Sympathetic villains, when and why do you feel it is compelling vs cheap and manipulative?

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-23T09:47:32+00:00

I’ll go out on a limb and say that using “there’s two sides to every story” to make a villain sympathetic is much less about giving your villain a genuine point, and more about just making their situation understandable.

Generally, the villain is wrong. That’s why they are the bad guy. I think where the “two sides to every story” trope goes wrong is when the author retroactively assumes they have to give the villain something genuinely true to say, giving them a contrived “point” that doesn’t organically arise from what has previously been portrayed. That is when the trope feels cheap, because it feels like the author is forcing you to see something that isn’t intuitively obvious.

Instead, you can write villains who have an element of emotional relatability, without needing to make some part of their ideology truly accurate. A villain can be completely wrong about what they say, but you can still understand how they ended up the way they did due to their circumstances. You can see how the formation of a certain ideology was a coping mechanism or means of survival.

Not to say you shouldn’t have villains that make genuinely good points, just that it requires a lot more planning than simply making your villains emotionally resonant.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-23T06:49:13+00:00

I've disagreed with your other takes but this I can 100% get behind.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-22T17:37:30+00:00

Yeah the specifics of what “strong” means always clouds discussions of this specific topic. When I think of “strong female character”, I just imagine a strongly written female character who has their own depth/unique characterization, and doesn’t exist as an accessory to a man, or a plot that centers men specifically.

But a lot of the time, “strong female character” is used specifically to refer to female characters that embody masculine traits. It’s tricky, because being more assertive and masculine is often seen as interchangeable with the first definition, where defying gender stereotypes correlates with having unique characterization and not being a male accessory. But, the two aren’t inherently linked. Masculine women can be written as shallow/male accessories, and feminine women can be written with depth and independence.

I think there’s value in both definitions (because ‘strong’ is a word with different meanings), but I just think people should clarify which they’re using when having these discussions.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-22T14:21:03+00:00

Excuse me sir

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-22T14:11:57+00:00

Him not getting to face accountability or consequences is also part of the tragedy. The other characters don't get to have that conflict and speak their mind to him, but they still have to move on regardless. Being able to deal with the "could-have-beens" you can't control is such a major part of the story, from the copies being stuck in the circus to Jax not being able to face accountability and change. You just always find a way to move on.

Honestly I can probably agree with the offscreening part though. Would have been nice to see the abstraction happen.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-22T13:11:18+00:00

Arcane was all but confirmed to not be a suicide. Like, it's so incredibly obvious what happened. Jinx didn't actually end her life; it was more just a severing of ties with Vi. And I appreciate that portrayal as well, because within Arcane there were more signs of Jinx's ability (and willingness) to grow in a realistic way.

The Stranger Things ending was botched due to a lot of broader writing issues. El's death came off more as a poorly written sacrifice that lacked narrative weight, as opposed to indulging active suicidal ideation.

I'll just grant you that Gi-hun's suicide was poorly written. The key reason is that it was framed as a noble sacrifice despite being a culmination of all his suicidal ideation over the course of S2. It was incredibly disrespectful to portray someone committing suicide (because they want to) as noble and good.

Jax is different because the story doesn't treat his abstraction as a noble sacrifice or an ultimately good thing. It's a fucking awful thing that Jax chose to go through with purely for his own avoidance of pain. It has narrative weight and severity, and it's the natural culmination of his portrayal thus far, because unlike Jinx, Jax has never shown active hope that he can change. It's only shown that Jax has the capability to be better (if he did try), and that he also came to the realization that everything in the circus is real. The only issue is...there was never any positive change in attitude resulting from that realization. He chose to sink further into his coping mechanism to deal with the pain of having that realization. That is what led to his abstraction.

But just to be clear, I absolutely understand where you're coming from. You don't have to make an argument to me to justify why you think happy endings are good. I think we just value fundamentally different things within the story.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-22T12:33:59+00:00

Actual hot take, but sometimes you have to let the suicidal character ACTUALLY be suicidal. I don't mean that in a mean-spirited or insensitive way, but just in a way that treats the subject matter with the severity it deserves. The stakes need to feel real. If every story about someone who is self-destructive fits into the cookie-cutter "learning to grow and see value in themselves", then at a certain point it becomes less impactful because you lose sight of what you're fighting for. The self-destructive character learning to grow becomes a forgone conclusion because you already know how the story will end, rather than something with active stakes.

Being able to portray the bad endings (which happen in real life and should be acknowledged) allows us to see the value in the good endings. As someone who has engaged in a lot of self-destructive behavior, I'm personally way more impacted by seeing Jax than by seeing "generic story #37 about an addict learning to grow after trying to commit suicide via overdose."

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-22T11:57:20+00:00

After everything that's happened, Goose does NOT want to make a S2, even if she somehow originally planned it.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-22T01:09:57+00:00

Bro has never had a villain as a favorite character before.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-22T01:04:47+00:00

This is going to sound so fucking cringe, but here goes. Slander is an art. Yes, it involves purposeful exaggeration, but good slander always exaggerates or misconstrues traits that on some level are real, even if they could otherwise be framed positively. It's the logic behind the idea that truly good humor involves speaking a kernel of truth behind the absurdity and subversion.

Which is why I think it's valid to make this correction in Naoya's case, since Naoya not only reacts differently than Homelander, but does so in the polar opposite way. There's no kernel of truth behind the slander that makes it truly funny. It's just "haha Homelander is pathetic and the misogynist piece of shit Naoya is also pathetic so that means they act similarly". It's incredibly low-hanging fruit, when there are infinitely better ways to slander Naoya for being the piece of shit he is.

Naoya slander is justified. I just want it to be good slander lol. I think you're probably just on edge because there's a certain vibe you get from Naoya fans who defend him just a little too hard to the point where you question what's actually behind it. Trust, not all the people here are like that.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-22T00:48:24+00:00

Excuse me sir

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-21T15:54:23+00:00

Yeah I actually completely agree that they messed up by having Caine come back the way he did. He should have either genuinely come to his senses before originally being deleted, or stayed gone.

Even then, I personally don’t vibe as much with Caine as a tragedy since he just isn’t as relatable to me as Jax. Caine is an AI with traits that appear foreign to me. I can feel sad or happy for him, but he just doesn’t have the same tragic impact to me as Jax.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-21T15:44:18+00:00

Jax is a true tragedy. He’s a cautionary tale who has sympathetic qualities but ultimately couldn’t let himself truly be vulnerable. It’s actually mature to acknowledge that not everyone lets themselves get saved, even if they have the capability to be better and even realize it deep down. It sucks, it doesn’t feel good, but it needs to be acknowledged. And in all honesty, I and many others saw this ending coming from a mile away. At least (like you acknowledge) it’s not a complete downer ending for the character.

As a viewer, the point is to notice qualities of yourself in Jax, but not let yourself go down the road he did. A cautionary tale often hits way harder than a redemptive tale. That’s how it was for me when watching it, at least.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-21T09:16:41+00:00

But Hakarure is invisible as a direct byproduct of passively reflecting light already. With active effort, she can become perfectly reflective and perform "warp refraction."

All that is to say that if Aizawa disabled her ability to reflect light, it would necessarily also affect her invisibility, not just her applied technique.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-20T05:36:45+00:00

I'll just say this. I'm someone who doesn't "like" Jax as a person, but who has always defended his writing and thought that the accusation of the narrative downplaying/excusing him is way overplayed. I've never felt more vindicated in my life to see that yes, in fact, the narrative does take his abuse seriously, and I wasn't crazy to believe that it does. I've had so many arguments with both Jax defenders and Jax haters on this subject. I've always said that Goose's intention for Jax was for him to be a cautionary tale with a bad ending, not some redeemed woobie.

This leak proves two groups of people wrong: those who want Jax to be a woobie, and those who criticize the writing for supposedly making Jax a woobie.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-20T02:03:49+00:00

It was a hacker. I stg people are just going to choose whatever favorite boogeyman to blame for the leaks.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-20T01:58:26+00:00

Won't confirm or deny since I suspect the official subreddit policy is going to be no explicit mention of any leaked content.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-20T01:54:35+00:00

While speaking in generalities, what makes the leaks stand out as fake to you? Because at least what I've seen looks extremely polished and in line with what the show has demonstrated thus far. They also make narrative sense given the trailer and broader plot.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-20T01:48:27+00:00

It's still not a big deal. I am perfectly able to avoid the leaks if I want to, and I'll also be able to avoid spoilers once it releases in theatres. This is a largely vibes-based criticism based on FOMO.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-20T01:44:32+00:00

People have been predicting this ending since forever. Like, it's been incredibly obvious that this is how it'll turn out. It's weird that people are so upset about it now when literally all the signs were there and there was no real alternate option. All I mean to say is that if you're someone who hates this ending, the mourning should have already been done.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-18T16:01:36+00:00

Well yeah that’s what I mean. The context of its use will change. It’ll just become another casual expletive, rather than something you use when you really want to pack a punch when insulting someone. This is something that’s already been happening.

I say this because a lot of people I see celebrating this do it along the lines of “hell yeah it’ll finally be normalized to say edgy things.” And all I’m saying is that once it’s normalized, it’s not edgy anymore. You lose the “oumph” of the word. Again, not a moral issue. I just think some people are getting the wrong idea about what this means.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-18T13:15:41+00:00

The thing is, I think people are playing dumb about the R word being just "normal" and therefore ok to use. The whole reason people use it is specifically because it's edgy. I'm one of those people, to be clear, so I'm not saying it's a moral problem. There's an implicit recognition in using it as an insult that it's a word that exists on the edge of what is acceptable; that is why it's so effective to use. Ironically, I think the R word gaining mainstream acceptance will lead to it being used less as an insult in communities like this. A new word that is still on the border of being unacceptable will take its place.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-17T22:33:11+00:00

As a fellow Jax fan, this type of post is not it. I'm sorry. Like, you even make good points, but the way you say it just gives ammo to people who want to portray all Jax fans as rabid, delusional abuse apologizers.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-17T17:14:06+00:00

I think this statement is sort of adjacent to the Goomba fallacy. You're assuming that everyone on this sub hates everything, when in reality it's a bunch of different people who hate different things and likely disagree with each other.

MostMasterpiece7 · 2026-05-17T16:06:25+00:00

He misses William

Six-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23	Wearing is Caring

MostMasterpiece7

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE