@@joshualowe959 She is very similar, but Frollo is just the superior Villain imo. He had a lot more going on with him, which made him super interesting as a character.
@@WhirlwindandHeatburst Yes. Mother Gothel is the right representation of an evil person. However Frollo is the wrong representation of what a good religious person is supposed to be.
@@WhirlwindandHeatburst and like you said, Frollo is the superior villain. He committed far more heinous acts and qualified as a complete monster unlike Gothel.
@@LazyOldFusspot_3428 I don’t think the whale got any consequences lol All he got was just a hit onto his head on a very large “rock mountain” (mb, I don’t know how to describe it). Anyways, Monstro wasn’t a villain, just a absurdly large animal wanting a meal. As for the other villains of Pinocchio, the reason they get off scott free was to show the viewer that most times, heinous individuals like them get away with what they do. This applies to real life “bad guys” too sadly…
5:31 Malifacent is not motivated by feelings of rejection. She's just evil. A force of evil who envokes "All the powers of hell". She came to that party to stir up trouble. You can see it in her reaction. Malifacent claims this, other characters talk about this. She's just evil. If she saw so much as a flower bloom she would kill it with frost.
That's what the og film portray her to be, the official Disney Villain books and the live action portray her as more of a "someone who was once a good person but forced down a bad path by society"
I am talking about the 1959 classic film yes. Personally I'm not hip to all these villains getting sympathetic retellings. I didn't think it made Malifacent more interesting, it didn't work with Cruella or the wicked witch, and it especially didn't work with Jafar. Maybe Palpatine can get a series showing how misunderstood his murderous reign as emperor really was.
@@officialmonarchmusic Indeed. The fact they resurrect him is enough , But I would love some movies about how despite some bad actions Empire wasn't that bad as peoples portrait it
My favorite type of villain is the type that serves as an example of what the hero could turn into if the hero fails to learn whatever it is they need to learn. Scar failed to face his insecurities and accept his responsibilities, while Simba learned how to do exactly that. Dr. Facilier saw no value in love or work, but Tiana learns the value of love and Naveen learns the value of work. Sometimes, in order for a hero's growth to shine, there needs to be a villain for them to be contrasted against.
I have another villain who fits that type. Turbo (King Candy) from Wreck it Ralph. Turbo is a programmed "good guy" who ultimately became bad/evil for his selfish desire for attention. While Wreck it Ralph was a programmed "bad guy" who just wanted to be recognized for his role in his game. He's basically an example of what Ralph could have become had he become too obsessed with getting what he wanted instead of doing the right thing.
Beauty and the Beast: Gaston makes no attempt to change his ways out of arrogance and pride, trying to coerce Belle (who lusts after purely because of her beauty) into marriage through manipulation and deceit, the Beast eventually learned kindness and compassion (and to appreciate Belle as a person). Gaston is what the Beast could have become if he was never cursed by the Enchantress.
Scar is my favorite of the Disney villains. He's sleek, conniving, cleaver and actually achieved his goal. Nowadays, Disney has been seemingly lacking with villains. DreamWorks is even beating them in that department.
Maleficent isn’t based of rejection. She clearly showed up to the celebration to wreak havoc. She’s only happy if she’s causing pain so she just took the opportunity at auroras celebration. Then the rest of the movie she’s determined because the fairies who she views as inferior outsmarted her.
Actually, in the fable, it is rejection. The soul reason for her wanting to wreak havoc is because she was rejected and insulted by that rejection. She felt entitled to be at the party, and because she wasn't invited it made her upset. Unlike other villains, she isn't as one dimensional as being evil just "because" she is evil.
Some of these villains terrified me as a kid (especially Ursula; yeesh). Nowadays, I have a lot more appreciation for how entertaining they are. There's a reason why Vincent Price loved playing Ratigan in The Great Mouse Detective: playing a bad guy like Gaston, Jafar, Hades, etc. is just so dang fun! This is actually one of the reasons why Big Jack Horner is my favorite antagonist in Puss in Boots: The Last Wish. He's just like the villains I grew up with: the perfect balance between unrepentant evil and high-quality entertainment. It felt like a love letter to the bad guys of old, and it's right up my alley.
Because Disney is too busy with pushing moral relativism. That's why they tried soooo hard to paint their twist villains as "poor abused babies", then implied that it was Maui's and Ralph's and Anna and Elsa's grandpa's "toxic masculinity" that caused problems in the first place. And now we have boring generational drama with no real weight to it.
@@purpleclaws202 Right, because clearly portraying Ralph as clingy and denying Vanellope her "precious dream" of moving to Slaughter Race (despite that contraddicting the message of the first movie entirely) by creating a virus is totally not painting him as the cause of problems. And it's not like Elsa and Anna's grandpa was portrayed as a raging racist who wanted the Sami people under his thumb by building a dam. Or Maui turning Te Fiti into Te Ka by stealing her heart and snickering about it while he does it. It's almost like you didn't pay attention, buddy.
@@yrooxrksvi7142 Moral relativism isn't bad, in my opinion. People aren't born evil or good (they're both made in my opinion). Regarding their twist villains, I think Hans fits that description (like you can see in _A Frozen Heart_ where he was abused by his father and most of his brothers sans Lars who sympathized with him), but it is a good explanation for his behavior-he wanted to finally get out of his abusive dad's shadow and prove his worth. Bellwether _maybe_ might fit it for how predator animals may've treated her in the past, but I don't think Turbo or Yokai fits the description (the former wanting ever more attention and making Vanellope a glitch and inserting himself as a fake King Candy to do so, and the latter wanting his daughter back and trying to destroy Krei in revenge for supposedly killing her). I do agree they butchered Ralph's and Vanellope's characters just to make a good story (the first _Wreck-It Ralph_ executed them much better and portrayed their friendship in a much healthier way which wouldn't make sense in the second one which just flanderized both of them), but not with the "toxic masculinity" point (which came about because of the flanderization), plus _Wreck-It Ralph_ is already feminist (feminism is NOT misandry and the two should not be confused with each other, the former are just asking for equality and equity for women). Plus, Runeard is already dead by the start of _Frozen II_ and his problem comes with his prejudice against the Northuldrans and magic (which I don't think he feared so much as hated it, which exist on separate planes) rather than toxic masculinity. And I don't think Maui was employing toxic masculinity when trying to get his people to accept him for his feats and also to play tricks and mess around (the last two in traditional Hawaiian folklore). Also, generational trauma isn't always boring. Though I haven't actually seen _Encanto_ before, I think it did the concept well without needing a villain (which I think would've dragged its plot in an unnecessary direction)-it's all in how it's executed. Not all good stories need traditional villains to get their point across.
@@jjtheraccoon61 "Moral relativism isn't bad, in my opinion." Already off to a horrible start. By this logic, systematic genocide, domestic abuse or plotting against family members are totally justified. "People aren't born evil or good (they're both made in my opinion)." Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, the kids who killed baby James Bulger would like to have a word with you, IRL. In Disney, you have Cruella De Vil, Gaston, Madame Medusa, Bill Sykes, Lady Tremaine and Judge Frollo who are irredeemably evil, yet nothing suggests they're poor misunderstood victims. Guess what : not everyone is a victim of circumstances. Some people are just rotten by nature. That's life. "like you can see in A Frozen Heart" No, if you're gonna resort to external material of questionable canonicity that exists only to paint this pathetic Scooby Doo villain as a "victim", then you've lost. Even the movies don't seem to care, given how Hans is treated like a joke, being punched in the face, getting a bucket dropped on his head, or getting buried under horse manure. You think Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee care enough about him to make us "feel" ? Think again, he's treated like a joke because he is one. "Bellwether maybe might fit it for how predator animals may've treated her in the past," Barely brushed over and implied, but how the movie frames it, it feels like she's pulling this complicated nonsensical plot out of spite for Lionheart. Not because she "cares" about prey animals or or because of an unspecified trauma. "but I don't think Turbo or Yokai fits the description" Well duh, because Turbo is, like villains of old, rotten to the core. Just like Ernesto De La Cruz was also so despicable to poison and steal from his supposed best friend. Again, not everyone is a victim. And again, Callaghan wanting revenge on Krei feels hollow and needlessly cruel because Krei is just dumb and careless rather than malicious, and Callaghan loses any shred of justification the moment he brushes off Tadashi's death as "his mistake".Abigail is dropped too far into the plot for the audience to care. Which is why it feels like a lazy retread of Mr Freeze's origin story from Batman TAS, with none of the nuance that made us feel for Freeze and Nora.
Yeah it’s weird we’ve pivoted to like “oh we can’t villainize anyone” and have to find the humanity in every character and “bad guy” I mean sure that can be a great angle sometimes but also sometimes there are people, or more likely forces and systems that are represented by one character, that will never care who they hurt to get what they want and those stories are cautionary tales worth being told!
Well, it is not like Elsa's and Anna's grandfather in "Frozen II" or the men who burned the old town and killed Abuelo Pedro in "Encanto" are given any humanity. But they are dead when the stories start and only appear in flashbacks and memories, so we can only see how their actions nevertheless still hurt people decades later...
@@Patchouliprince But that is an interesting angle too, that things are not always going to be fine just because one bad person is dead or even a group of bad people are dead.
What I started to notice is that almost all Disney villains (well, almost all of them who have a set of hair on their heads) have a hair color in the grayscale. It is black or white or grey or possibly a mix between two of them like Cruella Deville's or Commander Rourke's. The trope is so common that even Scar who's a lion was given a much darker mane than Mufasa and Simba were just because he's the villain. I can only think of four exceptions: Madame Medusa (red hair), Hades (blue fire as hair), Hans (brown hair) and King Runeard (red hair). Which is really not a lot in 85 years...
Actually I disagree that Shan Yu is just a edgy warlord. The scene with his men that you show actually showcases his intelligence and overall skill beyond the battlefield. We see from his facial expression when examining the doll in the tree, that he's got all the info he needs anyway. But he doesn't just choose to rely on that, he also differs to his inner circle. Tossing the doll between them to see if they're on the same page/what he may have missed if anything. Then after saying where the doll came from and that the information the doll contained shows the Imperial Army is awaiting them, his main archer suggests avoiding them, and he looks visibly annoyed for being stoic usually. From there he states that they'll go through the pass as it's the fastest route, and he shows he's more than happy to meet the army head on. His confidence there was definitely not misplaced either, given he took all of them out. We don't even see the villagers' fates. We get a hint from Shan Yu when he states they should return the doll to the child it came from, but really if you know how Hun society generally was with warfare, you can make more guesses. Just felt like adding my two cents there.
Also the one thing that a lot of villains got was a dope sick ass song. Also nothing can beat frollo. He is the best and most relatable to the real world. Frollo is all the deadly sins in one. He is scary, and someone who you can 100% find in real life which is why he is terrifying. Plus his song hellfire has so much meaning to it.
A kinda obvious pattern that I only just really realized is how the male villains are generally motivated by riches and power/control, and the female villains are generally motivated by jealousy over beauty. Or that's at least part of their motivations.
We've got female villains like Ursula and Yzma, whose goal is power too (even if they seem to want revenge as well much more than similar male villains do).
I hope Disney sees all this feedback from several channels and rewrites their next villain-less film to have a villain. Villains serve to deepen the themes of the movie or explore the limits of the main characters.
True. But because of some claptrap about nuance or “black and white” morality they hate having villains these days even though villains are (and always have been) their bread and butter. When Walt Disney warned his cartoonists never to forget that “it all started with a mouse” he should have also told his feature film division “never forget that it all started with a villain”.
I feel like Disney needs to teach kids that not every person is good. In evil, there’s a bit of good, but in good, there’s evil. Disney is looking past the evil and seeing the good. Sometimes, people are evil assholes who only care for themselves. Disney needs to go back to its old ways and make some heartless villains that will regain an audience of adults and a new generation of kids. Unfortunately, I am not old enough to remember any movies that were brand-spanking-new with truly wonderful villains and I would love to be able to.
Interesting how you said Disney is looking past the evil and seeing the good, cause nowadays it seems to be the reverse; looking past the good and seeing the evil, in both modern films and real life.
The coachman: - has less than 3 minutes of his screen time - barely says 5 phrases in the whole movie And yet he is one of the most frightening villains in cartoon history.
What I really hate about him is that we don't see him face any consequences for his evil deeds. Pinocchio escaped, but we don't know if the other boys ever were liberated and turned back to their human form.
@@Furienna But this is more real. A villain does not always pay for his evil and often gets away with his crimes. Pinocchio is not a fairy tale with total justice, it is a tough story.
@@mikhailbandurist8652 exactly. I mean the original story had Pinocchio get tortured and hung by punks at the end for his mischief, and he killed Jiminy.
In writings, a good villain makes a good hero. They gives our protagonist a reason to fight, the motivation to create changes, they push them to move forward, and gives us readers a sense of hatred for evil. You don't look at Cruella and thought "Oh I wanna be like her, I wanna skin puppies and make pretty Prada's 😍". You pity the puppies, you want to fight for them so their death won't be exploited for mere pennies and fancies that only lasted a few seasons. If a villain have no reasoning in their existence, then they are nothing but just another background character with extra fancy script. They are more than just being evil, they are a reminder that evil exists in many form. Like with Frollo and Quasimodo, or Aurora and Maleficent. A villain and a hero support each other's existence, a hero can't be a hero if there's no evil to fight, and a villain isn't a villain if there's nothing they want to destroy. It's a shame that Disney will no longer have great villains that they used to create before, in fear of "hurting the minorities" when in reality, no one cares about it.
Man Disney villains use to be so damn awesome, and is sad because it wasn't that LONG ago that they still deliver, to me the last 3 films with interesting villains where Moana, Wreck it Ralph and Tangled, I love King Candy, Mother Gothel and Tamatoa and Te'ka been my favorites of this modern era, is a shame that for reasons I can't understand they have completely dropped the villains, not even twist villains just generational drama, both Disney and Pixar and is just the worst.....compared this with Dreamworks most recent film Puss in Boots the Last Wish, that manage to created not 1, not 2 but 3 fantastic villains, and currently the film have even do more money than all Disney Films combine in the pandemic era and even QUANTUMANIA a MCU phase 5 film the opening of this phase.....Disney need to go back to have villains, good villains that makes sense like Jaffar, Scar, Ursula, Judge Frollo, Maleficent, Cruella de Vile, Capt. Hook, Hades, Gaston, all this iconic characters.......if they don't welp look what Dreamwoks just did with the new trailer of yet another very creative new film that I didn't even knew existed and now I want to see....Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken, they literally took ARIEL with Chelsea the villain of the film and give us an interesting reversal, with a looking Mermaid Ariel been the villain and a Ursula like Kraken in Ruby been the hero.....just that premise alone makes me excited to see this film, Dreamworks knows what they are doing while Disney is just been left in the dust if this continues.
Apparently, they will have a true villain again in "Wish". Also, "Frozen II" and "Encanto" actually have villains as well except of a different kind. We are shown in those stories how an evil deed in the past can have consequences for decades and long after the people who started everything are dead.
I half disagree with generational trauma being bad. They can be writen well like in Encanto, I just don't think they've tried writing villains in recent years.
@@lk_3099 It is all a matter of having some variety, I think. Some stories do work without a villain, but it doesn't mean that the whole character type should disappear.
Disney truly flew too close to the sun with Frollo the man is insane in so many ways, i still to this day can't believe that such a good villain came from Disney. He's my fav
Yeah.... Shere Khan was the one exception, [the one sore thumb], to the Renaissance era of Disney villains, where he was just...there I guess. The thing with villains that were evil for the sake of evil is that, because they may lack an interesting backstory/cause and/or relatability like sympathetic anti-villains tend to have, in order to keep the audience's attention, they need to excel in 2 things: Personality and Presentation. They need to have a fun, amusing and enigmatic, or a logical, grounded and sensible personality, and they need to have a good presentation of their quirks and motives as to draw the audience in. Shere Khan excelled at NEITHER of these 2 categories.
Ernesto de la Cruz may have been a twist villain, but he still stands out to me. He was portrayed as a egotistical celebrity before we found out he was the villain. The twist just made more sense. Of course someone with his ego and hunger for fame would stoop as low as to murder his friend and steal his work for his own fame.
Ernesto and King Candy work because they're active parts of their respective movies and they pose as obstacles and active antagonists even before being revealed as truly evil. Hans and Bellwether don't work because they work on two premises alone : 1. They're extremely boring and ancillary as the "good guys", thus making the reveal feel bogus and weightless. 2. Their respective plans work on the principle that everyone around them is stupid : Nobody bothers to check on Anna after Hans declares her dead, and even then he admits she was just a backup option after Elsa. And Bellwether goes onto this convoluted, nonsensical plan to get the mayor framed, despite there being CAMERAS, when she could have just let the feral predators roam free and terrorized people. And Callaghan in Big Hero 6 is just a more boring rehash of Mr Freeze, without the depth and nuance.
@@yrooxrksvi7142To be fair to Hans though, the people who should have checked on Anna were just as dumb as they needed to be to make his plan almost work. Nick and Judy had to trick Bellwether and record what she told them to have proof that she was the villain, so she almost succeeded too.
@@Furienna 1. That's precisely my point : he almost succeeded only because of plot-induced stupidity. That's lazy writing. 2. Still doesn't excuse how convoluted yet nonsensical her plan was, and once again, relying on plot-induced stupidity.
I believe a truly underrated villain is Ratigan from The Great Mouse Detective. His objective is to be precieved as a mastermind mouse when his true nature is a vicious rat. He stops at nothing to maintain that perception
Actually Pixar had twist villains since the Prospector in Toy Story 2 (1999), Warp Darkmatter in Buzz Lightyear of Star Command: The Adventure Begins (2000), then like you said Waternoose in Monsters Inc (2001), Auto in Wall-E (2008) Muntz in Up (2009), Lotso in Toy Story 3 (2010), Axelrod in Cars 2(2011), De La Cruz in Coco (2016), Screenslaver in The Incredibles 2 (2018) and future Buzz in Lightyear (2022). While non-Pixar Disney had as its plot twist villains Rourke from Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2002), Michael Yagoobian from Meet the Robinsons (2007), Turbo from Wreck it Ralph (2012), Prince Hans from Frozen (2013), Callaghan from Big Hero 6(2014), and Belwhether from Zootopia (2017). I know some people consider Stromboli from Pinocchio (1940) or Clayton from Tarzan (1999) to be plot twist villains but I am not one of those people
I'm surprised you didn't mention Prof. Ratingan from The Great Mouse Detective. He was voiced by the prince of classic horror himself - Vincent Price. He's such a delightful character, in my op, much funnier and darker than Hades. He's a larger than life charismatic psycho, as he singa a funny little song while a terrifying trap to kill the hero is set in motion. Prof Ratigan is also a charming salute to Price's long and exciting career as an adorable baddie.
I'll actually go and say that as far as twist villains go, I genuinely liked Mayor Bellweather from Zootopia. She felt like a good ol' Disney villain from their older films. She was angry at society due to what she had to endure and desired to control it with fear. No sad backstory, no just reason for her actions; she was just mad and wanted control. I love that. I really miss old Disney villains.
Bellwether was PATHETIC, I'm appalled that 21 people would think such a lazy, shoehorned rehash of Hans would think she was a "good villain". "She felt like a good ol' Disney villain from their older films." No she didn't. She's portrayed as a walking doormat throughout the movie, and after 3 twist villains in a row, she was VERY on the nose about the whole "LOL Wolf in sheep's clothing" bs. "She was angry at society due to what she had to endure and desired to control it with fear. No sad backstory, no just reason for her actions; she was just mad and wanted control. I love that." No, she's angry at society for being treated as a meek, humble weakling, so she saw herself into the protagonist, as if the writers want us to "feel for her" that she's went through the same bullying although unseen. I hate that and and her plan is as convoluted as it's utterly stupid : why just let feral animals be captured to get the mayor kicked, when she could have just let them roam free and terrorize people ? Seriously, get real.
@@gabrielarivera4864 Her motive is dumb, because the racism is just a pretense to hide her real motivation : hating the mayor for mistreating her. Everything about Zootopia sucked tbh
@LuPescaròAUnaMa whoa, where's all the hate coming from? I can understand not liking the racial allegory part of it, but that aside, it was a solid mystery film
@@DJSenpai17 Solid ????? It's pathetically lazy. The movie never takes itself seriously, the "mystery" is completely left in the background, and Bellwether's reveal was so stupid and lazy. Her motivation are just an excuse for her petty grudge against the Mayor mistreating her, NOTHING else is known about her or the Breaking Bad cameos. And her plan is as convoluted as nonsensical : why go all these lengths to turn predators feral......only to let them be captured by the Mayor ???? She could have done MUCH more damage by setting them free, attacking the population. But no, instead, she relied on the SINGLE conveniently headstrong rookie cop to expose the mayor. And then she does NOTHING once she's in power. No, it fails completely even as a "neo noir".
1:13 It's Love's First Kiss, not "True Love's Kiss". That one was used in Sleeping Beauty, and later reused for The Little Mermaid and I guess Frozen, with the former being reworded as "The Kiss Of True Love".
@Will N Thanks for the reminder of how Frozen used the concept 😉 (Although I'm a bit unaware if you mistook me referring to The Little Mermaid for Frozen 😅). While it is true that Disney hasn't been focusing on creating their own adaptations of fairytales since the 2010s, it's not as though they haven't created original stories before (Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Fantasia, Brother Bear, etc.). Not only that, but they've also adapted various novels that aren't fairytales (though still fictional), and some legends too. Big Hero 6 is based off of a Marvel comic series. I think The Princess And The Frog, Tangled, and Frozen is where Disney had the most creative liberties with their respective source materials since the start of the Revival Era. Not to say that they never had creative liberties with their prior films, just that's it's more noticeable and persistent in this era. I also wouldn't completely say that Anna, Moana, Raya, and Mirabel were particularly bratty princesses 😅 (Elsa's technically a queen in the first Frozen film, and most of her actions there were fueled by anxiety). I suppose in terms of Anna, the only moments of her being seen as bratty that I can think of is during her first confrontation with Elsa and her sled ride with Kristoff. One was fueled by her immense naiveté and desire to have some form of happiness in her life, and the other was caused by Kristoff judging her for her choice of an immediate marriage. Aside from those scenes, I'd hardly label her as the bratty type. Same goes for Moana, where some of her actions were fueled by the weight of responsibilities put on her shoulders, as well as trying to figure out what's the right path for herself. In terms of Raya (from what I could gather) it's having a lack of trust in others, and Mirabel's is being a part of a family going through lots of generational trauma, which contributed to her lack of self-worth in said family. Despite all that, I'm not gonna deny the fact that these ladies have their own fair share of sass to them 😆. I think this could explain some of what you mean. Besides that, I do agree with you on hoping that Wish will turn out great 😊. Who knows, perhaps it might return films back to the original Disney-esque fairytale format moving forward. Or something new will still be done with it, just as long as it's done well. And here's hoping for the best on how Asha's character will turn out.
@Will N That's for sure true 😂. I think the closest princess to somewhat reach those two's level of sass in the Disney Princess Lineup would probably be Jasmine 😅. I kinda feel bad that Esmeralda was kicked out of the line in the late-2000's due to how unpopular she or her film was at the time. That or because The Hunchback of Notre Dame wasn't recieved well at the box office due to how poorly it was marketed, which misled/misinformed lots of people going into seeing it. Hercules experienced this too, but not as egregiously so as Hunchback. Regardless, it was still enough for Megara not to be inducted into the lineup. I did not know that Anastasia helped contribute to Hercules's downfall at the box office 😳. Thanks for the info drop, that's very interesting.
11:34 Correction: The Hunchback of Notre Dame was released in 1996, two years after The Lion King (1994). The villain that came after Scar is Governor Ratcliffe from Pocahontas (1995).
It saddens me the last proper villian before the annoying phrase with twist villian is Mother Gothel the only twist villian i did like is King Candy it was clever. I miss when Disney did villians it definitely really died down in modern movies. Thats why I like Dreamworks at least they haven't stopped with villians.
Frollo was a mixture of Mother Gothel & Gaston. Like Mother Gothel, he locked his victim in a tower and taught the victim that the world is cruel. Like Gaston he was after a specific girl
The Queen in Snow White was so prefect that every other villain was just trying to live up to those standards. The quality of Disney films peaked with Walt & have been all over the place ever since. The modern films don’t have the classical elements anymore and there’s basically no adult appeal.
What about renaissence? Many movies in this period are amazing! Lion king, hunchback of Notre Dame, alladin and many more amazing movies with deep messages
Cant really agree with that tbh. The renaissence movies and some modern disney movies like Moana were really good as well, sometimes surpassing the old Walt movies as well.
The only villains I ever found to be scary were Medusa and McLeach from the Rescuers movies. Even as a little kid, I knew characters like Ursula or Maleficent weren't real, but the cruelty of Medusa and greed of McLeach had a realness to them that got into my head as a kid and as an adult, I've seen people like that.
"Maleficent comes from a place of rejection." Does she though? Like, if the kingdom did invite her to witness the birth, would she have gifted her wonderful things like everyone else? Put the live action film aside, because we can't say it was Disney's intent at the time, it's just an alternate take. Note: The Coachman is the only Disney villain to never be punished in any way. He got away with it. All those he tormented are still being tormented. Also, regarding Frollo, notice he goes down much like Cruella. She started out wanting the puppies, and she was driven to a car chase, in several instances, almost killing them all and making them unable to produce good coats, just to get her hands on them. Her eyes just before she crashed were that of insanity. Frollo's eyes just before he fell were insanity- wide, yellow and deranged. With Silver, I like to add that he's obviously, and indisputably, based off Long John Silver from Treaure Island, and the original Silver is a true pirate, but implicitly warms up to young Jim. He nonetheless disappears at the end. Planet's Silver exploited the implicit warming between Jim and Silver and delved more into it, creating a truly sympathetic character, to the point I sometimes find my mind conflating the two. As for the rest, I kinda wish you mentioned Hans. He wasn't too bad.
It is hard to say what Maleficent would have done if she had gotten an invitation. But it would have been a bigger insult to be excluded from a major royal event in the Medieval days than what we might be able to imagine today.
20:04 I think the reason why is because the twist isn’t that he’s a villain (because we already know he does villainous things before the plot twist) the twist is that we learn something new about him that explains what his plan is and why he is doing what he is doing.
Seriously though, these classic Disney villains could go neck in neck with some of Dreamworks' greatest villains of all time in terms of how great they really are.
Well, we do have Elsa's and Anna's grandfather in "Frozen II" and the men who burned the old town and killed Abuelo Pedro in "Encanto". But they are dead when the stories start and only appear in flashbacks and memories, so we can only see how their actions nevertheless still hurt people decades later...
@@RADARMYBRAT32 It is hardly fair to say that though since they only appear briefly in flashbacks and memories, so we can't know if they had "zero personality". But it's not bland to be a murderer even if we only find out very little about who King Runeard was and even less about who the evil-doers who killed Abuelo Pedro were. You can argue that they appeared so briefly that they didn't leave a lasting impression on you, and that is what I think that you were really trying to say. But I wonder if the posthumous villains of both these movies weren't actually parts of a bigger picture, which would have pushed them into doing what they did. Because I would guess that prejudices against the Northuldra and fear of magic existed before King Runeard planned to subjugate them and killed their chief. And when it comes to the attack where Abuelo Pedro was killed, it is clear that it happened during a civil war in Colombia where many people died in real life. But as far as these stories go, it is an important message that everything won't always be fine just because one bad guy is dead or even a group of bad guys are dead. Which is really mature when you consider that we're talking about Disney. In particular, people have accused "Pocahontas" and "The Hunchback of Notre-Dame" of being too simplistic and blaming everything bad that happened on one person. That is actually unfair since both of these two movies show us that racism and prejudices exist even without a full-blown villain like Ratcliffe or Frollo. However, "Frozen II" and "Encanto" take it one step further and show us that the effects of evil deeds often don't go away that easily and can even hurt future generations. This is very much a valid message, even though I too want to see new more traditional Disney villains in the future...
Maleficent wasn't the last great Disney villain of her era, the next movie after Sleeping Beauty was One Hundred and One Dalmatians with Cruella De Vil, arguably an even more iconic villain, and the Jungle Book, with three different main antagonists.
@@Furienna I haven't checked but I know for a fact that One Hundred and One Dalmatians came right after Sleeping Beauty and the Jungle Book was the last movie Walt Disney worked fully on before it's death, he started the development of the Aristocats but he died before the movie was done, and after/with this movie the dark age started.
Alright I checked, after Sleeping Beauty and One Hundred and One Dalmatians there is the Sword in the Stone and then the Jungle Book and the Aristocats. So no, One Hundred and One Dalmatians isn't the start of a new Era.
King Candy totally works because the twist isn't in his villainy, it's in why he is a villain. Until the reveal of his origins, we assume he's an antagonist, trying to keep the game safe by preventing Vanellope from racing. This shifts once Ralph realizes Vanellope is actually an original part of the game, and we start to question why King Candy would have re-written the game to exclude her and make himself king. In every step we know he's the bad guy, but we don't know why, so the twist still works.
I just wanna say something about Maleficent. On the matter of her personal motivation for going as far as she did, I've seen many people go back and forth on how her original motivation (pre-remake) wasn't good because it was petty and weak, or those who do like her just for how deplorable she is at heart. And I think they're both right. However, I don't think enough people are aware that, in the context of medieval times and where certain folklore takes place, the faeries or fae in mythos are not like how they are typically in Tinkerbell movies or any pleasant portrayal in children's media. For those who don't know (considering I never knew this until recent years), there are plenty of Celtic fae that are deemed incredibly petty and malicious when acting upon their whims. There would be stories on how they use their powers to harm innocents or play sadistic pranks onto the unwitting. And that's just portraying the tiny fairies! So imagine a dark fae just like what I've just mentioned, only human-sized and practically has the presence that COMMANDS you to respect her and to not underestimate her. Imagine how she is practically embracing the name that represents her very being and is confident that she can't be outmatched because she always got her way through terrorizing many. No joke, Celtic faes are DARK. So with that in mind, it's no wonder that Maleficent doesn't really *need* much reasoning to place a curse on the baby that did no wrong to her. It's not because of weak writing, it's because fae in classic folklore are basically like that and writers were using existing stories for reference! Maleficent was just portrayed as the biggest and the baddest compared to ALL fae. Her pettiness over not getting an invitation to a royal christening? In terms of hierarchy, she sees herself as practically a GOD compared to the king and queen, and yet they have the audacity to deny her presence? Well, may your child rot for your transgression! It's only fair, after all! That's the mindset of Maleficent; and she wanted people to know and fear her. So I just covered the reasoning behind faes' spiteful nature, now there's the matter of the party. The baby's christening in the kingdom was not a private party because people from all over came to celebrate. For Maleficent to not be invited was practically a spit in the face to her. And considering how Maleficent calls the three fairies that WERE invited as "rabble" compared to her, you can see that she did not appreciate how the lower fairies were chosen instead of her. This just begs the question as to why didn't they just invite her in the first place to avoid all this? Well, chances are they can't exactly guarantee that she *wouldn't* give their baby a terrifying gift, which is pretty likely, even if they were to play it safe. They probably couldn't accept that outcome no matter what and probably hoped for the best. (But that's just speculation on my part) So yes, on the terms of justification for her motivation, her reasoning is very petty and not tragic at whatsoever, but personally, I like that better because she's just a powerful force of nature that demands you to cater to her whims and punishes you for the smallest of things. That's just terrifying.
Hades was my favourite, as a kid when the movie came out I knew it was the antagonist but his lines oh my what an enjoyment Hey, what about Ratigan, Cruella or Madame Medusa? She really scared me, more than Cruella
Yeah man, i thought Disney did a great job of having great villains in any movie👏👏👏. My favourites are King Candy, Dr facilier i like what kind of scary things he had up his sleeves, i've had a dream that once after of the 7 masks are done scaring dr facilier they might come after me next. And for my third one, is no other than Captain Hook, i liked how he was a pirate trying to capture peter pan, but when Tik Tok Croc comes around, he's the number one funniest villian i can ever laugh🤣🤣🤣 at.
The last true good Disney villains were Mother Gothel as the last traditional villain, and King Candy as the only twist villain that actually worked. Since then, Disney has been hellbent on pushing moral relativism, by trying to paint Hans and Bellwether as "victims of society". "Oh no, my unseen brothers bullied me, so I'm just gonna take over this kingdom with no real king or queen because I'm such a wimp." "Oh no, my mayor treats me like a doormat, so I'm gonna blame predators as a whole and reshape society.....as long as everyone is too stupid to look at camera footage". Even Callaghan in Big Hero 6 is just a lazier rehash of Mr Freeze from Batman, except with none of the nuance and depth. Then they decided to push for generational/cultural drama to keep in line with moral relativism and NEVER portray anyone as truly evil. Maui is essentially the true villain in Moana because his "toxic masculinity and insecurities" led him to steal Te Fiti's heart, so now the super awesome Moana has to save the day. Ralph in Ralph Breaks The Internet is a clingy moron who won't let the (hypocritical and irresponsible) Vanellope go to Not-Fortnite, so he unleashes a virus and now the Princesses have to clean up his mess. In Frozen 2, they reveal AT THE VERY LAST MINUTE that it was Anna and Elsa's grandpa who caused the rift with the forest people because he was racist and power-hungry.......And now he's dead.......Who cares ? Raya tries SOOOOO hard to paint Namari as relatable and "just misguided" when she's just a horrible person from her first scene. Encanto didn't have any real stakes, the characters were just boring archetypes, and an overbearing grandma with PTSD is just not an antagonistic force.
Okay, I think I have balance out some of what you wrote. Hans was reportedly also abused by his father and can't have learned any good values from him and was messed up for that reason. I will assume that Bellwether has a backstory where she or somebody who was close to her was attacked by predators just like Nick was attacked by those prey bullies. Callaghan clearly lost it when he thought that his daughter died, which kind of makes sense too. Maui was really dumb to steal Te Fiti's heart and can be a jerk sometimes, but Tamatoa is the only evil character in that story even if he only appears in two scenes. I can't agree that there's no evil characters in the newer family drama Disney movies even if these stories play out a bit differently than older ones did. We care about what Elsa's and Anna's grandpa did because the spirits of the forest almost destroyed Arrendale and made it necessary for the sisters to set things right. And I don’t think that a family suffering under a generational trauma is "no real stakes" even if "Encanto" is more about talking to each other than having an adventure...
@@Furienna "Balance" out ? More like damage control lol Relying on external material or worse, headcanon, to fill the massive gaps in Frozen's and Zootopia's writing is a really poor defense. The truth is both are lazily written plot devices, not characters. If anything, Bellwether's motivation revolves more around how the mayor treated her, which makes her more pathetic than anything. DGAF about Nick, he's an obnoxious stereotypical smart alek in the most basic sense of the word. Callaghan is just a really POOR excuse of a Mr Freeze rip-off. His daughter is not nearly as strong of a motivation as Nora was to Victor Fries. Alistair Krai is just a moron, whereas Ferris Boyle was absolutely hateable in every way. So it makes his actions completely irredeemable AND unjustified. Tamatoa is just a Big Lipped Alligator moment, really shouldn't classify as a villain imo "We care about what Elsa's and Anna's grandpa did because the spirits of the forest almost destroyed Arrendale and made it necessary for the sisters to set things right." NO, WE DON'T. It's a completely made up backstory by the sequel, never hinted at by the first movie, and it's shoehorned towards the very end of the movie as well, making it less impactful. "And I don’t think that a family suffering under a generational trauma is "no real stakes" even if "Encanto" is more about talking to each other than having an adventure..." Encanto is more about a bunch of stressed one-note stereotypes who can't cope with expectations. Thing is, none of them are that memorable or interesting. It's just a boring telenovela plot and it's not even about "Talking to each other" given the obnoxious amount of tedious songs it had. Also, terribly rushed ending and resolution.
fun fact: (more like dark fact) The remake of sleeping beauty where maleficent was the main character, a lot of people have called it a fairytale retelling of a r-pe survivor
The thing about the King Candy twist is that it basically doesn't change anything. King Candy was already trying to kill Vanellope when he gets revealed as Turbo. The only thing the reveal does is widens the scope of what his meddling is doing. If he succeeds in stopping Vanellope from finishing the race, she stays separated from the code, he continues to be in control. If he fails, well, the movie finishes. Now, look at Disney's twist villains since then: Hans, when you get told he's a villain, it's a power play (in his head) that'll leave him with the entirety of Arendelle under his control because the local royalty will no longer have blood heirs in the two sisters. Bellwether: a wolf in sheep's clothing, content to slowly dismantle the local power structure, if Judy hadn't come along and disproved Bell's thesis that the only way to change things is from within, by basically saying, "Nah, I got this! I'm going to work hard for my position." Oh, yes, it's the predators that are dangerous, after they've been forcefully injected with a rage inducing drug, not this sheep who acts all demure and unimpressive. The only outliers in Zootopia who do actually harm prey species are the ones the government took self-control away from them... (Is Zootopia secretly based?)
What made the Disney Villains to me work is because their characters works in their story. As someone who writes, I see them for what they add to the story and their overall impact to both the plot, characters and audience. Just look at Lady Tremaine, her evilness and abusive relationship with Cinderella was enough for the story to work. She didn't need to have a tragic backstory or any form of sympathetic history but the mere fact that she was just envious of her stepdaughter to completely abuse her really cemented her cruelty and evilness. Malificent to me in the old movie was much more better, she truly embodied being evil and pretty much enjoyed it. She is sinister, devious, cruel and many more and that really made her a terrifying force because like many pure evil villains, they can't be reasoned with. By adding this sympathetic backstory which what they did in the live action, she pretty much lost her role as a villain.
I love the classic disney villains, but I don't really agree that disney nowadays suffer for the lack of one neccesarely, not all stories need villains, and even classic disney understood that, that's why the real bad guys in dumbo and bambi are either societal prejudice or forest animals place on the food chain
I would LOVE to see a Disney villain starting good and corrupting with time. Most if not all villains start being bad, or at least we don't see their corruption arc. Like MAN with Prince of Egypt Rameses' actions hurt so bad because we know he was better, but we also know what he has been through and how he came to be like this. It's better for us to sympathize with, and a whole lot better than infodumping their past.
Honestly, I agree. Here are my top favorite Disney villains: The Evil Queen Captain Hook The Coachman Judge Claude Frollo Jafar Maleficent The Horned King Dr. Facilier Ursula Hades Gaston Scar Shere Khan Professor Ratigan The Headless Horseman
Disney needs to remove twist villains. They seem to be focusing on the story of the villains themselves without hinting to much to the actual villain character just to suddenly pop there it is. Knowing a threat from the start and knowing the outcome really puts people on there toes, its one reason why such tv shows such as doctor who is still running, cause the threat is know.
People laughed when said I feared Frollo the most, granted I was a kid when I said this. So when I saw that man in Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance my heart just stopped.
0:44 my favorite villain!!!!🤩; thank you 😊 for putting her first in the list😊because she IS the very FIRST villain like..EVER😊😊😊😊🤩🤩🤩🤩🖤🖤🖤🖤🖤🖤🖤🖤🍎🍎🍎🍎🍎🍎 5:03 she is ALSO my absolute FAVORITE villain as well🤩🤩🤩🤩😊😊😊😊💜💜💜💜💜💜😈😈😈😈😈😈😈
Disney villains from the golden era: had different understandable motivations. Disney villains from the dark ages: mostly desired money Disney villains from the Renaissance era: desired power
the fact that ppl always Forget about Annastasia is crazy bc that was also a good story nd the Villain in that movie was crazy he killed that girls whole family expt for her nd the granny nd he still tried to come after her wen she got older so that movie was also a master peice
I have loved Disney villains more than the heroes since I was a child. To create a compelling story, you need a perfect villain who's morals and ambitions conflict perfectly with that of the protagonist. Frollo is definitely my favourite because he's the darkest villain in Disney history
@jf k I love it too, although it's far from perfect, especially with the story itself. But it fits in well with the many other dark fantasy movies of the 80s and I like to watch it around Halloween.
I remembered being terrified watching those kids getting turned into donkeys, my parents usually use that to scare me so I wouldn't do bad things they would says that if I did (insert bad thing to do as a child) I would be turned into a donkey.
Ironically Villain-centric Disney Live Action Movie such as Cruella and Maleficent got the better story , better budget , better casting and better costumes compared to the heroes side
The days before the stupid twist villains and no villains were so grand. It's funny how for 80 years the kinds of villains Disney created were enough. They were universally loved and praised and they never got old. The twist villains were old after the first one and whatever they're doing now is just garbage. I'm fine with a twist here and there when it makes sense (King Candy) or even no villain (Encanto)...but the people at Disney have no idea what they are doing these days from Mary-Sue heroes that make Snow White (bless her heart) look nuanced to "the real villain was my emotional trauma, all along!"
"Encanto" and "Frozen II" has villains, but they're a different kind than the traditional more obvious ones. They have been dead for decades when the story starts, but it doesn't mean that the effects of their evil actions don't still hurt people. But yeah, we have to hope that "Wish" brings back the traditional villain.
@@Furienna The way Encanto plays out, I think it was just fine not having an active villain in the story. Frozen 2 was kind of nonsensical with or without a villain. Here's to hoping Wish gives us something great and memorable. It's been too long since we've had a memorable villain...Tamatoa was good, but he was more of an obstacle.
@@saintfighteraqua I'm not fine with either twist villains or generational/cultural struggle bs. Disney has ran the twist villain trope to the ground to the point of people joking that the piglet in Moana was gonna be the villain. King Candy worked as a twist because it falls in line with his antagonist role, enhancing it. Hans and Bellwether are just lazy "Ha ! GOTCHA!" Scooby Doo villains, one-note shoehorned lazy plot devices with no real personality other than "One moment I'm this super meek and nice person, next up I'm a power hungry psycho", but both of their "plans" just rely on people's stupidity rather than genius. Hence why they don't work. And Callaghan in BH6 was just a more boring rip-off of Mr Freeze from Batman without the nuance.
@@saintfighteraqua Encanto didn't work because it had no real stakes. The family members were just a bunch of one-note cardboards. And generational struggle is just.........BORING. Oh no, my grandma is too strict because of PTSD. Whatever. Same for Strange World, such a boring, aimless movie. Agreed on Frozen 2, ALSO a nonsensical and aimless movie with no real stakes or plot.
@@Furienna Encanto doesn't have a villain. And it's boring as hell. Frozen 2 tries to paint Anna and Elsa's grandfather as a racist warmongering tyrant, but...Who cares ? It's revealed way too late into the movie, nothing that happened before lead up to this reveal.
Frollo really is Disney’s GOAT. They will never make another villain or even character like him again.
Mother Gothel was very similar to Frollo. She like Frollo taught the world is cruel
@@joshualowe959 She is very similar, but Frollo is just the superior Villain imo. He had a lot more going on with him, which made him super interesting as a character.
@@WhirlwindandHeatburst Yes. Mother Gothel is the right representation of an evil person. However Frollo is the wrong representation of what a good religious person is supposed to be.
@@WhirlwindandHeatburst and like you said, Frollo is the superior villain. He committed far more heinous acts and qualified as a complete monster unlike Gothel.
@@joshualowe959 yea gothel was similar but frollo is just evil
Can we talk about how the coachman is literally the only pure evil Disney villain to never have consequences for his actions whatsoever?
Basically all the Pinocchio villains get off scot free
@@Ketser1505 except perhaps Monstro the Whale, who isn't really a villain by any means.
There's also the Siamese Cats from Lady and the Tramp, but they were more like troublemakers and not evil.
@@LazyOldFusspot_3428 I don’t think the whale got any consequences lol All he got was just a hit onto his head on a very large “rock mountain” (mb, I don’t know how to describe it). Anyways, Monstro wasn’t a villain, just a absurdly large animal wanting a meal. As for the other villains of Pinocchio, the reason they get off scott free was to show the viewer that most times, heinous individuals like them get away with what they do. This applies to real life “bad guys” too sadly…
@@INFP-Turd Cliff. But the whale still was a perfect final obstacle for Pinocchio to overcome in the end.
5:31 Malifacent is not motivated by feelings of rejection. She's just evil. A force of evil who envokes "All the powers of hell". She came to that party to stir up trouble. You can see it in her reaction. Malifacent claims this, other characters talk about this. She's just evil. If she saw so much as a flower bloom she would kill it with frost.
I had always thought Maleficent cursed the princess because the king and queen were treating with her enemies.
That's what the og film portray her to be, the official Disney Villain books and the live action portray her as more of a "someone who was once a good person but forced down a bad path by society"
I am talking about the 1959 classic film yes. Personally I'm not hip to all these villains getting sympathetic retellings. I didn't think it made Malifacent more interesting, it didn't work with Cruella or the wicked witch, and it especially didn't work with Jafar. Maybe Palpatine can get a series showing how misunderstood his murderous reign as emperor really was.
@@bugeerah Please no. My man Palps has had enough
@@officialmonarchmusic Indeed. The fact they resurrect him is enough , But I would love some movies about how despite some bad actions Empire wasn't that bad as peoples portrait it
My favorite type of villain is the type that serves as an example of what the hero could turn into if the hero fails to learn whatever it is they need to learn. Scar failed to face his insecurities and accept his responsibilities, while Simba learned how to do exactly that. Dr. Facilier saw no value in love or work, but Tiana learns the value of love and Naveen learns the value of work. Sometimes, in order for a hero's growth to shine, there needs to be a villain for them to be contrasted against.
I have another villain who fits that type. Turbo (King Candy) from Wreck it Ralph.
Turbo is a programmed "good guy" who ultimately became bad/evil for his selfish desire for attention.
While Wreck it Ralph was a programmed "bad guy" who just wanted to be recognized for his role in his game.
He's basically an example of what Ralph could have become had he become too obsessed with getting what he wanted instead of doing the right thing.
Beauty and the Beast: Gaston makes no attempt to change his ways out of arrogance and pride, trying to coerce Belle (who lusts after purely because of her beauty) into marriage through manipulation and deceit, the Beast eventually learned kindness and compassion (and to appreciate Belle as a person).
Gaston is what the Beast could have become if he was never cursed by the Enchantress.
Scar is my favorite of the Disney villains. He's sleek, conniving, cleaver and actually achieved his goal. Nowadays, Disney has been seemingly lacking with villains. DreamWorks is even beating them in that department.
Maleficent isn’t based of rejection. She clearly showed up to the celebration to wreak havoc. She’s only happy if she’s causing pain so she just took the opportunity at auroras celebration. Then the rest of the movie she’s determined because the fairies who she views as inferior outsmarted her.
Actually, in the fable, it is rejection. The soul reason for her wanting to wreak havoc is because she was rejected and insulted by that rejection. She felt entitled to be at the party, and because she wasn't invited it made her upset.
Unlike other villains, she isn't as one dimensional as being evil just "because" she is evil.
Some of these villains terrified me as a kid (especially Ursula; yeesh). Nowadays, I have a lot more appreciation for how entertaining they are. There's a reason why Vincent Price loved playing Ratigan in The Great Mouse Detective: playing a bad guy like Gaston, Jafar, Hades, etc. is just so dang fun! This is actually one of the reasons why Big Jack Horner is my favorite antagonist in Puss in Boots: The Last Wish. He's just like the villains I grew up with: the perfect balance between unrepentant evil and high-quality entertainment. It felt like a love letter to the bad guys of old, and it's right up my alley.
weird how a non-Disney company still knows how to make Disney villains but Disney forgot.
And it’s a huge sad shame that Disney is too scared to make villains like these anymore
Because Disney is too busy with pushing moral relativism. That's why they tried soooo hard to paint their twist villains as "poor abused babies", then implied that it was Maui's and Ralph's and Anna and Elsa's grandpa's "toxic masculinity" that caused problems in the first place. And now we have boring generational drama with no real weight to it.
@@yrooxrksvi7142 I don't think it was ever implied those characters had "toxic masculinity" buddy
@@purpleclaws202 Right, because clearly portraying Ralph as clingy and denying Vanellope her "precious dream" of moving to Slaughter Race (despite that contraddicting the message of the first movie entirely) by creating a virus is totally not painting him as the cause of problems. And it's not like Elsa and Anna's grandpa was portrayed as a raging racist who wanted the Sami people under his thumb by building a dam.
Or Maui turning Te Fiti into Te Ka by stealing her heart and snickering about it while he does it.
It's almost like you didn't pay attention, buddy.
@@yrooxrksvi7142 Moral relativism isn't bad, in my opinion. People aren't born evil or good (they're both made in my opinion). Regarding their twist villains, I think Hans fits that description (like you can see in _A Frozen Heart_ where he was abused by his father and most of his brothers sans Lars who sympathized with him), but it is a good explanation for his behavior-he wanted to finally get out of his abusive dad's shadow and prove his worth. Bellwether _maybe_ might fit it for how predator animals may've treated her in the past, but I don't think Turbo or Yokai fits the description (the former wanting ever more attention and making Vanellope a glitch and inserting himself as a fake King Candy to do so, and the latter wanting his daughter back and trying to destroy Krei in revenge for supposedly killing her).
I do agree they butchered Ralph's and Vanellope's characters just to make a good story (the first _Wreck-It Ralph_ executed them much better and portrayed their friendship in a much healthier way which wouldn't make sense in the second one which just flanderized both of them), but not with the "toxic masculinity" point (which came about because of the flanderization), plus _Wreck-It Ralph_ is already feminist (feminism is NOT misandry and the two should not be confused with each other, the former are just asking for equality and equity for women). Plus, Runeard is already dead by the start of _Frozen II_ and his problem comes with his prejudice against the Northuldrans and magic (which I don't think he feared so much as hated it, which exist on separate planes) rather than toxic masculinity. And I don't think Maui was employing toxic masculinity when trying to get his people to accept him for his feats and also to play tricks and mess around (the last two in traditional Hawaiian folklore). Also, generational trauma isn't always boring. Though I haven't actually seen _Encanto_ before, I think it did the concept well without needing a villain (which I think would've dragged its plot in an unnecessary direction)-it's all in how it's executed. Not all good stories need traditional villains to get their point across.
@@jjtheraccoon61 "Moral relativism isn't bad, in my opinion."
Already off to a horrible start. By this logic, systematic genocide, domestic abuse or plotting against family members are totally justified.
"People aren't born evil or good (they're both made in my opinion)."
Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, the kids who killed baby James Bulger would like to have a word with you, IRL. In Disney, you have Cruella De Vil, Gaston, Madame Medusa, Bill Sykes, Lady Tremaine and Judge Frollo who are irredeemably evil, yet nothing suggests they're poor misunderstood victims. Guess what : not everyone is a victim of circumstances. Some people are just rotten by nature. That's life.
"like you can see in A Frozen Heart"
No, if you're gonna resort to external material of questionable canonicity that exists only to paint this pathetic Scooby Doo villain as a "victim", then you've lost. Even the movies don't seem to care, given how Hans is treated like a joke, being punched in the face, getting a bucket dropped on his head, or getting buried under horse manure. You think Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee care enough about him to make us "feel" ? Think again, he's treated like a joke because he is one.
"Bellwether maybe might fit it for how predator animals may've treated her in the past,"
Barely brushed over and implied, but how the movie frames it, it feels like she's pulling this complicated nonsensical plot out of spite for Lionheart. Not because she "cares" about prey animals or or because of an unspecified trauma.
"but I don't think Turbo or Yokai fits the description"
Well duh, because Turbo is, like villains of old, rotten to the core. Just like Ernesto De La Cruz was also so despicable to poison and steal from his supposed best friend. Again, not everyone is a victim.
And again, Callaghan wanting revenge on Krei feels hollow and needlessly cruel because Krei is just dumb and careless rather than malicious, and Callaghan loses any shred of justification the moment he brushes off Tadashi's death as "his mistake".Abigail is dropped too far into the plot for the audience to care. Which is why it feels like a lazy retread of Mr Freeze's origin story from Batman TAS, with none of the nuance that made us feel for Freeze and Nora.
Yeah it’s weird we’ve pivoted to like “oh we can’t villainize anyone” and have to find the humanity in every character and “bad guy” I mean sure that can be a great angle sometimes but also sometimes there are people, or more likely forces and systems that are represented by one character, that will never care who they hurt to get what they want and those stories are cautionary tales worth being told!
Well, it is not like Elsa's and Anna's grandfather in "Frozen II" or the men who burned the old town and killed Abuelo Pedro in "Encanto" are given any humanity.
But they are dead when the stories start and only appear in flashbacks and memories, so we can only see how their actions nevertheless still hurt people decades later...
@@Furienna that’s a good point! But yeah they’re gone before the actual story so I just totally forgot they existed lol
@@Patchouliprince But that is an interesting angle too, that things are not always going to be fine just because one bad person is dead or even a group of bad people are dead.
What I started to notice is that almost all Disney villains (well, almost all of them who have a set of hair on their heads) have a hair color in the grayscale.
It is black or white or grey or possibly a mix between two of them like Cruella Deville's or Commander Rourke's.
The trope is so common that even Scar who's a lion was given a much darker mane than Mufasa and Simba were just because he's the villain.
I can only think of four exceptions: Madame Medusa (red hair), Hades (blue fire as hair), Hans (brown hair) and King Runeard (red hair).
Which is really not a lot in 85 years...
Well Hades got Grey body and was only one from
gods who looked like that, which still fit your observation.
Even Turbo was Grey
Actually I disagree that Shan Yu is just a edgy warlord. The scene with his men that you show actually showcases his intelligence and overall skill beyond the battlefield. We see from his facial expression when examining the doll in the tree, that he's got all the info he needs anyway. But he doesn't just choose to rely on that, he also differs to his inner circle. Tossing the doll between them to see if they're on the same page/what he may have missed if anything. Then after saying where the doll came from and that the information the doll contained shows the Imperial Army is awaiting them, his main archer suggests avoiding them, and he looks visibly annoyed for being stoic usually. From there he states that they'll go through the pass as it's the fastest route, and he shows he's more than happy to meet the army head on. His confidence there was definitely not misplaced either, given he took all of them out. We don't even see the villagers' fates. We get a hint from Shan Yu when he states they should return the doll to the child it came from, but really if you know how Hun society generally was with warfare, you can make more guesses. Just felt like adding my two cents there.
You should’ve made the title say “Why Disney Villains WERE Amazing”.
Also the one thing that a lot of villains got was a dope sick ass song. Also nothing can beat frollo. He is the best and most relatable to the real world. Frollo is all the deadly sins in one. He is scary, and someone who you can 100% find in real life which is why he is terrifying. Plus his song hellfire has so much meaning to it.
A kinda obvious pattern that I only just really realized is how the male villains are generally motivated by riches and power/control, and the female villains are generally motivated by jealousy over beauty. Or that's at least part of their motivations.
We've got female villains like Ursula and Yzma, whose goal is power too (even if they seem to want revenge as well much more than similar male villains do).
Ursula was my favorite, not to mention how she tried to steal Ariel's man
I hope Disney sees all this feedback from several channels and rewrites their next villain-less film to have a villain.
Villains serve to deepen the themes of the movie or explore the limits of the main characters.
True. But because of some claptrap about nuance or “black and white” morality they hate having villains these days even though villains are (and always have been) their bread and butter. When Walt Disney warned his cartoonists never to forget that “it all started with a mouse” he should have also told his feature film division “never forget that it all started with a villain”.
@@matityaloran9157 Dreamworks' villains will teach them.
@@Alejandroigarabide Hopefully
I heard their upcoming film Wish will have one but we'll see when it comes out.
I doubt it, but then again, it looks like the heads at Disney are re-evaluating the MCU because of all the online backlash. So there’s a chance.
I feel like Disney needs to teach kids that not every person is good. In evil, there’s a bit of good, but in good, there’s evil. Disney is looking past the evil and seeing the good. Sometimes, people are evil assholes who only care for themselves. Disney needs to go back to its old ways and make some heartless villains that will regain an audience of adults and a new generation of kids. Unfortunately, I am not old enough to remember any movies that were brand-spanking-new with truly wonderful villains and I would love to be able to.
Interesting how you said Disney is looking past the evil and seeing the good, cause nowadays it seems to be the reverse; looking past the good and seeing the evil, in both modern films and real life.
@jf k Tamatoa was NOT scary LMFAO
He was just a Big Lipped Alligator moment.
@@yrooxrksvi7142He scared me.
If a character can brag about eating his grandmother, he scares me.
@@Furienna What are you, 2 years old ?
The coachman:
- has less than 3 minutes of his screen time
- barely says 5 phrases in the whole movie
And yet he is one of the most frightening villains in cartoon history.
What I really hate about him is that we don't see him face any consequences for his evil deeds.
Pinocchio escaped, but we don't know if the other boys ever were liberated and turned back to their human form.
@@Furienna But this is more real. A villain does not always pay for his evil and often gets away with his crimes. Pinocchio is not a fairy tale with total justice, it is a tough story.
@@mikhailbandurist8652 Perhaps, but it nevertheless makes The Coachman more hatable than most other Disney villains.
@@mikhailbandurist8652 exactly. I mean the original story had Pinocchio get tortured and hung by punks at the end for his mischief, and he killed Jiminy.
In writings, a good villain makes a good hero. They gives our protagonist a reason to fight, the motivation to create changes, they push them to move forward, and gives us readers a sense of hatred for evil. You don't look at Cruella and thought "Oh I wanna be like her, I wanna skin puppies and make pretty Prada's 😍". You pity the puppies, you want to fight for them so their death won't be exploited for mere pennies and fancies that only lasted a few seasons.
If a villain have no reasoning in their existence, then they are nothing but just another background character with extra fancy script. They are more than just being evil, they are a reminder that evil exists in many form. Like with Frollo and Quasimodo, or Aurora and Maleficent. A villain and a hero support each other's existence, a hero can't be a hero if there's no evil to fight, and a villain isn't a villain if there's nothing they want to destroy.
It's a shame that Disney will no longer have great villains that they used to create before, in fear of "hurting the minorities" when in reality, no one cares about it.
I think the title should have been "Why Disney Villains Were Amazing"
Man Disney villains use to be so damn awesome, and is sad because it wasn't that LONG ago that they still deliver, to me the last 3 films with interesting villains where Moana, Wreck it Ralph and Tangled, I love King Candy, Mother Gothel and Tamatoa and Te'ka been my favorites of this modern era, is a shame that for reasons I can't understand they have completely dropped the villains, not even twist villains just generational drama, both Disney and Pixar and is just the worst.....compared this with Dreamworks most recent film Puss in Boots the Last Wish, that manage to created not 1, not 2 but 3 fantastic villains, and currently the film have even do more money than all Disney Films combine in the pandemic era and even QUANTUMANIA a MCU phase 5 film the opening of this phase.....Disney need to go back to have villains, good villains that makes sense like Jaffar, Scar, Ursula, Judge Frollo, Maleficent, Cruella de Vile, Capt. Hook, Hades, Gaston, all this iconic characters.......if they don't welp look what Dreamwoks just did with the new trailer of yet another very creative new film that I didn't even knew existed and now I want to see....Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken, they literally took ARIEL with Chelsea the villain of the film and give us an interesting reversal, with a looking Mermaid Ariel been the villain and a Ursula like Kraken in Ruby been the hero.....just that premise alone makes me excited to see this film, Dreamworks knows what they are doing while Disney is just been left in the dust if this continues.
Apparently, they will have a true villain again in "Wish".
Also, "Frozen II" and "Encanto" actually have villains as well except of a different kind.
We are shown in those stories how an evil deed in the past can have consequences for decades and long after the people who started everything are dead.
I half disagree with generational trauma being bad. They can be writen well like in Encanto, I just don't think they've tried writing villains in recent years.
@@lk_3099 It is all a matter of having some variety, I think.
Some stories do work without a villain, but it doesn't mean that the whole character type should disappear.
Definitely no villain from Moana.. The last good villain was gothel
@@-i_own_you_- what about Dr. Facilier and King Candy
Disney truly flew too close to the sun with Frollo the man is insane in so many ways, i still to this day can't believe that such a good villain came from Disney. He's my fav
The heroes are cool but the highlight of a good movie is the villain 😈
They don't make villains like before 😮💨, a side note they forgot about Shere khan😞
He's not really one of the best villains imo
Yeah....
Shere Khan was the one exception, [the one sore thumb], to the Renaissance era of Disney villains, where he was just...there I guess.
The thing with villains that were evil for the sake of evil is that, because they may lack an interesting backstory/cause and/or relatability like sympathetic anti-villains tend to have, in order to keep the audience's attention, they need to excel in 2 things: Personality and Presentation.
They need to have a fun, amusing and enigmatic, or a logical, grounded and sensible personality, and they need to have a good presentation of their quirks and motives as to draw the audience in.
Shere Khan excelled at NEITHER of these 2 categories.
Also King louie but the version from the 2016 Jungle book. Like bro was such a monster that he could stand up a 1v1 fight with King kong.
Ernesto de la Cruz may have been a twist villain, but he still stands out to me. He was portrayed as a egotistical celebrity before we found out he was the villain. The twist just made more sense. Of course someone with his ego and hunger for fame would stoop as low as to murder his friend and steal his work for his own fame.
Ernesto and King Candy work because they're active parts of their respective movies and they pose as obstacles and active antagonists even before being revealed as truly evil.
Hans and Bellwether don't work because they work on two premises alone : 1. They're extremely boring and ancillary as the "good guys", thus making the reveal feel bogus and weightless. 2. Their respective plans work on the principle that everyone around them is stupid : Nobody bothers to check on Anna after Hans declares her dead, and even then he admits she was just a backup option after Elsa. And Bellwether goes onto this convoluted, nonsensical plan to get the mayor framed, despite there being CAMERAS, when she could have just let the feral predators roam free and terrorized people.
And Callaghan in Big Hero 6 is just a more boring rehash of Mr Freeze, without the depth and nuance.
@@yrooxrksvi7142To be fair to Hans though, the people who should have checked on Anna were just as dumb as they needed to be to make his plan almost work.
Nick and Judy had to trick Bellwether and record what she told them to have proof that she was the villain, so she almost succeeded too.
@@Furienna 1. That's precisely my point : he almost succeeded only because of plot-induced stupidity. That's lazy writing.
2. Still doesn't excuse how convoluted yet nonsensical her plan was, and once again, relying on plot-induced stupidity.
@@yrooxrksvi7142 Sure, but I guess that we sometimes have to accept that things just happen a certain way in a story.
@@Furienna Or maybe you should raise your standards and stop accepting lazyness and contrivances.
I believe a truly underrated villain is Ratigan from The Great Mouse Detective. His objective is to be precieved as a mastermind mouse when his true nature is a vicious rat. He stops at nothing to maintain that perception
technically the twist villain trope started with Pixar's Waternoose
Actually Pixar had twist villains since the Prospector in Toy Story 2 (1999), Warp Darkmatter in Buzz Lightyear of Star Command: The Adventure Begins (2000), then like you said Waternoose in Monsters Inc (2001), Auto in Wall-E (2008) Muntz in Up (2009), Lotso in Toy Story 3 (2010), Axelrod in Cars 2(2011), De La Cruz in Coco (2016), Screenslaver in The Incredibles 2 (2018) and future Buzz in Lightyear (2022).
While non-Pixar Disney had as its plot twist villains Rourke from Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2002), Michael Yagoobian from Meet the Robinsons (2007), Turbo from Wreck it Ralph (2012), Prince Hans from Frozen (2013), Callaghan from Big Hero 6(2014), and Belwhether from Zootopia (2017).
I know some people consider Stromboli from Pinocchio (1940) or Clayton from Tarzan (1999) to be plot twist villains but I am not one of those people
I'm surprised you didn't mention Prof. Ratingan from The Great Mouse Detective. He was voiced by the prince of classic horror himself - Vincent Price. He's such a delightful character, in my op, much funnier and darker than Hades. He's a larger than life charismatic psycho, as he singa a funny little song while a terrifying trap to kill the hero is set in motion.
Prof Ratigan is also a charming salute to Price's long and exciting career as an adorable baddie.
I'll actually go and say that as far as twist villains go, I genuinely liked Mayor Bellweather from Zootopia. She felt like a good ol' Disney villain from their older films. She was angry at society due to what she had to endure and desired to control it with fear. No sad backstory, no just reason for her actions; she was just mad and wanted control. I love that. I really miss old Disney villains.
Bellwether was PATHETIC, I'm appalled that 21 people would think such a lazy, shoehorned rehash of Hans would think she was a "good villain".
"She felt like a good ol' Disney villain from their older films."
No she didn't. She's portrayed as a walking doormat throughout the movie, and after 3 twist villains in a row, she was VERY on the nose about the whole "LOL Wolf in sheep's clothing" bs.
"She was angry at society due to what she had to endure and desired to control it with fear. No sad backstory, no just reason for her actions; she was just mad and wanted control. I love that."
No, she's angry at society for being treated as a meek, humble weakling, so she saw herself into the protagonist, as if the writers want us to "feel for her" that she's went through the same bullying although unseen. I hate that and and her plan is as convoluted as it's utterly stupid : why just let feral animals be captured to get the mayor kicked, when she could have just let them roam free and terrorize people ?
Seriously, get real.
I honestly don’t mind the motive. It’s the set up that sucked and her “defeat” sucked too. Why not embarrass her publicly? Like Ernesto
@@gabrielarivera4864 Her motive is dumb, because the racism is just a pretense to hide her real motivation : hating the mayor for mistreating her. Everything about Zootopia sucked tbh
@LuPescaròAUnaMa whoa, where's all the hate coming from? I can understand not liking the racial allegory part of it, but that aside, it was a solid mystery film
@@DJSenpai17 Solid ????? It's pathetically lazy. The movie never takes itself seriously, the "mystery" is completely left in the background, and Bellwether's reveal was so stupid and lazy. Her motivation are just an excuse for her petty grudge against the Mayor mistreating her, NOTHING else is known about her or the Breaking Bad cameos. And her plan is as convoluted as nonsensical : why go all these lengths to turn predators feral......only to let them be captured by the Mayor ???? She could have done MUCH more damage by setting them free, attacking the population. But no, instead, she relied on the SINGLE conveniently headstrong rookie cop to expose the mayor. And then she does NOTHING once she's in power.
No, it fails completely even as a "neo noir".
1:13 It's Love's First Kiss, not "True Love's Kiss". That one was used in Sleeping Beauty, and later reused for The Little Mermaid and I guess Frozen, with the former being reworded as "The Kiss Of True Love".
@@willn-wf2tcI really hope they improve the personalities of the protagonists cause Raya was so bland and Elsa was annoying.
@Will N Thanks for the reminder of how Frozen used the concept 😉 (Although I'm a bit unaware if you mistook me referring to The Little Mermaid for Frozen 😅). While it is true that Disney hasn't been focusing on creating their own adaptations of fairytales since the 2010s, it's not as though they haven't created original stories before (Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Fantasia, Brother Bear, etc.). Not only that, but they've also adapted various novels that aren't fairytales (though still fictional), and some legends too. Big Hero 6 is based off of a Marvel comic series. I think The Princess And The Frog, Tangled, and Frozen is where Disney had the most creative liberties with their respective source materials since the start of the Revival Era. Not to say that they never had creative liberties with their prior films, just that's it's more noticeable and persistent in this era.
I also wouldn't completely say that Anna, Moana, Raya, and Mirabel were particularly bratty princesses 😅 (Elsa's technically a queen in the first Frozen film, and most of her actions there were fueled by anxiety). I suppose in terms of Anna, the only moments of her being seen as bratty that I can think of is during her first confrontation with Elsa and her sled ride with Kristoff. One was fueled by her immense naiveté and desire to have some form of happiness in her life, and the other was caused by Kristoff judging her for her choice of an immediate marriage. Aside from those scenes, I'd hardly label her as the bratty type. Same goes for Moana, where some of her actions were fueled by the weight of responsibilities put on her shoulders, as well as trying to figure out what's the right path for herself. In terms of Raya (from what I could gather) it's having a lack of trust in others, and Mirabel's is being a part of a family going through lots of generational trauma, which contributed to her lack of self-worth in said family. Despite all that, I'm not gonna deny the fact that these ladies have their own fair share of sass to them 😆. I think this could explain some of what you mean.
Besides that, I do agree with you on hoping that Wish will turn out great 😊. Who knows, perhaps it might return films back to the original Disney-esque fairytale format moving forward. Or something new will still be done with it, just as long as it's done well. And here's hoping for the best on how Asha's character will turn out.
@Will N That's for sure true 😂. I think the closest princess to somewhat reach those two's level of sass in the Disney Princess Lineup would probably be Jasmine 😅. I kinda feel bad that Esmeralda was kicked out of the line in the late-2000's due to how unpopular she or her film was at the time. That or because The Hunchback of Notre Dame wasn't recieved well at the box office due to how poorly it was marketed, which misled/misinformed lots of people going into seeing it. Hercules experienced this too, but not as egregiously so as Hunchback. Regardless, it was still enough for Megara not to be inducted into the lineup.
I did not know that Anastasia helped contribute to Hercules's downfall at the box office 😳. Thanks for the info drop, that's very interesting.
11:34 Correction:
The Hunchback of Notre Dame was released in 1996, two years after The Lion King (1994).
The villain that came after Scar is Governor Ratcliffe from Pocahontas (1995).
It saddens me the last proper villian before the annoying phrase with twist villian is Mother Gothel the only twist villian i did like is King Candy it was clever.
I miss when Disney did villians it definitely really died down in modern movies. Thats why I like Dreamworks at least they haven't stopped with villians.
Cause back then. They are allowed to be villains
Frollo was a mixture of Mother Gothel & Gaston. Like Mother Gothel, he locked his victim in a tower and taught the victim that the world is cruel. Like Gaston he was after a specific girl
And like Gaston was a dark mirror of the Beast, Frollo was this to Quasimodo.
THANK YOU for talking about the horned king. Underrated.
The Queen in Snow White was so prefect that every other villain was just trying to live up to those standards. The quality of Disney films peaked with Walt & have been all over the place ever since. The modern films don’t have the classical elements anymore and there’s basically no adult appeal.
What about renaissence? Many movies in this period are amazing! Lion king, hunchback of Notre Dame, alladin and many more amazing movies with deep messages
Cant really agree with that tbh. The renaissence movies and some modern disney movies like Moana were really good as well, sometimes surpassing the old Walt movies as well.
Captain Hook and Judge Claude Frollo are my 2 favorite Disney Villains and Frollo has the best Villain song “Hellfire.”
The only villains I ever found to be scary were Medusa and McLeach from the Rescuers movies. Even as a little kid, I knew characters like Ursula or Maleficent weren't real, but the cruelty of Medusa and greed of McLeach had a realness to them that got into my head as a kid and as an adult, I've seen people like that.
A Part of Villains,is they are Willing to Sacrifice Others to achieve their goals.
You should read the books that inspired these movies. They are more detailed and easier to understand.
Which movies are you talking about? I know the black caldron is “based” off of the chronicles of prydain but do any of the other movies have books?
@@iwannareadforever8185 pretty much EVERY movie Walt Disney made came from a book.
@@forrestdupre87 not all of them have the same name as the movie and I was wondering which ones you liked.
so any you recommend?
@@iwannareadforever8185 Pinocchio, Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan, 101 Dalmatians, Sword in the Stone, Mary Poppins, The Jungle Book, Winnie The Pooh
Can you do DreamWorks villains.
I Absolutely Agree The Old Disney Villains are The Best Legendary and Iconic Villains in The Entire Disney History.
"Maleficent comes from a place of rejection."
Does she though? Like, if the kingdom did invite her to witness the birth, would she have gifted her wonderful things like everyone else? Put the live action film aside, because we can't say it was Disney's intent at the time, it's just an alternate take.
Note: The Coachman is the only Disney villain to never be punished in any way. He got away with it. All those he tormented are still being tormented.
Also, regarding Frollo, notice he goes down much like Cruella. She started out wanting the puppies, and she was driven to a car chase, in several instances, almost killing them all and making them unable to produce good coats, just to get her hands on them. Her eyes just before she crashed were that of insanity. Frollo's eyes just before he fell were insanity- wide, yellow and deranged.
With Silver, I like to add that he's obviously, and indisputably, based off Long John Silver from Treaure Island, and the original Silver is a true pirate, but implicitly warms up to young Jim. He nonetheless disappears at the end. Planet's Silver exploited the implicit warming between Jim and Silver and delved more into it, creating a truly sympathetic character, to the point I sometimes find my mind conflating the two.
As for the rest, I kinda wish you mentioned Hans. He wasn't too bad.
It is hard to say what Maleficent would have done if she had gotten an invitation.
But it would have been a bigger insult to be excluded from a major royal event in the Medieval days than what we might be able to imagine today.
20:04 I think the reason why is because the twist isn’t that he’s a villain (because we already know he does villainous things before the plot twist) the twist is that we learn something new about him that explains what his plan is and why he is doing what he is doing.
16:28, but they balanced it out with Mr. Scroop being evil as sin
Maleficent is the only live action Disney film I can say that I properly enjoyed, it doesn't rehash old stuff but add unto an old story
The first one is really great! Also, the cinderella one is great too. They put more into the villain but it still was a villain
Seriously though, these classic Disney villains could go neck in neck with some of Dreamworks' greatest villains of all time in terms of how great they really are.
I'd say the Horned King was more like Satan, because at least the Grim Reaper might have scruples.
It's a great shame we haven't seen any true villians in a while
Well, we do have Elsa's and Anna's grandfather in "Frozen II" and the men who burned the old town and killed Abuelo Pedro in "Encanto".
But they are dead when the stories start and only appear in flashbacks and memories, so we can only see how their actions nevertheless still hurt people decades later...
@Furienna Elsa and Anna's grandfather and those bandits had zero personality to them and they're pretty bland
@@RADARMYBRAT32 It is hardly fair to say that though since they only appear briefly in flashbacks and memories, so we can't know if they had "zero personality".
But it's not bland to be a murderer even if we only find out very little about who King Runeard was and even less about who the evil-doers who killed Abuelo Pedro were.
You can argue that they appeared so briefly that they didn't leave a lasting impression on you, and that is what I think that you were really trying to say.
But I wonder if the posthumous villains of both these movies weren't actually parts of a bigger picture, which would have pushed them into doing what they did.
Because I would guess that prejudices against the Northuldra and fear of magic existed before King Runeard planned to subjugate them and killed their chief.
And when it comes to the attack where Abuelo Pedro was killed, it is clear that it happened during a civil war in Colombia where many people died in real life.
But as far as these stories go, it is an important message that everything won't always be fine just because one bad guy is dead or even a group of bad guys are dead.
Which is really mature when you consider that we're talking about Disney.
In particular, people have accused "Pocahontas" and "The Hunchback of Notre-Dame" of being too simplistic and blaming everything bad that happened on one person.
That is actually unfair since both of these two movies show us that racism and prejudices exist even without a full-blown villain like Ratcliffe or Frollo.
However, "Frozen II" and "Encanto" take it one step further and show us that the effects of evil deeds often don't go away that easily and can even hurt future generations.
This is very much a valid message, even though I too want to see new more traditional Disney villains in the future...
Disney Villains Era Loses its Glory
This Era means Rises of Dreamworks Villain
Dreamworks be like : Disney ? Ha ! Never Fear Them
I had such a big crush on Scar when I was little and I still do as an adult 😩. He's the one who initiated my love for villains.
Frollo is sooo evil and has no redeeming qualities and I love him for that.
Absolutely great videos on Disney movies, particularly their animation. Keep it up, friend!! I’ll be watching :)
Gothel was the last truly great Villian imo
God bless! Loving these videos!
Scar is my personal favorite.
Maleficent wasn't the last great Disney villain of her era, the next movie after Sleeping Beauty was One Hundred and One Dalmatians with Cruella De Vil, arguably an even more iconic villain, and the Jungle Book, with three different main antagonists.
"Sleeping Beauty" and "101 Dalmatians" are two different eras though.
@@Furienna I haven't checked but I know for a fact that One Hundred and One Dalmatians came right after Sleeping Beauty and the Jungle Book was the last movie Walt Disney worked fully on before it's death, he started the development of the Aristocats but he died before the movie was done, and after/with this movie the dark age started.
@@angeloclemente6913 Actually, "101 Dalmatians" is considered to be the start of a new era with new animation techniques and jazzier music.
@@Furienna I am going to check soon, but that doesn't change the fact that he skipped Cruella De Vil and the Jungle Book villains.
Alright I checked, after Sleeping Beauty and One Hundred and One Dalmatians there is the Sword in the Stone and then the Jungle Book and the Aristocats.
So no, One Hundred and One Dalmatians isn't the start of a new Era.
King Candy totally works because the twist isn't in his villainy, it's in why he is a villain. Until the reveal of his origins, we assume he's an antagonist, trying to keep the game safe by preventing Vanellope from racing. This shifts once Ralph realizes Vanellope is actually an original part of the game, and we start to question why King Candy would have re-written the game to exclude her and make himself king. In every step we know he's the bad guy, but we don't know why, so the twist still works.
We can be sure that Maleficent is not just disliked but feared and avoided due to past actions.
They're most memorable villains in ficton!
I just wanna say something about Maleficent. On the matter of her personal motivation for going as far as she did, I've seen many people go back and forth on how her original motivation (pre-remake) wasn't good because it was petty and weak, or those who do like her just for how deplorable she is at heart. And I think they're both right. However, I don't think enough people are aware that, in the context of medieval times and where certain folklore takes place, the faeries or fae in mythos are not like how they are typically in Tinkerbell movies or any pleasant portrayal in children's media. For those who don't know (considering I never knew this until recent years), there are plenty of Celtic fae that are deemed incredibly petty and malicious when acting upon their whims. There would be stories on how they use their powers to harm innocents or play sadistic pranks onto the unwitting. And that's just portraying the tiny fairies!
So imagine a dark fae just like what I've just mentioned, only human-sized and practically has the presence that COMMANDS you to respect her and to not underestimate her. Imagine how she is practically embracing the name that represents her very being and is confident that she can't be outmatched because she always got her way through terrorizing many. No joke, Celtic faes are DARK. So with that in mind, it's no wonder that Maleficent doesn't really *need* much reasoning to place a curse on the baby that did no wrong to her. It's not because of weak writing, it's because fae in classic folklore are basically like that and writers were using existing stories for reference! Maleficent was just portrayed as the biggest and the baddest compared to ALL fae.
Her pettiness over not getting an invitation to a royal christening? In terms of hierarchy, she sees herself as practically a GOD compared to the king and queen, and yet they have the audacity to deny her presence? Well, may your child rot for your transgression! It's only fair, after all! That's the mindset of Maleficent; and she wanted people to know and fear her.
So I just covered the reasoning behind faes' spiteful nature, now there's the matter of the party. The baby's christening in the kingdom was not a private party because people from all over came to celebrate. For Maleficent to not be invited was practically a spit in the face to her. And considering how Maleficent calls the three fairies that WERE invited as "rabble" compared to her, you can see that she did not appreciate how the lower fairies were chosen instead of her.
This just begs the question as to why didn't they just invite her in the first place to avoid all this? Well, chances are they can't exactly guarantee that she *wouldn't* give their baby a terrifying gift, which is pretty likely, even if they were to play it safe. They probably couldn't accept that outcome no matter what and probably hoped for the best. (But that's just speculation on my part)
So yes, on the terms of justification for her motivation, her reasoning is very petty and not tragic at whatsoever, but personally, I like that better because she's just a powerful force of nature that demands you to cater to her whims and punishes you for the smallest of things. That's just terrifying.
Hades was my favourite, as a kid when the movie came out I knew it was the antagonist but his lines oh my what an enjoyment
Hey, what about Ratigan, Cruella or Madame Medusa? She really scared me, more than Cruella
Yeah man, i thought Disney did a great job of having great villains in any movie👏👏👏. My favourites are King Candy, Dr facilier i like what kind of scary things he had up his sleeves, i've had a dream that once after of the 7 masks are done scaring dr facilier they might come after me next. And for my third one, is no other than Captain Hook, i liked how he was a pirate trying to capture peter pan, but when Tik Tok Croc comes around, he's the number one funniest villian i can ever laugh🤣🤣🤣 at.
The last true good Disney villains were Mother Gothel as the last traditional villain, and King Candy as the only twist villain that actually worked.
Since then, Disney has been hellbent on pushing moral relativism, by trying to paint Hans and Bellwether as "victims of society". "Oh no, my unseen brothers bullied me, so I'm just gonna take over this kingdom with no real king or queen because I'm such a wimp."
"Oh no, my mayor treats me like a doormat, so I'm gonna blame predators as a whole and reshape society.....as long as everyone is too stupid to look at camera footage".
Even Callaghan in Big Hero 6 is just a lazier rehash of Mr Freeze from Batman, except with none of the nuance and depth. Then they decided to push for generational/cultural drama to keep in line with moral relativism and NEVER portray anyone as truly evil. Maui is essentially the true villain in Moana because his "toxic masculinity and insecurities" led him to steal Te Fiti's heart, so now the super awesome Moana has to save the day. Ralph in Ralph Breaks The Internet is a clingy moron who won't let the (hypocritical and irresponsible) Vanellope go to Not-Fortnite, so he unleashes a virus and now the Princesses have to clean up his mess. In Frozen 2, they reveal AT THE VERY LAST MINUTE that it was Anna and Elsa's grandpa who caused the rift with the forest people because he was racist and power-hungry.......And now he's dead.......Who cares ?
Raya tries SOOOOO hard to paint Namari as relatable and "just misguided" when she's just a horrible person from her first scene. Encanto didn't have any real stakes, the characters were just boring archetypes, and an overbearing grandma with PTSD is just not an antagonistic force.
Okay, I think I have balance out some of what you wrote.
Hans was reportedly also abused by his father and can't have learned any good values from him and was messed up for that reason.
I will assume that Bellwether has a backstory where she or somebody who was close to her was attacked by predators just like Nick was attacked by those prey bullies.
Callaghan clearly lost it when he thought that his daughter died, which kind of makes sense too.
Maui was really dumb to steal Te Fiti's heart and can be a jerk sometimes, but Tamatoa is the only evil character in that story even if he only appears in two scenes.
I can't agree that there's no evil characters in the newer family drama Disney movies even if these stories play out a bit differently than older ones did.
We care about what Elsa's and Anna's grandpa did because the spirits of the forest almost destroyed Arrendale and made it necessary for the sisters to set things right.
And I don’t think that a family suffering under a generational trauma is "no real stakes" even if "Encanto" is more about talking to each other than having an adventure...
@@Furienna "Balance" out ? More like damage control lol
Relying on external material or worse, headcanon, to fill the massive gaps in Frozen's and Zootopia's writing is a really poor defense. The truth is both are lazily written plot devices, not characters. If anything, Bellwether's motivation revolves more around how the mayor treated her, which makes her more pathetic than anything.
DGAF about Nick, he's an obnoxious stereotypical smart alek in the most basic sense of the word.
Callaghan is just a really POOR excuse of a Mr Freeze rip-off. His daughter is not nearly as strong of a motivation as Nora was to Victor Fries. Alistair Krai is just a moron, whereas Ferris Boyle was absolutely hateable in every way. So it makes his actions completely irredeemable AND unjustified.
Tamatoa is just a Big Lipped Alligator moment, really shouldn't classify as a villain imo
"We care about what Elsa's and Anna's grandpa did because the spirits of the forest almost destroyed Arrendale and made it necessary for the sisters to set things right."
NO, WE DON'T. It's a completely made up backstory by the sequel, never hinted at by the first movie, and it's shoehorned towards the very end of the movie as well, making it less impactful.
"And I don’t think that a family suffering under a generational trauma is "no real stakes" even if "Encanto" is more about talking to each other than having an adventure..."
Encanto is more about a bunch of stressed one-note stereotypes who can't cope with expectations. Thing is, none of them are that memorable or interesting. It's just a boring telenovela plot and it's not even about "Talking to each other" given the obnoxious amount of tedious songs it had. Also, terribly rushed ending and resolution.
In summary the reason why Disney villains are great is because Disney is evil themselves so it's a self insert.
fun fact: (more like dark fact) The remake of sleeping beauty where maleficent was the main character, a lot of people have called it a fairytale retelling of a r-pe survivor
Recent villains in the Disney movie library have been kinda sucky lately, so it’s nice to go back to the good old days of pure evil characters.
Should be called why they WERE amazing
The thing about the King Candy twist is that it basically doesn't change anything. King Candy was already trying to kill Vanellope when he gets revealed as Turbo. The only thing the reveal does is widens the scope of what his meddling is doing. If he succeeds in stopping Vanellope from finishing the race, she stays separated from the code, he continues to be in control. If he fails, well, the movie finishes.
Now, look at Disney's twist villains since then: Hans, when you get told he's a villain, it's a power play (in his head) that'll leave him with the entirety of Arendelle under his control because the local royalty will no longer have blood heirs in the two sisters.
Bellwether: a wolf in sheep's clothing, content to slowly dismantle the local power structure, if Judy hadn't come along and disproved Bell's thesis that the only way to change things is from within, by basically saying, "Nah, I got this! I'm going to work hard for my position." Oh, yes, it's the predators that are dangerous, after they've been forcefully injected with a rage inducing drug, not this sheep who acts all demure and unimpressive. The only outliers in Zootopia who do actually harm prey species are the ones the government took self-control away from them... (Is Zootopia secretly based?)
What made the Disney Villains to me work is because their characters works in their story. As someone who writes, I see them for what they add to the story and their overall impact to both the plot, characters and audience. Just look at Lady Tremaine, her evilness and abusive relationship with Cinderella was enough for the story to work. She didn't need to have a tragic backstory or any form of sympathetic history but the mere fact that she was just envious of her stepdaughter to completely abuse her really cemented her cruelty and evilness. Malificent to me in the old movie was much more better, she truly embodied being evil and pretty much enjoyed it. She is sinister, devious, cruel and many more and that really made her a terrifying force because like many pure evil villains, they can't be reasoned with. By adding this sympathetic backstory which what they did in the live action, she pretty much lost her role as a villain.
Dr.Facilier Jafar and Judge Frollo wearing Red Black and Purple Clothing ❤️🖤💜
I love the classic disney villains, but I don't really agree that disney nowadays suffer for the lack of one neccesarely, not all stories need villains, and even classic disney understood that, that's why the real bad guys in dumbo and bambi are either societal prejudice or forest animals place on the food chain
Maleficent was my first cartoon crush when I was young, felt bad I wanted to see her succeed.
I would LOVE to see a Disney villain starting good and corrupting with time. Most if not all villains start being bad, or at least we don't see their corruption arc. Like MAN with Prince of Egypt Rameses' actions hurt so bad because we know he was better, but we also know what he has been through and how he came to be like this. It's better for us to sympathize with, and a whole lot better than infodumping their past.
Honestly, I agree. Here are my top favorite Disney villains:
The Evil Queen
Captain Hook
The Coachman
Judge Claude Frollo
Jafar
Maleficent
The Horned King
Dr. Facilier
Ursula
Hades
Gaston
Scar
Shere Khan
Professor Ratigan
The Headless Horseman
6:27 Horned King
A mixture of Maleficent & Chernabog
I agree with everything you sed😊
Ursula & Dr Facilier both made deals with people
Scar is the GOAT 💚🧡
And Gaston is the CHAD
Disney needs to remove twist villains. They seem to be focusing on the story of the villains themselves without hinting to much to the actual villain character just to suddenly pop there it is. Knowing a threat from the start and knowing the outcome really puts people on there toes, its one reason why such tv shows such as doctor who is still running, cause the threat is know.
People laughed when said I feared Frollo the most, granted I was a kid when I said this. So when I saw that man in Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance my heart just stopped.
0:44 my favorite villain!!!!🤩; thank you 😊 for putting her first in the list😊because she IS the very FIRST villain like..EVER😊😊😊😊🤩🤩🤩🤩🖤🖤🖤🖤🖤🖤🖤🖤🍎🍎🍎🍎🍎🍎
5:03 she is ALSO my absolute FAVORITE villain as well🤩🤩🤩🤩😊😊😊😊💜💜💜💜💜💜😈😈😈😈😈😈😈
I will never forget the comment I saw about Frollo “Frollo is the OG Yandere”
The disrespect to Professor Ratigan. Dude has a villain song with one lyric being "Worse than the widows and orphans you drowned".
Dreamworks > Disney 🗿🍷
Disney villains from the golden era: had different understandable motivations.
Disney villains from the dark ages: mostly desired money
Disney villains from the Renaissance era: desired power
Please Make A Video About Disney Channel Original Movies
My favourite Disney Villains are Scar, Jafar, Ursula, Cruella De Vil, Frollo, Gaston and Hades
the fact that ppl always Forget about Annastasia is crazy bc that was also a good story nd the Villain in that movie was crazy he killed that girls whole family expt for her nd the granny nd he still tried to come after her wen she got older so that movie was also a master peice
It is not Disney though.
@@Furiennait is now, after Disney bought out the company that made that movie. I see it more as an honorable mention if anything, though.
@@GoofyGosling Well, it is not really a Disney movie to me anyway since it wasn't made by one of their studios.
They WERE great
My favorite Disney Villain doesn't prod nor yell, but he drives them doges well.
Great video, but you really shouldve mentioned Edgar from Aristocats. My siblings and I nearly died laughing at him when we were little.
I have loved Disney villains more than the heroes since I was a child. To create a compelling story, you need a perfect villain who's morals and ambitions conflict perfectly with that of the protagonist. Frollo is definitely my favourite because he's the darkest villain in Disney history
Kids today: wow Hans is so evil
Disney Villains: 😐
I wish the black cauldron wasnt made by disney. If it wasn't for their meddling and forcing it to be a children's film, it wouldve been so good
@jf k I love it too, although it's far from perfect, especially with the story itself. But it fits in well with the many other dark fantasy movies of the 80s and I like to watch it around Halloween.
I remembered being terrified watching those kids getting turned into donkeys, my parents usually use that to scare me so I wouldn't do bad things they would says that if I did (insert bad thing to do as a child) I would be turned into a donkey.
19:28 oh to be that wall
Death: WHO IS YOUR FAVORITE FEARLESS VILLAIIIIN?! (or antagonist)
Ironically Villain-centric Disney Live Action Movie such as Cruella and Maleficent got the better story , better budget , better casting and better costumes compared to the heroes side
The days before the stupid twist villains and no villains were so grand.
It's funny how for 80 years the kinds of villains Disney created were enough. They were universally loved and praised and they never got old.
The twist villains were old after the first one and whatever they're doing now is just garbage.
I'm fine with a twist here and there when it makes sense (King Candy) or even no villain (Encanto)...but the people at Disney have no idea what they are doing these days from Mary-Sue heroes that make Snow White (bless her heart) look nuanced to "the real villain was my emotional trauma, all along!"
"Encanto" and "Frozen II" has villains, but they're a different kind than the traditional more obvious ones.
They have been dead for decades when the story starts, but it doesn't mean that the effects of their evil actions don't still hurt people.
But yeah, we have to hope that "Wish" brings back the traditional villain.
@@Furienna The way Encanto plays out, I think it was just fine not having an active villain in the story.
Frozen 2 was kind of nonsensical with or without a villain.
Here's to hoping Wish gives us something great and memorable. It's been too long since we've had a memorable villain...Tamatoa was good, but he was more of an obstacle.
@@saintfighteraqua I'm not fine with either twist villains or generational/cultural struggle bs. Disney has ran the twist villain trope to the ground to the point of people joking that the piglet in Moana was gonna be the villain. King Candy worked as a twist because it falls in line with his antagonist role, enhancing it. Hans and Bellwether are just lazy "Ha ! GOTCHA!" Scooby Doo villains, one-note shoehorned lazy plot devices with no real personality other than "One moment I'm this super meek and nice person, next up I'm a power hungry psycho", but both of their "plans" just rely on people's stupidity rather than genius. Hence why they don't work.
And Callaghan in BH6 was just a more boring rip-off of Mr Freeze from Batman without the nuance.
@@saintfighteraqua Encanto didn't work because it had no real stakes. The family members were just a bunch of one-note cardboards. And generational struggle is just.........BORING. Oh no, my grandma is too strict because of PTSD. Whatever.
Same for Strange World, such a boring, aimless movie. Agreed on Frozen 2, ALSO a nonsensical and aimless movie with no real stakes or plot.
@@Furienna Encanto doesn't have a villain. And it's boring as hell.
Frozen 2 tries to paint Anna and Elsa's grandfather as a racist warmongering tyrant, but...Who cares ? It's revealed way too late into the movie, nothing that happened before lead up to this reveal.
I Love Disney Witches