The problem also is though Rac Rules is that ‘Draco in Leatherpantsing’ is a term that gets thrown around a lot, same with ‘Mary Sue’ sometimes- when it’s not exactly always warranted. Sometimes. Often in fact. But not always. When people take any character and try to make it out as perfect- then yes, complaints are warranted- but sometimes there are things which suggest (even an antagonist), is more than they first appear.
Even the term ‘cliche’ is thrown about too much as an insult actually (more on that later).
Randall is listed as a ‘Draco in L.P’ - and when someone makes him out to be perfect, the complaints are warranted in this case. Because he is far from perfect. He’s immature, he’s showing a rapidly shortening fuse and he’s prepared to kill if he has to, even it seems not being that cut up about it. But it’s also a fact that for the rules of the universe to make sense- he could not have been hired in the mental capacity he was in the film at all among other circumstances existing- which people can relate to. This is perfectly fine. Relating to caharcters is what puts Pixar ahead of the game after all. Just because people makes out the antagonist to be more than they first appear isn’t a bad thing and sometimes can be interesting.
But making them PERFECT? (A TRUE Draco in leatherpantsing?) That’s really annoying and if your only motivation behind it is because they find them ‘hot’… um no. That’s just weird. I don’t really get the idea of finding villains ‘hot’ myself. Not my area. But I do enjoy grey anatgonists. But you must also refer flaws you know exist even if you try to bring in a lighter side more to the forefront.
But people CAN change- but it would take time to develop it- no IMMEDIATE changes and immediately showing them to be ‘good’ but have them gradually devleop into something more. Immediate changes of heart are just bizarre sometimes.
I also have a peeve specifically in relation to Syndrome- making him… suave… Syndrome is not suave.
But then Syndrome (next to Hopper/Mr.Waternoose perhaps?) is perhaps the least redeemable of the antagonists in reality. Syndrome fans have their work cut out when it comes to him.
It’s perhaps the same with the whole ‘revenge’ thing- it’s not so much that the cliche is USED perhaps (because EVERYTHING has technically been done- there’s just a new way of telling things), but it’s just more or less how these trends/cliches are HANDLED perhaps.
For instance- making an OC doesn’t have to be a bad thing. But just like with making a CANON character perfect, you can’t make the OC perfect either regardless of your own character bias. Revenge also can be an interesting place to take fiction… but if you are really intending to write something you want people to take seriously (instead of just random stuff), you can’t do the evil ‘muahahaha- I am making no sense at all for no reason’ type of thing- instead you must explore the reason behind it.
Why are they doing this?
Randall’s own revenge stories are constantly completely and utterly stupid from the get go- because in addition to making him stupid himself, they tend to ignore the very fact- RANDALL HAS BEEN GONE FOR A YEAR (by the time Boo’s door is rebuilt when we see the chart Sulley holds)- what exactly was Randall doing in all that time? I somehow doubt he took a YEAR to come up with such a (usually stupid) plan, so what happened? Was he held aganist his will? Did he just snap? Did he get brain damage? Were his experiences that horrible? But I’ve never seen it explained AT ALL. Because honestly- you think it would take Randall over a year to get back just to do that?
I can get revenge if it’s in the heat of the moment/just in the after mathg- because that can account for stupidity. But when it comes to PLANS and having TIME to think it out… you’ve got your work cut out to make it believable and not seem stupid.
Randall, if he has some other motivation to get back to the monster world- would get back. And perhaps he might try for revenge along the way if he bumped into Sulley and Mike- but for it to be his ONLY motivation to go back. Well you’re going have to explain why! That’s a hard thing for me to swallow or believe- that that after such a time would be his only drive in life.
Another thing I hate relates specifically to Boo (most of the time anyway)- basically making her into this extremely depressed/abused teenager. Because honestly, with her excellent room and her friendly happy attitude and is very smart for her age- she does not give ANY evidence of such treatment at all. I doubt her parents beat her/starve her/live in poverty. Look at her room! Her parents in fact, must be at least upper-middle class. HIGH-upper middle class.
But seriously- I don’t get the ‘abused’ thing at all.
I suppose it could be argued (in relation to making Randall pure ‘evil’ and Boo with ‘abusive parents’- is the fact in some ways people do have SOME excuse- we don’t see Boo’s parents, we only see some small hints of Randall having any other side, it’s just a fact however- that when you sit down and think really hard about the evidence before you- it just doesn’t fit at all. It wouldn’t make any sense if it was true given what we see about how M.I. works (because Randall would never have been hired regardless of talent if he’d been like that always) or what we see of Boo either.
But one area where the ‘abused’ thing gets thrown in for which there is NO excuse is in the Incredibles- you know what I mean. Violet suddenly falls for Syndrome. Parents do not approve (well duh…)… then the borderline-abuse starts. Sometimes without the borderline.
HUH?
Look Bob and Helen are not perfect parents (after all, there is no such thing), but they LOVE their kids in the end. Sure if Violet ever decided to go for the guy (?) well, they’d obviously NOT be happy. But they’d have good reason! They’d be ultimately concerned for their daughter’s welfare and they LOVE their daughter. Bob is not going to start beating her. He is not an abuser. This example has less excuse than Boo- because we actually SEE the parents, and KNOW what they’re like.
Do they really seem that much like abusers?