Cliches you can't stand

[Simon_Jester]

I listed him as a Rebel, because his actions were to effectively overturn the status quo in so many ways.

Click to shrink...

I feel like that kind of strains the boundaries of the category, because he starts the movie with much, much more actual power than anyone else involved. The Sultan is basically a babbling nincompoop who can't hold his ground against Jafar. Jasmine's entire energies are concentrated on the impending prospect of her (undesired) marriage to unspecified parties. Aladdin is a penniless street urchin.

Jafar is a powerful sorcerer who has the Sultan's ear; about the only thing he may want and can't necessarily automatically have are (1) formally ruling the city and (2) Jasmine.

I'd say he's really no more of a 'rebel' than Frollo is.

 

[Valmond]

If Jafar had not gone for the lamp via Aladdin, he would have just won it all with his legal loophole trick that got trainwrecked by the Prince Ali parade.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

Oddly enough in real life, the governor was a cinsiderably nicer person than John Smith, and in the 1001 Nights, Jafar was a heroic character and the Sultan was a murderous asshole. Disney really doesn't care. Frollo at least sticks with the source material tho

 

[Mandemon]

Disney isn't interested in brining accurate depiction of the original story. They are interested in selling a movie to western audience. This has only lately slowly been changing.

Underage girl with bad pioneer is not a good story for Americans. So instead Pocahontas gets aged up, John Smith made into rugged pioneer and representative of Engand, Radcliffe, gets to be bad guy looking for gold. Notice how rest of the men turn on them once he tries to kill the heroic totally-not-yet-Amerrican?

Same with Aladin, "backstabbing councilor" is stable trope for west, so Jafar gets recontextualized to be bad guy while Aladdin gets to be underdog rags-to-riches story.

I mean, look at their version of Hercules. Hades is presented as this satan analogue, Hercules as goody good shoes and Zeus is made into family man.

 

[Comrade Future]

Oddly enough in real life, the governor was a cinsiderably nicer person than John Smith, and in the 1001 Nights, Jafar was a heroic character and the Sultan was a murderous asshole. Disney really doesn't care. Frollo at least sticks with the source material tho

Click to shrink...

In fact, this is not the same story at all - it is a mixture of the plot of the films "The Thief of Baghdad" with the original "Aladdin". In fact, most adaptations of fairy tales are free interpretations.

 

[Comrade Future]

Disney isn't interested in brining accurate depiction of the original story. They are interested in selling a movie to western audience. This has only lately slowly been changing.

Click to shrink...

Well, we all know what happens when Disney tries to do something not for the American audience (a reference to the Mulan remake).

 

[Konradleijon]

Hence "environmentalism by wiping out humanity" or "world peace by killing dissenters".

Click to shrink...

That might be based on Ecofascisn which is a real ideology who thinks overpopulation and not overconsumption is the root cause of environmental disaster.

I would love more Status quo maintainer villains who uphold the harmful status quo because it benefits them.

But even in stories like that people rebel to return to a previous better status quo. And not this is the way life has been and it's bad let's change it to something new.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

That might be based on Ecofascisn which is a real ideology who thinks overpopulation and not overconsumption is the root cause of environmental disaster.

I would love more Status quo maintainer villains who uphold the harmful status quo because it benefits them.

But even in stories like that people rebel to return to a previous better status quo. And not this is the way life has been and it's bad let's change it to something new.

Click to shrink...

At that point though, you're asking the novelist to wade directly into being a political propagandist. Because while "the status quo is bad" is fairly universal, once you've given your opinion on what it should be changed to, you've potentially lost half or more of your audience.

So if you want to make money you sort of have to end it right after the fall of the status quo with "happily ever after" and not discuss what comes next

 

[kaillll]

hmm
Have to admit my favorite kind of villain is the status quo villain and those who didn't care even a single bit about the rebellion and just want to maintain their precious little status quo.
Because they know that little bit of rebellion will fall flat on the ground dead sooner or later.
And no matter what, nothing will change, and those who push them over will just fall into the same hole.
just like them.
And nothing about the life of the people will change.

 

[Corti]

Well, we all know what happens when Disney tries to do something not for the American audience (a reference to the Mulan remake).

Click to shrink...

Mulan was made to please American audience. But not only. That's why the movie failed miserably.

 

[Konradleijon]

At that point though, you're asking the novelist to wade directly into being a political propagandist. Because while "the status quo is bad" is fairly universal, once you've given your opinion on what it should be changed to, you've potentially lost half or more of your audience.

Click to shrink...

Yep people really disagree on how the status quo should change that's why all Marvel movies have Status quo disrupters as villains. That start sympathetic before doing something really evil because the writers remembered they are suppose to be evil.

In Disney Films Lady Tremire is a textbook abusive parent who abuses her stepdaughter Cinderella as a scapegoat to keep her own daughters in line. While Judge Frollo is a bigoted judge who despises "the Gypsies" and wants Paris free of then. Both of them want to continue the status quo where they have power.

Funny in light of the latest Pop Culture Detective video.

But in fact, I remember a video dedicated to Disney villains, and they were just divided into "rebels" and "dominators". At the same time, some characters combined the features of both.

Click to shrink...

Yes it depends on the villains do.

Milan failed to appeal to Chinese audiences because it got everything about Chinese culture wrong. Along side not being focused

 

[Comrade Future]

At that point though, you're asking the novelist to wade directly into being a political propagandist. Because while "the status quo is bad" is fairly universal, once you've given your opinion on what it should be changed to, you've potentially lost half or more of your audience.

So if you want to make money you sort of have to end it right after the fall of the status quo with "happily ever after" and not discuss what comes next

Click to shrink...

It should be noted that even in those cases when the hero deliberately challenges the world order, he is depicted in an extremely abstract way - for example, in teenage dystopias. That is, they are fighting an obvious dictatorship for freedom. I noticed this in "emotional dystopias" - where everything is built on the elimination of a person's ability to experience emotions. We instinctively do not want to lose all our emotions - and we will be against it, but we forget that emotions can be useful for dictators.

 

[Arawn_Emrys]

Yep people really disagree on how the status quo should change that's why all Marvel movies have Status quo disrupters as villains. That start sympathetic before doing something really evil because the writers remembered they are suppose to be evil.

In Disney Films Lady Tremire is a textbook abusive parent who abuses her stepdaughter Cinderella as a scapegoat to keep her own daughters in line. While Judge Frollo is a bigoted judge who despises "the Gypsies" and wants Paris free of then. Both of them want to continue the status quo where they have power.

Yes it depends on the villains do.

Milan failed to appeal to Chinese audiences because it got everything about Chinese culture wrong. Along side not being focused

Click to shrink...

The removal of Lady Tremire though is a return to prior status quo of no Lady Tremire. She represents a temporary aberration rather than the longterm status quo. Just like Prince John in Robin Hood. The Status Quo our rebel heroes are opposing is the reign of John, not monarchy itself which they fully and enthusiastically support when Richard shows up

 

[Comrade Future]

Milan failed to appeal to Chinese audiences because it got everything about Chinese culture wrong. Along side not being focused

Click to shrink...

It's still a dubious idea, given that there are a dozen film adaptations of the poem in China, and some of them have even been successful in the East Asian Market.

The removal of Lady Tremire though is a return to prior status quo of no Lady Tremire. She represents a temporary aberration rather than the longterm status quo. Just like Prince John in Robin Hood. The Status Quo our rebel heroes are opposing is the reign of John, not monarchy itself which they fully and enthusiastically support when Richard shows up

Click to shrink...

Peasant Riots were held under the slogan - "When Adam plowed and Eve spun - who was the king?"
One of the first forms of rebellion is the desire to return the original "Golden Age". The return of King Richard can be described as the return of the "Golden Age". But in Cinderella there is no talk of any restoration - Cinderella loses the marker "daughter", and receives the status "Wife".

 

[Konradleijon]

The removal of Lady Tremire though is a return to prior status quo of no Lady Tremire. She represents a temporary aberration rather than the longterm status quo. Just like Prince John in Robin Hood. The Status Quo our rebel heroes are opposing is the reign of John, not monarchy itself which they fully and enthusiastically support when Richard shows up

Click to shrink...

Yep it's the return to the previous status quo.
But it can get fuzzy sometimes. A abusive parent is a macocasm of the status quo. With Cinderella at the bottom of the family hierarchy.

Peasant Riots were held under the slogan - "When Adam plowed and Eve spun - who was the king?"

Click to shrink...

Wow I did not know that it's cool.

Even today many activists want to return to a previous age of equalitiranism. Like indigenous right activists.

 

[Reveen]

My take is that there are few credible scenarios where a group of people rebelling against the status quo of society can be neatly slotted as "villains" because of the simple fact that large numbers of people don't rise up to try to blow up the government unless they're desperate. Either because they're gonna starve or because the government has already decided to preemptively put it's perceived enemies against the wall to be shot.

You kinda can't have a "the insane stupid masses are rebelling" plot without actually trying to engage with the reasons why the revolution happened. Unless you're just fine with cutting propaganda about how everyone should just shut up and let the upper echelons of society do their jobs.

Now there's a distinction to be made about other types of attempted usurpation of the social order that can be framed in more explicitly negative terms. Like a dictator rising from the chaos with the support of the military or a good portion of the majoritarian political class. Or a movement concerned with culture and suppressing what they see as subversive elements. Those usually require a degree of already existing social privilege real or perceived, which might give them a sense of entitlement or confidence that they can just take over that lets them go do crazy shit without needing to be pushed.

But if you have a plot about the lowest orders of society rising up in violent rebellion don't blow smoke up my ass and tell me that they're deluded dummies and that the problems they face aren't that bad. Because people in that kind of position don't generally just decide to burn shit for funzies. They need to be pushed to the brink.

 

[Adloquium]

But even in stories like that people rebel to return to a previous better status quo. And not this is the way life has been and it's bad let's change it to something new.

Click to shrink...

The Star Wars original trilogy kind of springs to mind.

 

[Konradleijon]

You kinda can't have a "the insane stupid masses are rebelling" plot without actually trying to engage with the reasons why the revolution happened. Unless you're just fine with cutting propaganda about how everyone should just shut up and let the upper echelons of society do their jobs.

Click to shrink...

Yes I'm okay with rebellions not being all rosy in fiction if they actually try to examine why the revolution happened and why shit got bad.

People don't risk their lives and go to war over frivolous things.

Anything that says anyone who questions the status quo is bad is a terrible listen because you should always question the status quo.

 

[Avernus]

My take is that there are few credible scenarios where a group of people rebelling against the status quo of society can be neatly slotted as "villains" because of the simple fact that large numbers of people don't rise up to try to blow up the government unless they're desperate.

Click to shrink...

Since when? Plenty of revolutions have the goal of installing a dictatorship of one variety or another. Groups like the Khmer Rouge, ISIS and the Taliban weren't motivated by "desperation", they just wanted power, to kill people they didn't like, and to impose a tyranny.

Hatred, fanaticism and the hunger for power are some of the most common reasons to want to overthrow an established order.

 

[Alane1]

With the orginal star wars trilogy it's not hard to see why people would have want to restore the republic.

A polity that lasted so long that nobody could even recall what it name actually was and for the most part was remembered as a long age of peace and prosperity is rather appealing when you got warmongering genocidal fascists running around specially with the knowledge that said fascists had violently seized power to establish the empire.

But then I always felt there was a big disconnect between the original trilogy and the prequels, likely owing to no small part being based in different backstories written in different eras.

 

[Fluffy_serpent]

With the orginal star wars trilogy it's not hard to see why people would have want to restore the republic.

A polity that lasted so long that nobody could even recall what it name actually was and for the most part was remembered as a long age of peace and prosperity is rather appealing when you got warmongering genocidal fascists running around specially with the knowledge that said fascists had violently seized power to establish the empire.

But then I always felt there was a big disconnect between the original trilogy and the prequels, likely owing to no small part being based in different backstories written in different eras.

Click to shrink...

I seem to remember somewhere it said that in legends lore (I think) the empire was actually quite safe for the average citizen.

While they peacefully submitted to the empire

 

[Fourthspartan56]

Since when? Plenty of revolutions have the goal of installing a dictatorship of one variety or another. Groups like the Khmer Rouge, ISIS and the Taliban weren't motivated by "desperation", they just wanted power, to kill people they didn't like, and to impose a tyranny.

Click to shrink...

This is such sociologically absurd thinking.

Just because these groups were monstrous doesn't mean there wasn't more nuanced reasons behind their rise. The goals of a group don't have to be sympathetic for there to be reasons that people backed them (note: reasons does not mean good reasons).

It's no coincidence that these organizations all arose in environments of extreme chaos and deprivation, those are the perfect conditions for evil forces to take advantage of people's grievances and radicalize them. That doesn't mean we have to be sympathetic towards the average Khmer Rouge, Daesh, or Taliban supporter but we should have empathy and understand why these groups can exist in the first place. Which leads us to Reveens point, revolutions don't happen for no reason.

I seem to remember somewhere it said that in legends lore (I think) the empire was actually quite safe for the average citizen.

While they peacefully submitted to the empire

Click to shrink...

This isn't correct, the expanded universe was always clear that the Galactic Empire was brutally xenophobic and classist.

The only average citizen this could really be said to be true of would be of the average human living in the Core Worlds. Anywhere else and peaceful submission was too often not an option.

 

[Reveen]

Groups like the Khmer Rouge, ISIS and the Taliban weren't motivated by "desperation", they just wanted power, to kill people they didn't like, and to impose a tyranny.

Click to shrink...

Oh yeah dude. One thing you can say about Cambodia, Afghanistan and Iraq is not desperate. Come one.

Yeah, once a country spends long enough in a protracted state of civil war or military occupation it will start producing dictatorial regimes as a matter of course. Like no shit Sherlock.

 

[Avernus]

One thing you can say about Cambodia, Afghanistan and Iraq is not desperate.

Click to shrink...

It has nothing to do with being "desperate"; it's about them being weak. Pretty much every nation has plenty of similar people; they just have a much harder time taking over. It wasn't "desperation" that motivated the January 6th coup attempt here in the US, and those were people with the same sorts of motivations and goals.

Greed, hatred and cruelty are in my opinion the most common reason people attempt to violently overthrow present society; especially among those who succeed. And in all these cases we are in fact talking about violent attempts.

 

[Chaos Blade]

Disney isn't interested in brining accurate depiction of the original story. They are interested in selling a movie to western audience. This has only lately slowly been changing.

Underage girl with bad pioneer is not a good story for Americans. So instead Pocahontas gets aged up, John Smith made into rugged pioneer and representative of Engand, Radcliffe, gets to be bad guy looking for gold. Notice how rest of the men turn on them once he tries to kill the heroic totally-not-yet-Amerrican?

Same with Aladin, "backstabbing councilor" is stable trope for west, so Jafar gets recontextualized to be bad guy while Aladdin gets to be underdog rags-to-riches story.

I mean, look at their version of Hercules. Hades is presented as this satan analogue, Hercules as goody good shoes and Zeus is made into family man.

Click to shrink...

Being fair, Hades does tend to get that association more oft than not when done by people that don't know or don't care about the source material.

THe rest I do agree with you and never quite understood why go so far for such simplistic representations, children aren't dumb or stupid and while some concepts might need easing in (like, you know, Zeus serial affairs, specially those where he takes the place of the husband and what not and Hera's reaction to those)