Favorite/most memorable villain?

dp.

Charan, bro. I'm the type of guy who can state his position without it getting personal. The fact is that you ARE a pompous ass. That's not a crime. It's your persona. Look up the dictionary definition of the term. Just because I called you out on it doesn't mean that I ever bothered to dislike you. It takes all kinds of people to make this world and this forum what it is and you're a pompous ass. Own it. It's undeniable. And it's part of the reason why people enjoy interacting with you online, or at least that's the impression I've gotten.

Anyway I hate doing all the quotes. But I'll just touch on the beast's points. You already called me out on my typos long before this thread so it's kind of silly for you to attempt to attribute them to anger NOW! I could go and look for the documentation. But it's not worth the effort. So the typo = anger thing is just a swing and a miss. You could do better than grasping for straws like that. A part of the reason for the typos is I'm using an old wireless keyboard that cuts out because I'm draining every last ounce outta them batteries boi!

No, Charan, you took the first shots at me when you repeatedly made the wrong assumptions about my intentions. And rather than asking for clarification or something you just chose to talk down to me which is perfectly consistent for what someone woudl expect from a pompous ass.

One example, I said Eva goes over people's heads. And you say - 'yeah maybe it's going over yours' - I'm paraphrasing. And to me that's very condescending. Because OF COURSE I WAS INCLUDING MYSELF IN THAT STATEMENT! But you repeatedly act like you have this piercing insight that I wasn't privy to. But no, man, you just kept making the wrong assumptions about everything I said.

Dude some of the insults you're making are just sicko. About me being a snowflake. Lol. I don't even know what to say to that. Look lets address the elephant in the room. As young Eva fans we all experienced the frustration of realizing that other people experienced that series differently than we did. But different peopel respond to that frustration in different ways. Maybe you've chosen to take the Radiohead approach and just declare that everything is subjective and give up. But that's not my way. I have an opinion. I'm not telling you my opinion is right. But I'm not going to shy away from offering my THEORY that it is. I admit that there is some nuance there. Perhaps you are unwilling to allow me that nuance tho, being the beast that you are.

So when I said I was going to burn Charan I awoke the beast? Well I only meant burn in the playful sense. Seeing as this was a playful thread. dot dot dot - i mean I didn't come after your family did I. I was talking about a batman villain vs Gendo Ikari lol. Oh yeah and the fact that you tell me that OTHER theories about Eva exist is another pompous condescending move because you assume that I didn't know that already. Thank you for educating me. I thought I was the only person with an opinion on Eva. Man you are just being ridiculous.

And finally I can see in the end you are generous enough to offer me the salvation of your superior intellect on Eva. Well, I thought that neither of us cared what the other thought about the series. So I dont' really see any point in my taking you up on such a generous offer, sir.

But seriously Charan. It's true you are a much bigger prescense on this community than I ever will. Maybe that's why I wanted to burn you. I mean it was never personal. It's just like Charan and I_No are probably the two most recognizable names on the forum. I don't know anything about either of you. But I mean if you're there and I'm here and we're both posting in a silly off topic section forum, I figured why not poke a little fun in a frivolous off-topic kind of manner?

tl;dr - it's just a misunderstanding *shrug*

Charan makes a good villain.

Owning the stage in sheep clothing making all the wolves cry.



Peace,

-Boem-

Give me a second while i remiss on the fact i can't type "that's exactly what a villain would say".

Hitler eh, we going down that route? Isn't it a borring question.

Why not make it something interesting like

"who's the greater villain hitler or hitler's mom/dad?"

At least we can cover some dicy ground that way.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit : Define maniac btw, i find people are very eager to put hitler in the "mentally disfunctional" box very rapidly.

"

I thought it was a boring question to begin with. The thread has taken pretty much the trajectory I expected: first superhero villains, then a few movie and tv, some anime, with a slight detour on the last, and after getting all that out of our pop-cultured saturated collective system, we move onto literary and classic villains. And since many of those are based on real world people such as Brutus, Cassius and Judas, it's inevitable that we'd move past fiction and into history.

I tried to sort of guide the discussion in the much more interesting direction of 'what is a villain?' regarding perspective and control of narrative, but that didn't really stick. :(

Can't pin it on me, i voted Melkor as a solidly defined "evil".

He's an interesting character on "how to turn into evil", not so much the simplicity of the subject but how it evolves and grows over time.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit :

"

What do people think divides an anti-hero from a villain? I don't need a wiki breakdown or heavily cited response (although it's welcome) -- just off-the-cuff, what's the difference?

Off the cuff = culture

"

"

Boem wrote:

Can't pin it on me, i voted Melkor as a solidly defined "evil".

https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/the-entire-silmarillion-in-1000-words.118529/


Oldie but goodie.

Culture. Elaborate.

Somehow i don't think you can grasp the "evil over time" thing in that post, though it was hilarious.

But in essence it sums down quite nicely what a villain is.

"what is evil?"

"that which is out of tune"

As for culture i guess i could tackle that now, since i gave the answer without any thought.

It's the culture that defines what the "normal logic" should be in order to create the "heroic" behavior.
The anti hero defy's that logic while still getting "good" results.
The villain defy's that logic while getting bad results.

The result created from the action in relation to the cultures morality would be what defines either of them.

My assumption would be that the "true hero" is utilized in story's where society itself is functional and non-corrupt while anti-hero's are utilized in opposite scenario's where innovation is required to solve the moral problem culture is faced with.

Probably holes in that, but it's what i came up with.

No wiki, citations but off the cuff stuff.

Peace,

-Boem-

One-punch-man best anti-hero or not?

Peace,

-Boem-

Saitama isn't an anti-hero doe

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

Saitama isn't an anti-hero doe

But he is.

He doesn't have heroic qaulity's because the entire story is filled with hero's and special powers.(strongest man alive is not a superpower when the story is filled with hundreds of special powers that are "godlike")

And his moral agenda is pure evil if you think about his goal and it makes the ending sublime.

Peace,

-Boem-

???

I have literally no idea what you're rambling about, and the fact that you mention Wanpanman's "ending" gives off a strong scent of "this guy has no fucking clue what he's talking about".