Rooting for the bad guys

[wooty]

The two fims that spring to mind are Death Note and Collateral.

Light was right in saying that criminals and scumbags deserve to die, while Vincent had some very good points in Collateral.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

LoTR. I do not root for the good guys or the bad guys. I find the entire series fun to watch or read but utterly retarded at the same time. Hundreds of years of constant war? HOW HAVE YOU NOT INVENTED ANYTHING MORE COMPLEX THAN A CROSSBOW.

To be fair, it took us 1600 years of constant war in Europe to develop anything more complex than a crossbow.

Ok, fair point. However the situation is slightly different. The wars in Europe were not wars of survival. I mean, the states involved were fighting for power, glory and the continuation of the lineage. Gondor is fighting for THE SURVIVAL OF HUMANITY.

Finally...

I cannot find the exact amount of time LoTR has been in technology stasis. Aragorn is part of the 39th generation following Isildurs death. The war has been going on for that long, without a break, in Gondor. We started the first world war with tanks. We ended it with nukes. That was within 4 years. Ok, different times, Technology was already advancing at a rather alarming rate.

But in 39 generations of war, 39 generations of a war for your very SURVIVAL, they have not made a single discovery. Not one.

Although my main problem with the films and books is the amount of times they are being shot at but get lucky. Seriously. Not one of them thinks to carry a shield. And, bar Boromir, NONE OF THEM PAY FOR IT.

Because in High fantasy, technology and industry is shunned. You may have noticed the Orcs using explosives on the attack on Helms Deep, that was a technological innovation that almost turned the up-to-that point successful defence into a smouldering pile of man flesh. Also, the conversion of Isengard into an industrial warmachine is meant to portrayed as the worst possible thing they could possibly do... then the trees kill everybody. That's hippy dreams right there.

Also note that it's the Orcs who are desperate, not the humans and the elves. Granted in timeline of the LotR films and books, things look desperate for humanity, but that's after centuries of complacency and internal dispute. After all, the biggest threat to the mortal realms fell millenia ago and most knowledge from that time fell into legends and myths... even the ring that could destroy all.

Ergo, after humanity had convinced themselves they had won and after a long period of decadence and ignorance, suddenly found themselves been spit roasted by the forces of Mordor and exiled/evil races of men on a scale unseen for centuries. The only race aware of this movement were the stuck up and pompous elves, which most of the mortal races hate.

EDIT: Speaking for aragorn on the shield part... he is a ranger, who wields a bastard sword and prefers boiled leather to heavy plate. Why? Because he relies on speed and agility to get through a fight. Is that practical? No... but fucking magic and wyverns and immortal gobshites aren't particularly feasible either.

 

[kasperbbs]

Out of boredom i started watching '24' and during the first season i got so annoyed by the protagonists family i hoped someone would finally kill them, my wish almost came true, at least one of them is out of the picture.

 

[TheKruzdawg]

I wanted the humans in Avatar to win so badly. Mainly because I was sick of the "white guilt" stuff and Stephen Lang was hilariously badass.

He's the head military guy with the scars right? He was pretty awesome. I loved how somewhere between 1/4-1/3 of his screen time is spent being badass while refusing to breathe. Like purposefully chasing their ship without a gas mask just so he can shoot at them some more.

 

[Vrex360]

Not sure if this counts but:
Sherrif Wydell from The Devil's Rejects.
I'm not really sure if he is actually the villain in this story or not but the trio of psychotic killers who are the movie's namesake certainly seemed to be pushed into the 'protagonist' role as they flee from law enforcement while Wydell the revenge seeking Sherrif becoming ever more crazy himself was the 'antagonist'.
But the thing is, honestly, the trio of killers are evil heartless sick twisted monsters. They kill innocent people in horrific and gruesome ways essentially for kicks and while it's true that Wydell does end up giving up on lawful solutions and enters the realm of vigilante and goes to amoral lengths to catch them... again they kill people for fun.
They kill them, they cut off their faces, they make their family members watch and they sexually assault them as well. Frankly I don't care how amoral someone gets, they will never be as evil as that and I would support any effort to stop them.
Even then his amorality only extends to members of the family of killers and people who knowingly assist them, so again it's hard to really be that bothered by the things he does. Hell the final scene:

Spoiler

Where he had them all tied up in their own farmhouse and tortured them for hours in the same manner with which they did their victims

Had me cheering. Because you know, f*ck them. Between two evils I'll pick the kind of crazy sherrif out for the blood of criminals over depraved sadistic killers and rapists out for fun. Like I said, it's a weird movie because I honestly don't know who the director intended as the antagonist or as the protagonist or maybe if the ultimate message is that neither of them are the good guy and both sides are evil.
But all I'm saying is if Wydell was supposed to the be 'bad guy' for daring to want the murderous family who have killed over 75 innocent people to be tortured and killed themselves, I have difficulty aruging with him.

 

[Megawat22]

I was rooting for the bad guys in Dead Island and The Rock.
The Rock because I liked the "bad guys" motives (although if memory serves the leader who was pretty decent gets overthrown and replaced by some generic psycho). Also because the bad guys had John C. McGinley.
Dead Island because... well because just everything. There's just so much in that the "good guys" screw up that me and my friends just grew to resent them (if it wasn't for the fact that I was playing through it with my friends I'd have dropped that game like a live 'nade). I think I can best sum up why I was rooting for the "bad guy" with just one spoiler.

SPOILERS (I'm not sure how to do spoiler tags, sorry)

At the end of the game the guy who was helping you betrays you. He asks for the only cure in the world for the zombie plague and says he will take it to civilisation. You do not give him the cure. He tells you that he has to leave on the only helicopter as the army are going to basically nuke the island. Why? Because he and about 6 other people are the only people left on the island alive, the rest are zombies.
Your characters take offence at this and then something, something, something he gets bit by a zombie. Then he is forced to use the only cure on the planet on himself. It backfires and turns him into a super zombie and then you kill him.
After he's dead the crew fly off into the sunset with a person who consumed the flesh of zombies and could apparently change at any moment. The end.

 

[LordFisheh]

As someone above said, a major point of LOTR is that culture and technology is regressing. Numenor, which I imagine would have developed advanced technology some day, is gone, humanity is fractured, etc, etc. The lands across the sea have been physically split off from the rest of the world. And now the elves, the most civilised and advanced race, are leaving. They're meant to be regressing from the golden age of Numenor in culture and technology.

 

[Thyunda]

snip

Yes, tower shields ARE designed to cover the entire body, but then, have you seen the kind of person who'd hold a tower shield? Yeah. He's not likely to be a hobbit. Hobbits are the most physically inept of all the races, hence their almost pacifistic nature.

And I can only think of one other wizard, and that's Radagast the Brown. Though it is hinted at (a lot) that there used to be a lot more of them.

LoTR. I do not root for the good guys or the bad guys. I find the entire series fun to watch or read but utterly retarded at the same time. Hundreds of years of constant war? HOW HAVE YOU NOT INVENTED ANYTHING MORE COMPLEX THAN A CROSSBOW.

To be fair, it took us 1600 years of constant war in Europe to develop anything more complex than a crossbow.

Ok, fair point. However the situation is slightly different. The wars in Europe were not wars of survival. I mean, the states involved were fighting for power, glory and the continuation of the lineage. Gondor is fighting for THE SURVIVAL OF HUMANITY.

Finally...

I cannot find the exact amount of time LoTR has been in technology stasis. Aragorn is part of the 39th generation following Isildurs death. The war has been going on for that long, without a break, in Gondor. We started the first world war with tanks. We ended it with nukes. That was within 4 years. Ok, different times, Technology was already advancing at a rather alarming rate.

But in 39 generations of war, 39 generations of a war for your very SURVIVAL, they have not made a single discovery. Not one.

Although my main problem with the films and books is the amount of times they are being shot at but get lucky. Seriously. Not one of them thinks to carry a shield. And, bar Boromir, NONE OF THEM PAY FOR IT.

You do have a fair point with your second paragraph. As in, a very fair point. I remember, when reading the Lord of the Rings, being completely unable to comprehend the vast time differences between historic events and current ones. If the Second Era had ended with more primitive weaponry (as in, chainmail and iron swords) it'd be more believable. But the fact that Anduril is as valid a sword in Aragorn's time as it was in Isildur's time makes absolutely no sense.

It's not even as if they were totally broke and unable to afford weapon-development. Maybe they just trusted in magic? By the time of LOTR, at least, Denethor was pretty delusional, so maybe he would have forbidden it?

I don't know why I'm trying to rationalise it. Put simply, it doesn't actually make much sense. But it DOES explain why the shambolic hordes of Mordor were so effective. THEY made advancements in weaponry and armour, and even machinery. Saruman's Uruk-hai employed explosive devices when assaulting Helm's Deep. They wore plate armour and carried specialised blades.

But...then...Isengard was destroyed by the trees. THAT must be why. Every time they try to get anywhere significant, the bloody environmentalists fight back.

And...I don't think we employed nuclear weaponry in the First World War. Tanks and fighter aircraft were the major advancements back then - and not even 'tank' tanks. No cannons...well, no turret. The male tanks had two cannons, two machine-guns. The females four machineguns. What was I talking about?

Oh. One last thing. Boromir was the only person to carry a shield. And he was the only one taken down by arrows.
Though it makes sense in context. Four Hobbits - the shield is about their height. That is not a sensible piece of equipment to be carrying. Legolas and Aragorn are archers. The only reasonable shield for them would be a buckler, which wouldn't be much help against arrows. Gimli's a heavily armoured dwarf. Shield is pretty much unnecessary. Boromir, as we know, carried a shield. I'm missing somebody. Who the hell am I missing?
Gandalf? Was he part of the Fellowship? Yes. I suppose he was. For a while, anyway. Gandalf is a wizard. He don't need no shield.

In fairness isn't that a deliberate chocie, that only is technology not getting betteer, it's getting worse. Think of it from the viewpoint of Someone in Dark Ages Europe, the Roman Empire has gone and all this stuff from aqeducts and roads are not being built anymore, heck most people don't know how to build them.

Noww Lord of the rings does this throw the idea of the civiilisations of Numernor and the various elfen ones. Society seems to be in regressionf or these people because it is. Noone has the wealth to make these huge giant statues, refine steel and the like.

I don't know...Gondor seems fairly wealthy, at least until the Orcs start streaming out again. Rohan is the only one with an excuse, and that's because the Rohirrim have their horses and shortbows, and if Genghis and Kubilai Khan could conquer the everything between Baghdad and Paris with that, the Rohirrim really had no need to advance. Crossbows might be easier to aim, but they're harder to reload, especially on horseback. Their armour has no reason to be anything heavier than leather, and they don't appear to have the nearby resources to go about inventing gunpowder.

Also - take a look at Gondor's military. Look at their swords. There is no way they're anything less than perfectly refined steel. But, you know what else was perfectly refined steel? Isildur's blade. And the Elven blades. AND the Gondorian swords back then, too. They're technologically static in an era of war. Complacency, perhaps? Confident in the power of Man and the protection of the Elves? Sauron's gone, therefore we don't need to arm ourselves for war anymore.

Course not. All the disputes were pretty much diplomatic and within Gondor. The only people keeping up any semblance of martial culture was Rohan, and that's because they're essentially Scandinavian.
Ooh, though there is one faction that intrigued me beyond all else. The Easterlings. And the Corsairs. Is it ironic that the most mysterious and interesting of the factions present in the whole Lord of the Rings universe are the two antagonistic human groups?

 

[Thistlehart]

Beware, Wall O' Text inbound!

Super Snip

Concerning LotR.
I think it is important to mention that the Wizards that exist in Middle Earth are not human. No one is born with magical ability because there is no such thing as "magic" in Middle Earth.

What Wizards such as Gandalf and Saruman employ is essentially the raw power of the firmament that only they and some elves can tap into (re. miracles). The Wizards can do this because they are actually aspects/servants of greater spirits (re. demigods). That is why Gandalf says he was "sent back until my task is complete." His boss said he wasn't done, gave him a promotion and some bigger guns, and booted him back into the field.

Another example is Elrond. Elrond and his family can perform feats that may appear to be magical, but in fact they are simply derived forces that already exist and because of his intimate and expansive knowledge he can employ them. This is why he is referred to as a Loremaster. Much of what he does is actually science of a sort and applied history.

Concerning WoW.
WoW actually does have magic, and that is what is holding technology back. Why build sophisticated flying machines when you can tame gryphons? Why manufacture rifles when you have people that can call down fire with words and gestures? What good are tanks and planes against demons the size of fortresses that can belch hellfire?

Why are people taking swords into battle instead of/against guns? Because those swords are more than just hunks of carefully crafted metal with sharp edges. They're magic swords. In the case of Frostmourne, very powerful magic swords. Magic sword > gun (see Star Wars).

As a sidenote, technology only exists because of the gnomes and the goblins. They are very diminutive races with no more magical capabilities than any other race. They have had to develope quickly to compensate the physical gap between their races and the rest.

Concerning OT.
It depends on the bad guy and their presentation, I must say. Motivation and intent play a hand, as do style and general badassery.

For instance, I'm not fond of Emperor Palpatine. He's too "I am evil, muahahahaaa evil!" He went through the long and arduous process of uniting the Galaxy into one Empire so that he could rule it and hold ultimate power. That's all. Boring and cliche. However, I like Darth Vader because he is evil with style and a hint of tragedy (ignoring the prequels). He helped Palpatine because he wanted a peaceful and united Galaxy. Unfortunately, he went a tad bonkers and his efforts left some rather horrendous skid-marks.

Similar to someone mentioned above, I enjoyed Arthas. Even his start in WC3 was compelling. He was desperate to save his people, this desperation lead him to be corrupted, and afterward he is still trying to save his people, but coming from the other direction. First he tries to save his land from the Scourge, then he tries to save it with the Scourge (though in a very bent way, being, after all, insane). Also, he's something of a high-fantsy Bond villan. I would be interested to see what Azeroth would have looked like had he won.

Oh, and let's not forget the werewolves in Dog Soldiers. I was rooting for them because, if they didn't win, they'd become part of something far more sinister (re. secret weapons project). Don't get me wrong, I felt bad for the soldiers. They were badasses and did themselves justice considering their situation, but they got screwed royally (get it? they were English? "for queen and country"? no? damn...). It was a fight for survival, and in the end I supported the ones I felt most deserved it.

In short, I like a bad guy that has a convincing motivation for doing what he/she does, and is somewhat heroic in his/her own way.

 

[Thyunda]

snip

Yes, tower shields ARE designed to cover the entire body, but then, have you seen the kind of person who'd hold a tower shield? Yeah. He's not likely to be a hobbit. Hobbits are the most physically inept of all the races, hence their almost pacifistic nature.

And I can only think of one other wizard, and that's Radagast the Brown. Though it is hinted at (a lot) that there used to be a lot more of them.

LoTR. I do not root for the good guys or the bad guys. I find the entire series fun to watch or read but utterly retarded at the same time. Hundreds of years of constant war? HOW HAVE YOU NOT INVENTED ANYTHING MORE COMPLEX THAN A CROSSBOW.

To be fair, it took us 1600 years of constant war in Europe to develop anything more complex than a crossbow.

Ok, fair point. However the situation is slightly different. The wars in Europe were not wars of survival. I mean, the states involved were fighting for power, glory and the continuation of the lineage. Gondor is fighting for THE SURVIVAL OF HUMANITY.

Finally...

I cannot find the exact amount of time LoTR has been in technology stasis. Aragorn is part of the 39th generation following Isildurs death. The war has been going on for that long, without a break, in Gondor. We started the first world war with tanks. We ended it with nukes. That was within 4 years. Ok, different times, Technology was already advancing at a rather alarming rate.

But in 39 generations of war, 39 generations of a war for your very SURVIVAL, they have not made a single discovery. Not one.

Although my main problem with the films and books is the amount of times they are being shot at but get lucky. Seriously. Not one of them thinks to carry a shield. And, bar Boromir, NONE OF THEM PAY FOR IT.

You do have a fair point with your second paragraph. As in, a very fair point. I remember, when reading the Lord of the Rings, being completely unable to comprehend the vast time differences between historic events and current ones. If the Second Era had ended with more primitive weaponry (as in, chainmail and iron swords) it'd be more believable. But the fact that Anduril is as valid a sword in Aragorn's time as it was in Isildur's time makes absolutely no sense.

It's not even as if they were totally broke and unable to afford weapon-development. Maybe they just trusted in magic? By the time of LOTR, at least, Denethor was pretty delusional, so maybe he would have forbidden it?

I don't know why I'm trying to rationalise it. Put simply, it doesn't actually make much sense. But it DOES explain why the shambolic hordes of Mordor were so effective. THEY made advancements in weaponry and armour, and even machinery. Saruman's Uruk-hai employed explosive devices when assaulting Helm's Deep. They wore plate armour and carried specialised blades.

But...then...Isengard was destroyed by the trees. THAT must be why. Every time they try to get anywhere significant, the bloody environmentalists fight back.

And...I don't think we employed nuclear weaponry in the First World War. Tanks and fighter aircraft were the major advancements back then - and not even 'tank' tanks. No cannons...well, no turret. The male tanks had two cannons, two machine-guns. The females four machineguns. What was I talking about?

Oh. One last thing. Boromir was the only person to carry a shield. And he was the only one taken down by arrows.
Though it makes sense in context. Four Hobbits - the shield is about their height. That is not a sensible piece of equipment to be carrying. Legolas and Aragorn are archers. The only reasonable shield for them would be a buckler, which wouldn't be much help against arrows. Gimli's a heavily armoured dwarf. Shield is pretty much unnecessary. Boromir, as we know, carried a shield. I'm missing somebody. Who the hell am I missing?
Gandalf? Was he part of the Fellowship? Yes. I suppose he was. For a while, anyway. Gandalf is a wizard. He don't need no shield.

In fairness isn't that a deliberate chocie, that only is technology not getting betteer, it's getting worse. Think of it from the viewpoint of Someone in Dark Ages Europe, the Roman Empire has gone and all this stuff from aqeducts and roads are not being built anymore, heck most people don't know how to build them.

Noww Lord of the rings does this throw the idea of the civiilisations of Numernor and the various elfen ones. Society seems to be in regressionf or these people because it is. Noone has the wealth to make these huge giant statues, refine steel and the like.

I don't know...Gondor seems fairly wealthy, at least until the Orcs start streaming out again. Rohan is the only one with an excuse, and that's because the Rohirrim have their horses and shortbows, and if Genghis and Kubilai Khan could conquer the everything between Baghdad and Paris with that, the Rohirrim really had no need to advance. Crossbows might be easier to aim, but they're harder to reload, especially on horseback. Their armour has no reason to be anything heavier than leather, and they don't appear to have the nearby resources to go about inventing gunpowder.

Also - take a look at Gondor's military. Look at their swords. There is no way they're anything less than perfectly refined steel. But, you know what else was perfectly refined steel? Isildur's blade. And the Elven blades. AND the Gondorian swords back then, too. They're technologically static in an era of war. Complacency, perhaps? Confident in the power of Man and the protection of the Elves? Sauron's gone, therefore we don't need to arm ourselves for war anymore.

Course not. All the disputes were pretty much diplomatic and within Gondor. The only people keeping up any semblance of martial culture was Rohan, and that's because they're essentially Scandinavian.
Ooh, though there is one faction that intrigued me beyond all else. The Easterlings. And the Corsairs. Is it ironic that the most mysterious and interesting of the factions present in the whole Lord of the Rings universe are the two antagonistic human groups?

And march out of the South East (With reference to the Haradrhim) and look distinctly Arab? *cough* The Elves are fleeing to the safe lands in the West, all forms of evil are coming from the East, the last hope of humanity is a bunch of white men because those brown guys are evil. Oh, ok, and hobits and the like. Also, the Rohirim are not as much based on Scandinavian culture as they are based on Norman culture.

Tolkein was not that inventive. The Shire and the lands of Rohan were based upon Brittany in North Western France. The people of Britainy being short and rather peaceful with a strong history of agriculture and (This might come as a shock) but in Normandy there were a bunch of Horse Lords. They had a few castles. They were the castles of Rohan. Yeah. Been there. Oh, they also had a really fancy sword that they gave to the leaders of the castles. Derf.

I still think that static technology is rather unbelievable. All things considered. But it is a fantasy setting so you must take some things for granted. Tbh, I find the technology in World of Warcraft significantly more annoying.

I could live with the presence of guns in Warcraft...but when they started bringing in more and more ridiculous technology, I had to opt out of all immersion. Muskets and blunderbusses I can live with. Missiles and cars. No.

And y'know, I was always taught that The Shire was based on the Black Country - as in south Staffordshire. The hint being in the name. And this might shock you, but Norman means 'Norseman'. Normandy is the land given to the Danes when they attacked France. England gave them money, France gave them land. So Scandinavian culture is still the basis.

Though to be fair - it's not surprise that the East would march on the West. Throughout history, the East has always seemed somewhat more civilised than the West - to the point where the crusading Franks were a horde of unwashed barbarians soiling the lovely Afghan fabrics of the Arabic cities. It was hard to see the Easterlings as 'Evil Men' when they wore eyeliner.

 

[Lazy Kitty]

All the time.
In games, I prefer being the bad guy.

 

[C F]

Avatar. I can never resist shouting out "Heck yeah, Capitalism!"

In general, I prefer my bad guys to be obviously evil: remorseless yet affable. I even like the Covenant better than the UNSC. You know, aside from the fact that their over-zealous military command structure is laughably idiotic compared to the UNSC's mechanical efficiency. But still, big ups for hammy Elites.

And Eggman. One of his plans involved forcing the world to yield and become his "Eggman Empire" within 24 hours, or he'll blow up the Earth! He even blew up half the moon as a demonstration. The best part was that he was really about to go through with it at the end of the 24 hours. I just love the fact that the obvious question of 'okay, and then what do we do?' never occurred to him.

 

[Aerosteam]

Just like lots of others said in this thread, Avatar.
I wanted the aliens to lose, I really hated their appearance.

... Damn it, I can't think of anything else. Bah, I'll edit this post later.

 

[rob_simple]

Law abiding citizen. I wanted the bad guy to win soooo bad.

You are correct, sir.

I'm usually in favour of the bad guys winning when they have a more relatable backstory than the hero (Ed Harris in The Rock, for example.)

It is weird that in most action films the antagonist has usually lost his family/friends/village/country whatever and is psychologically complex whereas the hero is the hero purely by virtue of being white and American.