I really enjoyed the video! I wonder about whether it's really necessary to provide a specific backstory for a villain to make him more compelling. Take, for instance, characters like Ganondorf from 'The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom.' In his case, his actions seem to make sense even without knowing his backstory. Perhaps this is because, in games, we often see the villain's perspective through the eyes of the protagonist, and in real life, we seldom have access to a villain's backstory when we encounter them. Maybe sometimes you wouldn't even want to portray a villain as human, but more like a force of nature to terrify the viewer and make "winning" against the villain feel more cathartic? It's possible that there are different categories of villains. Some may have specific reasons for turning to villainy and could potentially be redeemed, while others may not have a defined backstory but instead have developed their values through life experiences that led them down a dark path. In Ganondorf's case, it could be attributed to a strong aversion to mercy and a deep desire for power and control, shaped by his upbringing in the harsh desert environment, where weakness could come at a high cost. Interestingly enough, none of this is explicitly stated in the game, but the way Ganondorf is portrayed and how he behaves convey a compelling narrative on their own.
I'm so glad you enjoyed it! 😄 And I think you make a great point. I definitely think that some villains don't need a backstory, especially ones who we don't want to appear "human". In my opinion, what it really comes down to is an understand of why they are they way they are, even if it doesn't necessarily stem from a specific moment. It could be as simple as "they're an embodiment of evil" or "they represent something to the reader". You're making me want to learn more about Ganondorf!
Sorta agree yeah 😅 I didn’t really care about that season much, but I do think that the division between her and her family that formed was an interesting thing to explore.
thanos should have team up with santa claus and use the naughty list instead of randomly make half of the universe disappear... so, what would be your motivations as a villain ?
LOL gotta be honest that would be such a fun plot twist 🤣 Hmmm 🤔 if I wiped out all the other authors, I would be the greatest writer ever MWAHAHAHA (jk LOL 😂idk honestly. Suppose that's why I'm not a villain! Yet...)
villain and antagonists aren't always the same thing. the protagonist of overlord is a literal villain (the author said it himself) or silco became the antagonist from arcane as Vi did not like her 6 year old logic how the world worked was wrong
Totally! Antagonists and villains don’t have to be the same thing, they’re just often used as the same from a narrative standpoint. I think that’s a good destination to make tho.
Nice video! I really enjoy the examples you use to show villains with clear motivations and logic from their backstories, however, I think a "compelling" villain might be more defined by how well they serve their role in the story, ie - being an antagonistic driving force for conflict. I think you can see a lot of this in original Disney villains like Maleficent or Cruella DeVille, whose motivations are entirely selfish and petty, Maleficent's being based on a pretty minor personal slight and Cruella's just straight up fully and entirely wanting to commit mass puppy murder. Neither of them have backstories (if you dont count the remakes), neither of them have coherent logic, but neither of them fall flat because they do such a good job of being thoroughly evil and following their own internal logic; pettiness, selfishness, etc. either way, I can't disagree that a villain with a strong backstory will always win me over.
Thanks so much! I'm glad you liked it 😄 I do agree that depending on the kind of villain you're aiming for, backstory may not be required. Disney villains are a great example of that! I think it depends what kind of villain you're trying to write; usually in the sorts of stories I read and watch (or write) the villain is just as detailed and / or relatable as their heroic counterpart, but that's not the only way to do it.
Well, I like villains too. But... Why exactly Jinx or Claudia from Dragon Prince are mentioned as villains. The most evil deeds of Jinx was accidentally killing stepbrothers and stepfather(Silco). Everything else is self-defense and war events. And Claudia is the only truly good character in the show. She is protecting her family, country and people who live there. She is antagonist, but she is the only hero. So called main characters there are actually villains or better say heroes on the wrong side. Yes, Claudia is a black mage, but it's a good thing. It's hypocrisy to claim black magic bad in Dragon Prince universe, since it saved thousand or millions of lives. At the same time, the princes allied themselves with dragons and elves who humiliated humans for thousands of years and definitely didn't learn their lesson. Still, I totally agree with what you said about Thanos, Zuko and Soran.
personally, what I find to be very helpful is to not write your villains with the thought of 'good' or 'evil' in mind, nor 'protagonist' or 'antagonist'. sure, in the final result, the character will be the antagonist of the story (usually), but writing them like this in mind may cause them to be so obviously their role. to fully envelop your reader into that world, I feel as though the best method is to write them as the person they are, and have disagreements between them and the protagonist simply come from who they are. if there's agreements between your protagonist and antagonist? that can make them all the more interesting, as long as the protagonist opposing them despite this still makes sense.
When I was 12/13, I did not see Sozin's plan as wrong. I thought it was Roku's fault the war went too far, for not using his status to expand diplomatically I know better now, of course. But occasionally, there's still that fire in me. The fire that embellishes the conquest campaign, or screams for the Fire Nation's self destruction. Because the truth is, worldwide multiculturalism is as bad as the Fire Nation's monoculturalism. And I for one believe in Darwinism every once in a while: -Multiculturalism encourages multiple cultures to exist, but designs boundaries to prevent interference amongst themselves, accidentally leading to lack of communication. Interculturalism however promotes interaction without a full takeover, which can either create new entire beliefs, or evolve the already existing ones, which is how human society should be working these days. As for Darwinism, I'm somewhat like "If it survives and stays alive, it deserves to exist.".
How is worldwide multiculturalism bad? You can’t just say that without a supporting argument. It makes you sound like you don’t understand multiculturalism. And what exactly do you mean by “Darwinism”? It feels like you’re just saying words to sound smart.
@@trentonbuchert7342 ah ! Ok, sorry. What I meant to say, is that multiculturalism encourages multiple cultures to exist, but designs boundaries to prevent interference amongst themselves, accidentally leading to lack of communication. Interculturalism however promotes interaction without a full takeover, which can either create new entire beliefs, or evolve the already existing ones, which is how human society should be working these days. As for Darwinism, I'm somewhat like "If it survives and adapts to stay alive, it deserves to exist.". The Fire Nation did not survive its own corruption and almost ended the world and its ecossystem instead of adapting or controlling it, therefore, it deserved to burn from the inside out.
![[UA] NAVI проти G2 Esports | Blast Premier Fall Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QWlIm4FGESQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I'd love to hear your thoughts on Arcane. The plot and the characters themselves are so complex and well written.
Yes I love that show so much!! I’m planning to release a video on it in time with the new season dropping. So hyped 👏
I really enjoyed the video! I wonder about whether it's really necessary to provide a specific backstory for a villain to make him more compelling. Take, for instance, characters like Ganondorf from 'The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom.' In his case, his actions seem to make sense even without knowing his backstory. Perhaps this is because, in games, we often see the villain's perspective through the eyes of the protagonist, and in real life, we seldom have access to a villain's backstory when we encounter them. Maybe sometimes you wouldn't even want to portray a villain as human, but more like a force of nature to terrify the viewer and make "winning" against the villain feel more cathartic?
It's possible that there are different categories of villains. Some may have specific reasons for turning to villainy and could potentially be redeemed, while others may not have a defined backstory but instead have developed their values through life experiences that led them down a dark path. In Ganondorf's case, it could be attributed to a strong aversion to mercy and a deep desire for power and control, shaped by his upbringing in the harsh desert environment, where weakness could come at a high cost.
Interestingly enough, none of this is explicitly stated in the game, but the way Ganondorf is portrayed and how he behaves convey a compelling narrative on their own.
I'm so glad you enjoyed it! 😄 And I think you make a great point. I definitely think that some villains don't need a backstory, especially ones who we don't want to appear "human". In my opinion, what it really comes down to is an understand of why they are they way they are, even if it doesn't necessarily stem from a specific moment. It could be as simple as "they're an embodiment of evil" or "they represent something to the reader". You're making me want to learn more about Ganondorf!
Bill Cipher and Azula do the best of just villainy. Unavaatu was shit though
Sorta agree yeah 😅
I didn’t really care about that season much, but I do think that the division between her and her family that formed was an interesting thing to explore.
thanos should have team up with santa claus and use the naughty list instead of randomly make half of the universe disappear...
so, what would be your motivations as a villain ?
LOL gotta be honest that would be such a fun plot twist 🤣
Hmmm 🤔 if I wiped out all the other authors, I would be the greatest writer ever MWAHAHAHA (jk LOL 😂idk honestly. Suppose that's why I'm not a villain! Yet...)
@@WritingWithAsh don't forget to plan a fake attempt against yourself to be a witness and not a suspect !
villain and antagonists aren't always the same thing. the protagonist of overlord is a literal villain (the author said it himself) or silco became the antagonist from arcane as Vi did not like her 6 year old logic how the world worked was wrong
Totally! Antagonists and villains don’t have to be the same thing, they’re just often used as the same from a narrative standpoint. I think that’s a good destination to make tho.
Nice video! I really enjoy the examples you use to show villains with clear motivations and logic from their backstories, however, I think a "compelling" villain might be more defined by how well they serve their role in the story, ie - being an antagonistic driving force for conflict.
I think you can see a lot of this in original Disney villains like Maleficent or Cruella DeVille, whose motivations are entirely selfish and petty, Maleficent's being based on a pretty minor personal slight and Cruella's just straight up fully and entirely wanting to commit mass puppy murder. Neither of them have backstories (if you dont count the remakes), neither of them have coherent logic, but neither of them fall flat because they do such a good job of being thoroughly evil and following their own internal logic; pettiness, selfishness, etc.
either way, I can't disagree that a villain with a strong backstory will always win me over.
Thanks so much! I'm glad you liked it 😄
I do agree that depending on the kind of villain you're aiming for, backstory may not be required. Disney villains are a great example of that! I think it depends what kind of villain you're trying to write; usually in the sorts of stories I read and watch (or write) the villain is just as detailed and / or relatable as their heroic counterpart, but that's not the only way to do it.
Well, I like villains too. But... Why exactly Jinx or Claudia from Dragon Prince are mentioned as villains. The most evil deeds of Jinx was accidentally killing stepbrothers and stepfather(Silco). Everything else is self-defense and war events.
And Claudia is the only truly good character in the show. She is protecting her family, country and people who live there. She is antagonist, but she is the only hero. So called main characters there are actually villains or better say heroes on the wrong side. Yes, Claudia is a black mage, but it's a good thing. It's hypocrisy to claim black magic bad in Dragon Prince universe, since it saved thousand or millions of lives. At the same time, the princes allied themselves with dragons and elves who humiliated humans for thousands of years and definitely didn't learn their lesson.
Still, I totally agree with what you said about Thanos, Zuko and Soran.
personally, what I find to be very helpful is to not write your villains with the thought of 'good' or 'evil' in mind, nor 'protagonist' or 'antagonist'. sure, in the final result, the character will be the antagonist of the story (usually), but writing them like this in mind may cause them to be so obviously their role. to fully envelop your reader into that world, I feel as though the best method is to write them as the person they are, and have disagreements between them and the protagonist simply come from who they are. if there's agreements between your protagonist and antagonist? that can make them all the more interesting, as long as the protagonist opposing them despite this still makes sense.
Ooo that’s a good way to think about it! That’s really interesting 🤩
@@WritingWithAsh happy to help dude! c: loved the video!
@@Green-3c34y65vrbu 💙
Great video not sure why it was recommended but still cool
Thank you! I'm glad it got recommended then 😂
@@WritingWithAsh me 2
Edit: I rewrote my previous comment in order to better specify what I meant.
Loved the video about Catra you explain things so well
Thank you! 😊
@@WritingWithAsh you're welcome
When I was 12/13, I did not see Sozin's plan as wrong. I thought it was Roku's fault the war went too far, for not using his status to expand diplomatically
I know better now, of course. But occasionally, there's still that fire in me. The fire that embellishes the conquest campaign, or screams for the Fire Nation's self destruction. Because the truth is, worldwide multiculturalism is as bad as the Fire Nation's monoculturalism. And I for one believe in Darwinism every once in a while:
-Multiculturalism encourages multiple cultures to exist, but designs boundaries to prevent interference amongst themselves, accidentally leading to lack of communication.
Interculturalism however promotes interaction without a full takeover, which can either create new entire beliefs, or evolve the already existing ones, which is how human society should be working these days.
As for Darwinism, I'm somewhat like "If it survives and stays alive, it deserves to exist.".
How is worldwide multiculturalism bad? You can’t just say that without a supporting argument. It makes you sound like you don’t understand multiculturalism.
And what exactly do you mean by “Darwinism”? It feels like you’re just saying words to sound smart.
@@trentonbuchert7342 ah ! Ok, sorry.
What I meant to say, is that multiculturalism encourages multiple cultures to exist, but designs boundaries to prevent interference amongst themselves, accidentally leading to lack of communication.
Interculturalism however promotes interaction without a full takeover, which can either create new entire beliefs, or evolve the already existing ones, which is how human society should be working these days.
As for Darwinism, I'm somewhat like "If it survives and adapts to stay alive, it deserves to exist.". The Fire Nation did not survive its own corruption and almost ended the world and its ecossystem instead of adapting or controlling it, therefore, it deserved to burn from the inside out.