Who else find villains reformation story arcs over use these days.

[Oats12345]

As anyone who read my posts on this subject would know I find this Trope overuse these days to the point that I hate when certain villains become too popular now.

Because most of the time writers think that means a character can't be a villain anymore for instance Loki and alot of times there even retcon shit just to show that " said villain was never really evil the whole time"
Besides Loki.

I didn't like how Arrowverse redeem Black Siren because I like her more as a villain and thought she was a better character as such.

Does anyone else have similar feelings.

Like seriously fuck fangirls for ruining fun villains with their shipping poison

 

[Zero Day Defense]

Any writing decision is good if it's good.

If I could hazard a guess, I think the reaction to "overuse" has to do with these arcs not being "good"-- or, more conceretely, compelling-- to begin with.

Part of that "being compelling" has to do with the purpose of these redemption arcs ("what do the writers want to convey-- not just narratively, but in terms of themes and messages?"), along with how well the arcs confront 1) why these characters are villains and 2) what makes them villains in the narrative. Of course, the viewership should also be given some foothold to care for-- or at least pity-- the character.

Having said that, I think another issue with attempting to write redemption arcs-- given that the above is arguably necessary-- is that it can reveal how undercooked or underbuilt a character was.

 

[Oats12345]

Any writing decision is good if it's good.

If I could hazard a guess, I think the reaction to "overuse" has to do with these arcs not being "good"-- or, more conceretely, compelling-- to begin with.

Part of that "being compelling" has to do with the purpose of these redemption arcs ("what do the writers want to convey-- not just narratively, but in terms of themes and messages?"), along with how well the arcs confront 1) why these characters are villains and 2) what makes them villains in the narrative. Of course, the viewership should also be given some foothold to care for-- or at least pity-- the character.

Having said that, I think another issue with attempting to write redemption arcs-- given that the above is arguably necessary-- is that it can reveal how undercooked or underbuilt a character was.

True. But lately it seems characters are just being redeem just because the writers are listening to shippers

 

[CivilianOfTheFandomWars]

It really takes a good writer to make a villain redeem themselves, because it’s a simple view of morality to just say “good vs bad” and a character needs to have motivations to do things. A well done villain does not see themselves as the villain, they are the hero of their story.
An example would be Hrathden from Elantris, he is the antagonist for almost all the book. He does not see himself as evil, he is simply a missionary for his faith and kingdom where the religious leader is also the king. But, his motivations are contrary to that of our protagonists who don’t want to be invaded and some other stuff. His redemption is not him renouncing his faith, but actually him strengthening his conviction in faith and realizing that his king is a false prophet who led him astray. There’s a few really good scenes where we see him as he realizes more and more what his morals actually are, and at the climax he decides to serve his god, and not his king. This is after he locked himself in a prison city and prayed for like a week straight, he was a hardcore dude.
Compare that to something like Steven Universe and it’s writing, it’s obvious that a simplistic view about morality is not the story to redeem a villain in.

 

[Skitarii]

I hate the "troubled good guy, well-meaning bad guy" trope. There are people out there who want nothing but to genuinely do good in the world, and there are people who crave evil for the sake of it. Moral ambiguity doesn't make a character more "human"

 

[Shining Wit]

It's fine if done well, annoying if done badly. The key is showing your villains earning redemption in a sensible way

An example with both good and bad is Symphogear, Carol from GX gets a decent arc to her redemption, which takes course over 2 seasons, whilst Noble Red (especially Milaarc) from XV get theirs in under an episode and it's essentially a "yeah, sorry, we were being coerced " and then an heroing to get the protagonists off the moon. It's rushed and feels cheap

 

[AbduluCthuluZulu]

Same. I'm all for a good redemption arc every once in a while, but nowadays it feels like Hollywood doesn't allow true villains anymore unless they're one-offs or comic relief/parody characters.

 

[Oats12345]

Same. I'm all for a good redemption arc every once in a while, but nowadays it feels like Hollywood doesn't allow true villains anymore unless they're one-offs or comic relief/parody characters.

I remmber when Darth Vader was the rarity. I don't mind villain redemption arcs. I just find this trope has been over down to the point where I notice lately if a villain becomes super popular most writers feel like they need to redeem them. When they don't and can just let the villain be a fun villain with out taking the villain part away.

 

[DeadwastePrime]

it peaked with megamind and there hasnt been anything as good since

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

It's standard "subversion" storyline used by shit writers who fapped endlessly on Zuko and other bad boys in media.
It was interesting the first time it appeared, but by now it's practically a requirement for every pretty boy or minority in fiction, and it reaches absolutely absurd level where practical genocide are waived away because the guy had a daddy complex or someone called him a Nigger.
And I'm one hundred percent going the racial angle because this trope is never applied into adult/"nazi" looking white people, if anything they will usually get massive punishment for tiny acts, while Tyrone murders an entire neighborhood but he really dindu nuffin.

Actually thinking about it, there's a huge messiah complex going on with this trope, and when it's applied to the real world it usually ends up with a woman that get murdered by the grown up teen that raped and murdered her daughter.

 

[Oats12345]

It's standard "subversion" storyline used by shit writers who fapped endlessly on Zuko and other bad boys in media.
It was interesting the first time it appeared, but by now it's practically a requirement for every pretty boy or minority in fiction, and it reaches absolutely absurd level where practical genocide are waived away because the guy had a daddy complex or someone called him a Nigger.
And I'm one hundred percent going the racial angle because this trope is never applied into adult/"nazi" looking white people, if anything they will usually get massive punishment for tiny acts, while Tyrone murders an entire neighborhood but he really dindu nuffin.

Actually thinking about it, there's a huge messiah complex going on with this trope, and when it's applied to the real world it usually ends up with a woman that get murdered by the grown up teen that raped and murdered her daughter.

True. I mean MCU took the Nazi stuff out of Baron Zemo's backstory (granted he hasn't redeemed. But he is portrayed sympathetic in a way)

I mean alot of times they will have a woman or a woman of color redeeming themselves despite possible doing fuck up shit.

She-Ra had a character who was implied to have committed war crimes and made her the main character's girlfriend in the end because muh lesbian.

 

[BetterFuckChuck]

the thing with villain redemption arcs is you have to either have the character not be that bad to begin with - Megamind - have him be brainwashed or a child - Zuko - or introduce a way worse villain and then kill off the redeemed one - Darth Vader.

True. I mean MCU took the Nazi stuff out of Baron Zemo's backstory (granted he hasn't redeemed. But he is portrayed sympathetic in a way)

I mean alot of times they will have a woman or a woman of color redeeming themselves despite possible doing fuck up shit.

She-Ra had a character who was implied to have committed war crimes and made her the main character's girlfriend in the end because muh lesbian.

looking forward to Gaslight remade with She Ra and Catra

 

[Oats12345]

the thing with villain redemption arcs is you have to either have the character not be that bad to begin with - Megamind - have him be brainwashed or a child - Zuko - or introduce a way worse villain and then kill off the redeemed one - Darth Vader.

looking forward to Gaslight remade with She Ra and Catra

Funny enough Megamind, Zuko and Darth Vader are the villains who i like their redemption stories. I think the problem is more people are trying to copy their redemption storylines but take the parts that people like about their redemption arcs out of the equation.

 

[Coelacanth]

Because talking about your feelings is the most important thing in a story. Remember - it's cool to cry!

 

[Oats12345]

Actually a character I had thought about recently who starts out as a villain but ends up kind of redeeming himself is Crowly from Supernatural. Who I thought for a moment about.

So some would argue Crowly redeem himself after the eighth season. I would disagree I don't think he actually redeems himself until season 12 which is also his final season.

In season 9 he's more of a wild card than anything else since in that season he has a demon who traveled from the past who wants to kill him and take his throne well at the same time theirs a an rogue angel who wants to be God in heaven at the same time who also kicked out angels who didn't want to join him. So you know other for more dangerous threats similar to how season 7 was like.

Than cut to season 10. He still does villinous things throughout the season like being a bad influence and corrupter to the now demon Dean in the beginning of that season. Honselty season 10 is pretty much the season where everyone is technically a villain at that point with the possible exception of Castiel. Throughout that season him and his mother are pretty much doing evil things to each other to make the other one suffer more.

Than season 11 he actually does still do some villainious things like murdering a innocent family or trying to team up with Amara for moment until he realizes she's too crazy with the whole devouring as many souls as possible thing. He even dreams of remaking a world where everyone is evil but realizes it's more fun corrupting good souls instead.

It's not until season 12 after Lucifer kicks him out of his spot as King of Hell and than he later admits being king of hell sucks and later sacrifices himself. That I think is when he truely redeems himself.

Like season 9 to 11 he still pretty much a villain he just isn't trying to kill Sam and Dean anymore. In my opinion it's not until season 12 does he redeem himself making him somewhat of a better example than most recent cases intresting enough.

 

[Morethanabitfoolish]

It's not the story element itself, it's the execution.
It can be done well. But at this point it is being done badly more often than not and as such it feels like the story telling device is what's at fault, rather than the subpar writers (mostly) and the various people who should be pushing back on them.

 

[Oats12345]

It's not the story element itself, it's the execution.
It can be done well. But at this point it is being done badly more often than not and as such it feels like the story telling device is what's at fault, rather than the subpar writers (mostly) and the various people who should be pushing back on them.

I agree I think the problem is. It's a plot device that's been executed poorly too many times now. Like it can work but there have been so many times that it hasn't is what makes it feel overdone.

 

[Absurdist Laughter]

If I'm reading correctly, you're talking about bad guys going good sort of thing? I think, this cliche has it's spots, but the idea that the trope is overused I don't think is a trope problem but a writing one. Cliches are classic for a reason, but it requires a great deal of work to make them not feel "overused." Judging by the schlock that is being released today, writers for these mainstream shows and movies either lack creativity, delusional ideals, or some sort of corporate executives writing the script.

 

[ProfDongs]

I don't know if they're overused but they're generally not very creative or actually trying to do something with it when its done. It irks me when its a characters death that redeems them, or something that ends up leading to their death. Just let someone be a piece of shit that still ends up finding some semblance of humanity but actually has to live with the vile things they have done.

 

[Foghorns at a Funeral]

It just depends on if you find unredeemable psychopaths a good way to write a villain. The nature of what makes villain's evil is quite interesting to talk about. Self interest/Personal goal. Greater good/committed internal belief. I have seen fiction with many types of villainy.
When you say redeemable villain do you mean showing a villain, who has been defeated reevaluate his life up to that point and join/aid the hero? Or do you mean the villain that scenes show may have a justification for committing evil acts or has sympathetic scenes?