed somehow. It represents all the characters recognizing that they have everything they could ever wish for already. One of the strengths of the movie is that no one uses the wish and instead decide to accept and cherish what they already have. The being said, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to destroy the wish unless someone bad is after the wish. The fight with Death obviously requires the wish to still be there or else it loses next to all of its impact. Notably, the ending scene with Jack isn't really that much of a fight scene. The real fight with Jack ends when Kitty Softpaws pushed him into the bag. Giving him two Spanish splinters isn't a fight scene, he's just there to give everyone else a reason to destroy the wish.
@@Maxwell_Twist it's more like a screw him kinda thing.
I disagree with flipping the death and jack horner confrontation. The fact that Puss tosses the wish away when he still has it shows that he has grown while the alternative is growth but to a lesser extent, you would feel like puss didn't have a choice in the matter and had to accept it.
It is why I am not a fan of showing Goldielocks being ok with her family after the wish is destroyed, I think it would have been more powerful if say Puss gave her the wish and she also turned it down, then the final confrontation is dealing with Jack who we can all agree nobody would want to have the wish.
I can agree that it is a downgrade, the animation with puss against death is so amazing but its not bad by any means and seeing all the characters work together if feels like a good comedic climax where as the death fight was a drama climax.
Honestly, you have a real point. Cause if that was the way things played out, Goldie and the bears helping Puss fight Jack wouldn’t feel as abrupt as it did.
didnt Goldielocks also choose to turn down the wish when choosing to save her family though?
@@quoipi I think that was the intention but I don't think its quite strong enough.
For example Goldie could have just come to the conclusion that it isn't worth sacrificing her current family for this new family, however I don't think that moment is quite a turning down the wish as their is still the possibility they could get the wish.
It feels weaker
I agree. If you flip the fights then you have a big comedic fight, then a smaller scale but more intimate battle. I actually think it is better in the movie for the only reasoning being that Puss needed to accept that he is willing to face death, he needs to regain the blade that he abandoned, and that afterwards he needs to face a much more dangerous threat. I only refer to Jack being a more dangerous threat for the sake that he will wish to become essentially the most powerful sorcerer and has fun destroying anyone in his path as opposed to Death who is doing his job, although he does like striking fear into people.
Jack got pretty darn close to becoming what he wanted, he would be quite an issue to deal with if his wish comes true.
@@JasperLane It’s why having her rush off to save Baby Bear, and after the Death fight and witnessing Puss and Kitty’s realizations that they have what they wanted, Goldie fully realizes she has what she wanted, no wish necessary. Which makes her turn down the wish of Puss was offer her it.
Still a good movie, but an added minute or two could have made it all the better.
I love how they just couldn't decide if they wanted a silly cartoon villain, a serious villain or someone who's sympathetic so they just put all of the types into their movie and somehow it doesn't feel overcrowded
The script is unbelievably tight on this movie istg. It helps that the villains all (kinda) have the same goal and are going to the same destination, so there’s no jumping around or over-explaining each villain’s motives.
It works because they're so different from each other conceptually. And yes, script is perfect
You know Jack's a good character because he's pure evil, but somehow still likable. They nailed it with Jack as the comic relief villain.
bro I died when the cricket (jimminy or smth) was like, your not gonna shoot a puppy are you and Jacks like,
yeah, i’m the face, why. 💀
@@spicywaffles_L he says "yea, in the face, why?" Not that
@@Sir_GrimReaper your right my bad lol
Yeah, I'm tired of the hatable villain trope, they all feel 2-D and you can't take them seriously, but Jack is the opposite.
@@gamerstheater1187 Jack is more of, "You love to hate him" villain. We hate him but not because he's annoying or a terribly written character.
The fact that so many people still see the wolf as evil is honestly a testament to how sympathetic they make Puss, along with how subtle they make the reason for Wolf's sinister attitude.
You have to remember, Puss is loveable, he's a hero and helps people...but he does it all for his image. He doesn't value anything at all in his life, including his life, he only ever values himself and he knows that. And as he's doing all this, he as the nerve, the absolute gall, to literally laugh in deaths face about his nine lives, and death followed him, having to put up with the constant irredeemable existence that this guy who is actively laughing at him is leading. Which is ultimately why he revels in finally being able to take Puss's life.
Since death is a force of nature, he probably doesn't even speak to everyone else he has to reap. He probably doesn't even have to show himself or even take his blades out. Why does he act frustrated with not being able to take Puss's life at the end? Because suddenly becoming redeemable for the last ninth of your life doesn't change the fact that you were a terrible person for 8/9ths of the rest of it. It's also likely that death doesn't believe Puss can really change, but since Puss is showing signs of changing he has to stop actively pursuing his death and has to let it happen the natural way due to a moral code he likely has.
I don't see how coming to harvest puss' soul early out of spite while making clear that he's going to enjoy doing it isn't evil
@@yellowpig1026 because imagine doing the very thing your existence is focused on. Now imagine someone decided that dying doesn’t kill them and laughs at you cause you can’t do anything about it. Now imagine having to watch this person lose life after life doing the absolute stupidest things simply cuz he has the life to do so. Would that not piss you off? I would me and I would go after him for his last life as well. He didn’t value his other lives so why not make this one short and interesting at the very least.
Death even went on to say "I came here to take the life of an arrogant warrior. But..... I don't see him now."
He may be a force of nature, but he lives by his own code. Just like the saying give credit where credit is due, Puss managed to show Death that he was not the same as he was in his previous 8 lives. He was humbled by the fact of yes, he is going to die one day.
Death recognised that, and yeah pretty upset over it, he still stuck by it and walked off. The look over his shoulder screamed "Y'know one day I will be back for you." And the look from Puss said "And I'll let you have me then." Was more than enough respect between the two
@@neonthehybrid8047 he also just legit said I we will meet again.
Doesn’t change the fact that he is evil just to take puss live before time, for you to be a “force of nature” you cannot have feelings, it’s just work and done, wolf let puss escape so many times because he enjoy the fear that’s pretty evil for me, hell even wolf didn’t attack puss while being with the old woman because he saw puss living something worse than death, for death to be and antagonist it would need to be that puss is death and he is taking him to hell, but puss has one life left, that strait up makes him a villain
I love Jack as a villain for THIS movie specifically. I just think he fills his role so well. If the Goldie gang was the only other one after the wish, I think it’d damper the urgency a bit. Goldie and Kittys’ wishes wouldn’t impact the whole Shrekverse, Puss’s wish would actively hinder his character development, but behind all these wishes is Jack, and if he gets the wish, he’d basically be the most powerful person in the Shrek universe. It makes the chase for the wish feel more full and interesting, so I think he was a needed addition. But the choice to not flesh him out was honestly really smart. If they did that, the movie would have been so cramped and all over the place, even though Jack was a needed addition, he couldn’t overstay his welcome. There is also more to a character than complex motives and development. I love one note baddies, as long as they leave an impact, whether it’s because of their demeanour, their humour, their design, or just plain being evil for the sake of it. I like sympathetic villains too, but especially in Jack’s case where giving him depth would have added a layer that I think could muddy the waters, going with a delightfully one note approach to him, focusing mainly on humour and camp, while somehow still tying him into the ‘death’ theme, was a fantastic decision.
But I agree with you abt the Death vs the Jack climax. I didn’t even think about it but the death fight being the true finale might have given the Jack fight a bit more weight.
Some good points
Also, some of his 'one lines' and answers to Cricket are awesome. Cruel, but awesome
gotta love how in every scene he is in, there is at least one person directly or indirectly dying because of him
Whoa
I think Jack being very simple in character makes it his biggest strength. He’s so despicable and self aware of it, haven’t seen a villain like him in a while
I think closest you could think of would be the Manga One Piece's Blackbeard. ^^ ( I love that char )
I like how the Shrekverse is a parody of Disney and that he keeps Jiminy Cricket around and flicks him off at the end lol Like we need kids movies that pull no punches and it's amazing that Dreamworks can make a villain off of a nursery rhyme character and make it work
True, I heard the actor was doing an impression of Disney's version too
You know what would’ve boosted the final fight with Jack Horner? If it ended with Death coming back and claiming Jack himself. Like, we don’t see the kill, but once Puss and everyone has escaped the arena, Jack’s left and he hears the whistle. He turns and sees Death, showing fear for the first time in the movie
Imagine this. Jack survives the star explosion and lays on the ground, broken and battered, never to move again. Death approaches Jack after everyone has left, looks him in the eyes, and says "I've got a few errands to run. Cleanup after all your fun. I won't be too long." And he walks away, whistling, as Jack struggles to lift an arm up and moan toward death.
I think if they did it would of been too dark and disturbing for younger viewers
@Duke k Dave maybe they could've saved on the arm thing or moaning but they could simply let jack lie motionless while death says that and it could still work.
@@1000guy1 after everything that death does and that's where the line is drawn
Nah that would be silly. Death leaved just before the fight against Jack, only to come back a minute later?
Jack Horner is like the Dreamworks equivalent to Eric Cartman
Jack actually looks like a pleasant person compared to Eric Cartman.
Horner is more of a lunatic than Cartman
@@CrossoverFan4life “someone hasn’t been watching South Park”
More like Sundowner if you consider how those two absolute units look alike
@@idreadFell365 true, Cartman is more ruthless, but gotta give credit where is due.....Jack achieved the highest level of evil one can pull off while staying family friendly.
I totally agree that I really missed a good old fashioned irredeemable villain, I've been a little tired of all the "oh I'm the bad guy" followed immediately by the "but I'm not actually that bad of a guy because XYZ" so having someone who is so unabashedly just evil and revels in it was awesome. I think the fact that he's so hilariously unperturbed by it all and the fact that his """tragic""" backstory is just so absurdly unimportant makes it all the better. The fact that he's somewhat one-dimensional is a little bit of the point, which can be both good and bad, but it definitely plays into the strengths of the archetype he's very much designed around. Besides, even if Jack falls short in some villain aspects, there's always other characters to pick it up, and vice versa for the other villains.
You know who Else is an Irredeemable Villain Charles Muntz his Trauma for that Bird became too much
@@monke811 Exactly this! He's not exactly one dimensional. He's actually entertaining and interesting to watch. His whole character isn't just evil, even though that's the main focus. He reacts in an oddly organic way to a lot of situations, and says things that a lot of us would also likely say. He still feels like a person despite being as morally terrible as he is.
@@burnt_0range319 I think this has a lot to do with his mannerism. Despite him being cartoonishly evil in his behavior, he isn't inherently angry or tragic in any particular way. He has a sort of sarcastic vibe to his actions, not really having any motivations for them or ultimate reason to do them. Not only is he evil unapologetically, he also doesn't seem to really notice that his behavior is evil. It's so absurd that it carries his entire character premise expertly. He absolutely steals every scene he's in, but when he's gone it doesn't feel like a piece of the puzzle is missing. He adds intensity to the stakes of acquiring the wish but in a lighthearted way. Death remains the main focus.
What I like most about Jack Horner is that he returns a character archetype (unapologetically evil) to the storytelling arsenal for writers by proving its viability among modern audiences. Sympathetic and complex villains are great and all, but not all villains need to be sympathetic and complex. Sometimes I want to see the heroes take down someone who is simply rotten down to their very core.
And in regards to the order of the final battles with Death and Jack Horner, I think the Death and then Jack Horner sequence with the destruction of the final wish well after the final brush with Death was chosen so as to give Puss in Boots full agency in the duel… to choose between more lives or expressing his full appreciation of the life he still has left.
He's well written to be bidimensional, the fact that he does what he does just because he can really help to making him pure evil, i also love how despite being hilarious to the audience his crimes are still played for horror in the movie.
All death In the movie is either a 8 life flashback for Puss
Or real time murder Jack is committing.
He explodes his own men, gets them eaten by monster plants, burns them alive with a flame thrower, gets them plunged off of a cliff, flicks jimminy cricket so hard his wings come off, etc
Something I never hear anyone mention is that he plays into the message of appreciating what you have like the rest of the cast. He has so many things and none of it matters to him. While the others reflect and realise they have all they need, he's blinded by greed (and his own general awfulness) and that lead to his death.
I do agree with you, I actually missed these pure evil irredeemable villains in movies, complex villains are good, but we got way too many of them I'm kind of bored of it. Sometime all we need is a pure evil baster. Beside Big Jack Horner is one of the funnier villains in animation and Dreamwork, and he works great with the moral of the story, which is appreciate the life you have, and he show what would happen if we were too obsessed, you will consume by the things we seek and lost everything.
Why not both? Pure evil doesn't have to be simple. A famous criminal in my state just went around causing as much damage to anything and everything as he could out of pure hatred. No particular logic or order to his targets except accessibility. How a person's thoughts and experiences get them to that state my be complex, but how they act once there isn't necessarily.
@@101jir thanks, you give me the idea of how to write my villain.
@Comic Reaper Harry If I can find the name of the guy again I will let you know, glad I could help.
@@101jir thanks
Plus it’s not necessarily unrealistic. A lot of the worst things happening right now, irl, are driven by a sense of pure greed/entitlement that can’t be explained away by “I was sad once.”
Jack Horner is like Handsome Jack in which you know they're evil psychopaths, but absolutely love them for they're charisma and hilarious dialogue.
I feel like Jack is the final hurdle for both groups at the end, if Puss lost the wish first than he isn't choosing to give it up and face death on his own terms and is just doing it because he has literally no other option.
With both groups coming to realise they never needed the wish, the fight with Jack wraps up the wish plot and gives a nice send off of sometimes everything you wanted was always there and you just didn't see it and that if you focus too much on what you want you can end up like Jack, all fucked up and with nothing.
To me Jack’s fight after Puss defeats death makes a lot of sense from the perspective of the heroes journey (or as Dan Harmon describes it, the story circle). Puss crosses the threshold, gets sent on his journey by realizing he is mortal, so he enters a new world to find the solution: the wishing Star. 6 o’clock on the story circle, the bottom on the heroes journey, Puss finally gets what he was looking for. In classic story circle fashion though what was looking for wasn’t what he thought: not the wish to get 9 lives, but the sense of purpose and courage to fight for his current life. He learns this and defeats death.
But at 7-8 o’clock on the story circle, when the heroes are trying to return to the world they came from (everything below 3 and 9 o’clock is the new world, everything above is the old world) there is always some conflict, some consequence, for having entered the new world. You don’t get to search for the thing for free, it has a cost: it’s why in movies the bad thing always happens right after they get the treasure. In this case the cost was Jack Horner trying to use the wish for his own gain.
Lord of the Rings does this well. Something the movies unfortunately doesn't capture. After Sauron is defeated, the Hobbit heroes final challenge is overthrowing a de-powered Sauroman who had conquered their home.
Here it ends, by protecting and saving the home they left, not with the destruction of a grand evil.
03:17 I like "you are not going to shoot that puppy are you Jack?"
"Yeah in the face why?
Or
"What did I do to deserve this?" "I mean what specifically?"
His backstory didn't make him a tragic or complex villain, it made him more 2D with no redeeming qualities and I love it
The backstory’s probably even more petty when you realize how successful he is compared to Pinocchio now(not sure how the latter is doing, but he seems to be living a normal life instead of a rich one).
He is the main villain of the movie! But DreamWorks once said that they want to create a villain with no tragic backstory. I mean a villain doesn't need a story they are evil because they are evil so easy. When u are power hungry u don't need to have a backstory ur just power hungry and that is the case with jack horner no-one bothered him he is just power hungry.
simple but effectively .
Yea I like it. But Kai received lot of hate for having no backstory but somehow when it comes to jack horner no-one complains
@@dertee957
Kai isn’t bad but compared to Tai Lung and Shen he’s a bit underwhelming
I disagree that the jack and death fights can be flipped. When Death approaches Puss he asks if he is going to run or fight, implying he could in theory make a break for it and make the wish, but it’s Puss’s CHOICE to stand and fight for his life that actually makes his arc complete
I’m glad that we’re finally introducing some villains in modern times who don’t have some sort of sob story or anything. The reality is that most real-life horrible people aren’t victims. They don’t have rational reasons for hurting others. They’re just rotten.
I really think kids nowadays need to learn not to sympathize with villains so much. And Jack Horner was refreshing for that reason. The audience isn’t given any sort of excuse as to why all of the horrible things he did was okay.
Agreed so much
Exactly, like if you're going for a redemption story, similar to Megamind, or Zuko or something, go all out. But a villain in a hero v. villain movie? Nah, none of that, just a pure evil asshole that revels in it. Is it a one dimensional trope? Sure, but it works for villains. They don't deserve sympathy, they are evil monsters at the end of the day. Showing that unabashed evil dickery makes you want to root for the hero in stopping them, even when they are funny as hell like Jack.
I disagree with the point about real life villains. In real life, many criminals are "Good intentions gone bad", "Products of an Environment" or "Hurt people hurt people " type of villains. There are Gangbangers who feed neighborhoods and hold turkey drives or back to school events. Passion crimes where a person just loses it, and acts out of their normal self.
The reality is we all are some shade of gray.
I do agree that we need to stop being so sympathetic to crimes and evil, not because all criminals are truly horrible, but because crime has a social cost that needs to be addressed, such as victims and their families, damaged communities, destroyed property, etc. But most "bad people" have a human side to them. This is why even in jail, some crimes are considered unacceptable.
@@koldraiynedownskayle5744 life is about choice, either choose good or bad, it doesn't matter how you "good inside" or how "the society forced you to choose" it came from the inside, knowingly doing something bad you need to have to deal with the consequence, nothing annoyed me more when people doing something bad and justified it by blaming others, goodness is a choice, it's not about who you are underneath, it's about what you do that defines you, so many people overcome trauma and became amazing, it's your choice to use it to do horrible thing in this world. IT'S YOUR CHOICE
@Apud Most villains in real life know your outlook is prevalent and have grown up actively manipulating that. Rarely are the intentions truly good, they only need to convince others of it.
As an example, there is a video of a gang protecting a victim of bullying from a school. This makes them more sympathetic, but people forget the very same gang will kill entire families if they overheard something they shouldn't. Thus, the reasonable conclusion is that this is manipulation for recruiting, not actual empathy.
There are of course different levels. At many points, they willfully took "wrong turns" in the crossroads in their lives. They do have reasons of course, much like Jack. Excuses don't count for much when the decisions are willful.
@4:35 No, you couldn't do the death fight AFTER the wish was destroyed. That would take away all of Puss' agency in making his own choice to fight for his remaining life. If he had to fight death with literally (as far as the movie is concerned) option, it just ends up becoming Puss trying to run away again. Maybe he's running away to a better choice, but because he would have been backed into a corner by circumstances he would have no power of his own to make the choice. The whole idea is that he had to give up the wish for the life he had left.
Honestly Jack Horner was one of my top 3 favourite characters in the movie. (Behind Only Purrito and Death) A truly unforgivable villain that cares for nobody but himself and his own greedy goals, yet also manages to provide plenty of very funny scenes with how cold hearted he is. xD
Your point about flipping the order of the final battle with Death and the final battle with Jack Horner is a very good one with many merits. It's an interesting balance of consideration between their roles as villains and what kind of presence each of them has. As a major in Screenwriting, I believe I can answer your question.
In every properly written story, which Puss in Boots 2 certainly is, the protagonist must have their own journey, something about their character arc that acts as a catalyst for getting pulled into the conflict. And during the journey/conflict across the story, they must undergo a Transformation where they learn their lesson, evolve, and become something more. The protagonist is renewed and empowered, and they bring this to the story's climax as a show of who they have become. This is as important a victory for them as much as defeating the Bad Guy.
In this story, Death appears and reminds Puss of his own mortality, which acts as the catalyst to begin Puss' journey; both for wanting to wish for more lives and his own gradual growth as a person. By finally facing Death at the end and finally overcoming his prior arrogance and fear, Puss is Transformed, and Death begrudgingly congratulates him for it. The same journey of Transformation goes for Softpaws and Goldilocks, none of them need the Wish anymore, the Moral of the Story is complete, and so Jack Horner's final reemergence acts as the final touch. Everyone now unites. A call to bring forth what they have learned and who they have become against the one character who is truly irredeemable and is therefore the true villain who must be stopped.
The formula for this film was masterfully crafted and flawlessly executed!
I always see death as the secondary antagonist of the story and I like the idea that jack horner is the real main antagonist, because when I first saw the trailer I thought he was the main antagonist, but he turned out to be the secondary antagonist( to me). Also if death did met jack, would he be scared of death or just laugh at him because he thinks he's just the big bad wolf that dress up as grandma and blew down three house, I want to know what you think.
i think if jack did that to the wolf. he might just take him then and there. "i dont like him"
He’s a static character done really well! People always talk about how critical dynamic characters are - and it’s true, driving the plot is kind of hard if no characters evolve along with the challenges and events presented - but static characters who have very small or no character arcs can serve as pivot points and road blocks like no others.
My English teachers used to press on this point in school, sometimes you WANT the character who will change for nothing & whose whole role is very straightforward & *static*.
also, in real life some people are either unwilling to change or not self aware enough to do so. So some static characters are a realistic trope.
The scene where the cricket calls him an unredeemable monster almost made me cry tears of joy, oh it was a funny scene on it's own but what really made me happy was seeing a complete monster villain in a big studio animated movie again. I'm solely dependant on Dreamworks to bring me this type of villain now since Disney doubled down on their "not evil just misunderstood" villains, but both DW's movies in the last year had unredeemable villains, I think they realized they can exploit the gap in the market left behind by disney.
Honestly the fact that it's John Mulaney voicing this irredeemable sikko just made it even better for me
4:32 while I do understand and partially agree with your point about the Jack fight seeming kinda wack being there, I have to disagree with the flipping part
Cause if the map was ripped then Puss would have no real "choice" to make once Death corners him
However when he has the map yet decides to toss it away to face Death, it develops his character and makes the scene 10x more raw
"No. Just one."
"I'm done running."
Puss in Boots: The Last Wish hits all 3 of the main villain types almost perfectly.
Goldilocks, sympathetic/victim of circumstance.
Death, Force of Nature.
Big Jack Horner, pure evil.
Such a great film. Also I would argue the Death fight being before Jack's makes sense for the story, Puss had to let go and having the wish still be an option and him choosing not to use it makes the conclusion of his arc just that impactful.
I think that Jack is a great personality (not a good person in the slightest but really fun on screen) and the people around him make up for him being one-note. Pairing him with *not* Jiminy Cricket worked so well and gave him a lot to play off of since He might have gotten a bit stale in the middle without such a morally good character surrounding him.
I will say though in the climax the set pieces made it to where that was the best place to put his final fight since. If it happened before the death fight then it would take away from puss throwing away the wish to face his mortality and accept it, humbling himself. it also wraps up the wish plot point since jack was the only one that wanted the wish at this point and would not compromise, makes sense for him to be the last one interacting with the paper. It would also be pretty lame if they just left without doing anything about the wish.
Jack being the final threat gave the urgency to destroy the wish and to prove that Puss in boots grew by giving away his wish for the greater good.
Given that this is a part of the Shrek franchise, I'm pretty sure Jack is meant to be a response to the recent string of Disney antagonists who are either revealed at the very last minute, obstacles to our hero's journey, or barely even count as villains since they're tragic figures who have no idea how to properly communicate how troubled they are. Jack is none of those things, he's a petty psychopath with no shame in how monstrous he is. In fact, I think he'd fit right in alongside Bill Cipher, Lord Dominator, and tons of other DTVA villains.
i also agree with the fact death's actions are evil in this movie. he is going after Puss early. it isn't the right time to collect his soul yet but death doesn't care to watch Puss waist another life. while inadvertently giving puss a character arc that wasn't death's intention.
This is what a true villain needs to be, maybe Disney could take notes on this and actually have good villains again more.
i kinda love him. his expressions are great and he reminds me of a lot of the villians you get in one piece like arlong and crocodile who are just totally merciless and have a goal they are putting everything towards
I think it was important for the Death fight to happen before the map is broken, because that fight is where Puss comes to terms with his mortality which is what allows him to let go of his wish
I think jack horner cold heartedly murdered the most people on screen out of any villain in any animated movie. What an absolute terror. I think the organization of jack, then death, then rematch with jack where they all work together to tear up the wish was the perfect arrangement.
Brutal on-screen murder in kid’s movies is fine as long as the blood isn’t red 💀
@@anerrorhasoccurred8727 fucking confetti bro
@An Error Has Occurred
Remember kids, TV violence is fine. As long as you don’t show a nipple! Huhuhuaheheh!
@An Error Has Occurred
Remember kids, TV violence is fine. As long as you don’t show a nipple! Huhuhuaheheh!
@An Error Has Occurred
Remember kids, TV violence is fine. As long as you don’t show a nipple! Huhuhuaheheh!
I kinda like how he wants the magic to get back the attention he got, but when you look at the baker squad and how much they were trying there best for jack to litterly become a human bridge shows that he doesn’t care for the attention anymore but just wants the magic and power. Great villain.
He also technically gets his wish in a roundabout way (along with every other character) since he falls into what is presumed to essentially be liquid magic that has such immense power it can grant wishes.
Kinda wished that Death confronted/spooked Jack right before his ultimate demise 😂🤣
I feel like jack horner has some additional character depth, although not as precisely noticeable as Goldilocks and Death. If you really look into it, he was a nobody growing up but just a mere nursery rhyme that was greatly overshadowed by myths, legends, and fairy tales. Especially fairytales, such as Pinocchio. The most common thing associated with fairy tales is magic. Since people are more attentive to fairy tales than nursery rhymes, Jack Horner subconsciously believes that he has to harness all the magic in the world for himself to be somebody. Over time his obsession with magic has grown to pure hatred and evilness, and not caring for anyone else but his own selfish needs.
This is just my two cents on him, but I totally rather he is just a purely evil villain (no tragic backstory required).
2:32, I’m with you on this one. He’s Death but he’s not happening to Puss in the natural course of events when he’s dying and the Grim Reaper comes for his soul, he’s actively seeking to kill Puss.
I, for one, see death’s involvement as not so much maliciously trying to cut puss’s life short as much as it being half “scare them straight” and half “trial by fire”
Which is to say he COULD have killed puss any time. But his beef with the cat is that he’s been frivolously wasting the gift of life. If puss did pick the sword back up at the bar, putting his pride before his life, he would absolutely be dead.
I think the “I love the smell of fear” line isn’t just being menacing. It’s also genuine interest, because fear of death both gives him the joy of the hunt as well as seeing what a person’s will to live will bring out of them.
He's still a force of nature at the end of the day (which I feel is represented by the ending scene where he says that he'll come back for Puss later), but I would agree that he's coming after Puss for a personal reason for squandering his past lives. I mean, it feels less like some kind of personal vendetta and more like an annoyance that needs to be set right imo, but at the end of the day he's not just passively waiting for his final life to end.
@@galgramax6713 Exactly
I do like he's motive is so simple since he is a nursery rhyme character barely anyone knew that well. Of course he'd be hungry for magic, fame and recognition. A bit evil view of literally having he's men killed for he's goal but it does add to he's greedy morals and wants.
That and he's funny.
His motive is basically petty revenge
Wolf is 100% gunning after Puss for his blatant disregard for his lives, doing his job on the side, up until he realizes he played with his food for too long and Puss is no longer on his "Kill _Now"_ list.
I also love Jack's body language and facial expressions, they made an amazing job there
The thing that I like is that the ending when he was defeated, he's not clueless. "What have I done to deserve this" should be a line where most audience should say "maybe we've treated him too harsh" or "finally he realizes his wrong doings and wants to turn a new leaf" but then he adds up to it saying "I mean what specifically?" just makes the audience go "yep, he's definitely evil".
Also I saw this comment from another video which adds another meta commentary on the cricket:
"The cricket is just the embodiment of all naive audience who thinks that he's redeemable or that he could be changed to good"
Couldn't say it better myself.
Good analysis
I actually think having his battle after deaths is good, because then puss in boots can choose between acceptance and fear, and I think it adds more depth to kitty soft paws trust. Because, if the wish is destroyed, we know he probably would have chosen it, and kitty soft paws wouldn’t have known it was his choice to be with her.
As megamind once said, what makes a great villain is presentation. Big Jack is solid proof that villains who have no tragic backstory or cheesy redemption can still work as long as they are entertaining. Evil for the sake of being evil. Thats sometimes all you need from a good villain. Heck a lot of past villains like that are still beloved to this day. I would even argue that Bill Cypher is that sort of villain. I'm glad this characters reminds people to appreciate the simple things a bit more.
I had nightmares of Mrs. Tweedy when I was a child and everyone talks about the wolf being not good for children😅
I did not find Chicken Run scary.
She was very creepy
@@purpledragon1945 how
Mrs Tweedy _embodies_ “gaslight, gatekeep, girlboss.”
I think mrs tweedy and jack horner would have been best friends if they met
I believe that the Bears and team friendships teamed up together in the end because they realized the great threat Jack was by stealing all the magic in the world (this could include stealing their consciousness because they are magic animals)
I believe Jack in the end is the villain with consequence on the entire theme of the movie, taking things for granted. As Goldie and Puss took what they have for granted (Life and Family) while Jack just recklessly use whatever magic thing he pulls from his bag (and said magic thing even ended him in a blazing glory)
They finally decided to bring Jimminy Cricket into the Shrek universe while Pinocchio was there from day one.... And the way they decided to use him was BRILLIANT!
Jiminy just slowly just slowly loosing his mind more and more over the horrors Jack are doing with glee.
..... Can we take a moment to talk about how all of Jack's henchmen are literally only there for one purpose, to be KILLED. They all DIE.
But! The death gags are dark and hilarious, but they are actually more than just gags... They are a constant and important reminder that death itself is always right behind Puss. Death is present even when he isn't seen. Death has taken all of these henchmen... He's here.... All the time.
So it's not just a joke, it is that important reminder, and makes the audience constantly aware that yes... Puss could die. THESE guys are dead. For Puss to be scared of meeting the same fate as what he has just seen is very valid. And it works itself into that plot and the more emotional moments.
That was STUPIDLY clever of this movie, and you don't even think about it until someone points it out. That just shows how clever it is.
This is my own slight criticism of the movie's otherwise amazing writing, but I feel as though the Ethical Bug (his WikiShrek name) didn't quite live up to his moral potential. He does a good job diligently voicing his concerns while attempting to reason with Jack Horner. But there's a moment specifically during the final battle where the last remaining baker (Buzzsaw Baker) was calling to Jack Horner for help at the Wishing Star. Unfortunately, Jack barely acknowledges her, and she is pulled into the magical vortex and presumably perishes. Up until this point, the Ethical Bug had spent the entirety of the movie espousing the value of life (and finding the good in people) while showing his extreme disapproval of the deaths of the Baker's Dozen.
So...my criticism is that why did the writers, after going to all the effort of creating the Ethical Bug's character, not have him practice what he preached by actually *_saving_* a life for once by helping the last remaining baker? Because just moments later, the Ethical Bug is shown riding in on the phoenix and finally being proactive!...It's just too bad that time was only used to show the Ethical Bug announcing his resignation and burning the map fragment. The movie could have easily had him arrive just a bit earlier in time to save the last baker, making good on his supposed value of all life when he is now in a capable position to do so. He would have had time to burn the map fragment right after anyway! Also, Goldilocks and the Three Bears even talk about taking over Jack Horner's bakery after he is gone. Who else would be better suited to help them run the bakery than a now grateful and reformed, former employee at of that same bakery?
Idk, it just seemed like a wasted opportunity.
I love how Puss in boots had all 3 villain archetypes. The neutral force that challenges the protagonists worldview (death), the sympathetic misguided villain with a relatable goal (goldy), and finally the irredeemable monster (big jack). And they executed this flawlessly without making it feel crowded!
Meh. I didn't find goldy sympathetic. she was too crude and mean like for that. very selfish and cold. You can only like her because she "redeems herself" at the end, which is.. come on... unrealistic and clichee as hell, let's be honest. In reality she would just have made the wish and be done with it...
But hey. this is a fairy tale.
Death is going out of the way of his job to get revenge on a cocky guy wasting his own lives, even stopping when puss resigns his former self, until leaving when puss starts to change and value his life.
Goldilocks (although didn't get as much) was orphan who found her way into another home, growing bonds she didn't fully understand at the time. By the end, she too realizes she already has her wish.
Jack Horner. Jack was raised with loving parents, wealth, anything he could need and even says so himself. He eventually became less favored than the likes of Pinocchio, and sought after magical items excessively. He wants the last wish to have all the magic, and provides more than just opposition to puss, but the entirety of the Shrek universe(can't believe I'm genuinely speaking about the SCU rn). By the end, he alone suffers a death out of the antagonists, and his dying words are about his cruelty. He's also hilarious.
I love that they gave him a bag of holding full of all of the stolen magical items.
It made him even more perfectly cartoonish.
I kinda wished the analysis would analyze Jack in relation more to the themes of the movie rather than the story of the movie, since that's what I think is a more compelling topic, especially for this movie, in which all the villains each have unique themes, something I personally thought was really cool of the movie. Jack Horner is essentially a representation of capitalism, and I believe his actions and motive back this up. The biggest thing I can think of to support this is the scene where he tells the cricket he had a really good upbringing but in a way that made it seem like nothing. He's the head of a megacorporation and yet he wants more. The motive for his last wish has nothing to do with the fact that he wasn't popular but it's a critique on how capitalism and the mega rich always are out for more. More profits by any means necessary. Jack Horner's character is a really fun way to make a critique on capitalism without revolving the movie around it, without sucking the fun out of the movie, without being too preachy, and I think that makes his character really good.
I feel like Jack’s final scene had to come after the final fight with Death, because the final Death encounter was a final test for Puss, because he still hasn’t completely changed his mind, and if he already had that arc where they destroyed the wish, the final death fight wouldn’t be as important to the characters.
I really feel like the people who say that death isn't a villain because death is just "doing his job" are just repeating that sentence from other discussions without thinking about the reasoning behind that.
The whole reason why the personification of Death is usually considered a neutral character is because they are only doing their job, treat everyone equally and keep the natural order going, they are often depicted as a force of nature that just does what is natural. However in this movie Death outright says he goes against the natural order out of spite for Puss, meaning he is not treating everyone equally, he is not just doing his job in this movie and he goes against the natural order and that makes him a villain in this movie specifically.
Jack is more of a cautionary tale.
What happens when you care about chasing your own desires, instead cherishing what’s right in front of you.
He’s the person who would disregard everything: not only his respect for life, but his wealth and THRIVING bakery business just to get what he wants. Goldie and Jack, thankfully, still had their humanity to pull them back from going down that same path.
He’s a one note villain, yeah, but he served a purpose in the story.
Absolutely thought that the scenes should be flipped. As you know I'm a big furry now 😎 and Jack Horner being the big bad boss fight at the just didn't make much sense. Death kind of just amped the stakes so much so that the Jack Horner fight felt like the usual ending the storyboard writers fell back on to tie things up with Goldilocks and the others. Anways, I'm a big Death fan 😎.
4:31 I have to disagree because if Puss doesn't have the option to grant the wish then it wouldn't be as big of a choice for him to stop 'running away' as it were. If he has no real way of escaping death of course he's gonna fight, that's not really a meaningful choice if the only logical way for Puss to survive is to fight Death. I don't think he fought Death out of pride at the end either because that's what he tried to do when he first met Death and it didn't work. It was only when he was fighting for his last life instead of his status that he could put up a fight, he even aknowledges that he can't beat Death that doesn't sound like someone fighting for their 'pride'.