Got to say Hades just for the fact that he managed to be hilariously evil.Heck,he tried to conquer the gods and he was one.
So which Disney Villain really was the most Evil?
- Thread starter Vern5
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I always thought of Frollo as more insane than malicious.Greyfox105 said:
It seemed that everything bad he did was out of his obsession and desire over Esmerallda, which doesn't really make him evil, it just makes him insane and willing to do anything no matter how horrible to get the target of his obsessions.
All because he was lustful, flawed and corrupt from power which are pretty much core parts of what makes people Human.
So unless if you could call parts of Human nature it's self evil...
Although I don't remember watching the movie, I did read the Novel about a year ago, and it was so sad. :-(
Pretty much every one dies.
Really? Nobody thought of Shan Yu (from Mulan)? The dude burned entire towns and tried to kill the Emperor of China. As far as his motive, he's probably the most successful of all Disney villains. He was the leader of an invading army, and they destroyed everything in their path up until meeting the army Mulan was in.
Personally, I've always taken the philosophical view that in real life, everyone on Earth is naturally bad, and that humanity is inherently corrupt and evil. It's in our nature to do bad things. Those who claim to be 'good' are simply those who make a conscious effort to fight the dark, selfish impulses that control us all. So rather than saying who the most evil is, I'm instead going to go through each and every Disney villain from the Animated Canon, in chronological order by film, and say whether or not they could be argued as justified in their actions or if a case can be made to sympathise with them (films only, if I include TV series and comics and stuff then I'll still be writing this post at 6am, and it's almost 2am already...). It's up to the reader to then decide for themselves if that person is particularly evil or not. And I say this in a fictional context, rather than my view that everyone IRL is inherently evil, because fictional characters can easily be made good or bad without needing a real-life human reference frame... 
There are three more films in the Canon, but they haven't been released yet so I can't comment on any of them. Save the first of those, Winnie The Pooh, which by my earlier comment more than likely won't have a villain unless Christopher Robin turns psycho and develops a taste for honey-glazed rabbit with a side order of Owl eggs and bear pate.
Feel free to dispute any of my theories, even if it did take me about an hour and a half to write this post (yes, seriously, I started this after 1.30am local time and it's now 3.10am - I take my posting VERY seriously...). It's pretty much just my own ideas and conclusions, all of which could easily be discussed further with in-depth theories and analysis, though I won't be doing any of that because of how late it is (especially with Frollo). And finally, I believe this is apt for now to some extent...
[HEADING=1][/thread][/HEADING]
- Snow White - The Queen acts purely out of jealousy over her step-daughter's beauty, and is willing to kill for that, so we can argue that she is pretty evil without any justification.
- Pinocchio - The only real villains are the donkey-slave-owners, who aren't really given much screen time to flesh them out properly, and the fox dude and that Lampwick guy, both of whom seem more like tricksters out for a quick buck or as peer pressure models. I guess in a way you can justify it as being all they really know how to do, though they aren't exactly morally upstanding at any point, and are really there as metaphors for the audience to make their own decisions and not follow people blindly into stupid decisions... the jury's out on this one I guess.
- Fantasia - No real 'villain' at all here, except perhaps Chernabog, who's a demon anyway so he's meant to be evil.
- Dumbo - The only real villains here are the bullies in the circus, including the ringmaster, and in a way their behaviour is justifiable (though not excusable) by the fact that Dumbo has abnormally large ears, which they see as an abomination. A common view by people for other such deformities at the time, and even now, so although I don't agree with them, they can be justified to some degree.
- Bambi - Only 'villain' here is the hunter, who can be justified completely here because he's simply following the food chain. Humans are predators, and higher than deer on said chain, regardless of whether he's killing deer to eat or use their fur or whatever. The only way he could be morally in the wrong is if his use of the deer carcass is then morally wrong. So it mainly depends, but from what we see we can infer he's not so bad here...
- Saludos Amigos/The Three Caballeros/Make Mine Music/Fun and Fancy Free/Melody Time/The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr Toad - These six films were all 'package films' released in the 40's and were made up of unrelated segments, without any sorts of villain (save in retellings of fairy tales and in the Sleepy Hollow story).
- Cinderella - On the one hand, this seems like a given, as the wicked stepmother and stepsisters are simply jealous of the much prettier and kinder Cinderella. However, although it's hard to spin a case for the stepmother, the sisters can be seen as slightly sympathetic, as they are mean to Cinderella but mostly under the yoke of their mother, and can be inferred to simply have been raised that way and aren't inherently nasty people.
- Alice in Wonderland - The Red Queen is pretty nasty, however, it's more in an eccentric way rather than an evil way. Also, since the Wonderland events are implied to take place in Alice's own head, you can argue that the characters inside are simply aspects of her personality, meaning our villain is actually Alice herself (well, a part of her at least).
- Peter Pan - On the one hand, Captain Hook is a bastard, but then again he's dealing with a really cheeky young boy who'll never age, unlike Hook himself, and to top it off a crocodile bit his hand off, which would make anyone cranky. So not entirely evil, simply a bit overblown in how he deals with that justifiable anger.
- Lady and the Tramp - Was there a villain in this? Well, I guess the family who dislike Tramp for not being pedigree count, but then again, they don't understand puppy love anyway, being a different species, so we can put this down to simple ignorance.
- Sleeping Beauty - I won't argue, Maleficent is one of the most evil Disney villains. However, though I agree she is already pretty evil anyway, as the 'good' fairies state themselves beforehand, Maleficent can at least be justified in her actions. Everyone else was invited to Aurora's christening except her, so again, like with Hook, simple anger management issues to deal with.
- One Hundred and One Dalmatians - Cruella deVille. Yes, evil, but only towards animals. Can't really spin much justification here except that perhaps she'd been pissed off by PETA one too many times? Either way, a bit evil for wanting to skin so many dogs purely for a coat, but nevertheless, it was mostly simple greed and anger management issues that she had to deal with, which most people have anyway (one or the other).
- The Sword In The Stone - Should I really bother with this? Just look at any other adaptation of the Arthurian legends to get a better response. However, in particular to this film (which takes a lot of liberties even for an Arthur legend), Madame Mim was basically a rival to Merlin. Not surprising as any wizard with such power would have enemies, and it's only the narration point of view that suggests Merlin is all that good anyway. So really, the power struggles between them in the film suggest the two are both as good, or bad, as each other...
- The Jungle Book - They're animals. That eat humans as well as other things. Mowgli is a human. It's basic biology, no-one in this is evil at all, it's simply something called the food chain.
- The Aristocats - The butler was a bit of a bastard for trying to kill the cats, but to be fair to him, he did just see everything he had been hoping for get given away to a bunch of animals. And he doesn't know they can talk, so what do you expect him to think? Doesn't excuse his actions, but it does give him some mild justification, and besides, it's not like he tried to bump off the old lady himself, which any actual evil person would do, right?
- Robin Hood - Okay, the Sheriff of Nottingham and King John are bastards, but to be fair, Robin was stealing all their money then giving it away. It's basically saying that the ends justify the means, which isn't necessarily always true. The film claims it's okay to steal if you give the money away. And the taxes were needed anyway to pay for a very costly war, i.e. the Crusades, though conveniently this is changed in the film to 'funding the Sheriff and John's lavish lifestyles'. In real life, King John was actually a decent enough ruler, what with the Magna Carta, and having to keep the realm stable and economically solvent while his brother kept on fighting a pointless war and getting captured all the time (which John had to pay the bail for). So I'm firmly on the monarchy's side here.
- The Many Adventures of Winnie The Pooh - Yeah, there's no villain in Winnie the Pooh. Unless Christopher Robin suddenly decided he fancied pork for dinner and killed Piglet. We can skip this one.
- The Rescuers - Again, a case of a will, except unlike in The Aristocats we see the villains are pretty despicable. I can't find any more justification for them really, they abuse and potentially try to kill the young girl (if you read between the lines). They're pretty evil.
- The Fox And The Hound - This one is pretty simple, the animal villain is the dog Chief, who simply follows both nature and orders, and the human villain is a hunter who thinks that foxes are vermin creatures who go after smaller animals like chickens and cause a nuisance. I personally like foxes, but since the human is simply subscribing to the widespread (and actually FALSE) belief that foxes are pests, he can be excused and justified here. It's simple ignorance again, no malevolence whatsoever.
- The Black Cauldron - Okay, since the Horned King is simply trying to take over the world (and not in the comedic Pinky and the Brain way), I'll have to give Disney this one. He's simply evil.
- The Great Mouse Detective - Ratigan is basically yourrat mouse version of Moriarty, so any analysis of Moriarty's character can tell you more than I can. However, in general I'd say he's fairly evil, but also he does have an inferiority complex because of being a rat, which by no means excuses him but does give at least some insight into why he does some of the things he does.
- Oliver and Company - Bill Sykes. That's all there is to say. He's a gangster type guy, with a pair of Dobermen (actually lovely dogs, my family has always had Dobermen who are more likely to lick you to death than bite you, except perhaps playfully and gently). He's based on the guy from Oliver Twist. Not much more to say really, I can't say anything else except try doing a character study of Dickens villains for a better idea. Aside from that, yeah, he's fairly evil, but we don't have all the pieces to the puzzle at any point... as for Fagin, same case, except he redeems himself and he's more the lovable buffoon type of guy in this film, so not really a villain at all.
- The Little Mermaid - Okay, I'll grant that Ursula is pretty damn evil. However, she does have some excuse to a certain degree, she was banished by King Triton for not much more reason than 'she's ugly' and 'she's a witch' - this coming from the guy who wields a massive MAGIC TRIDENT... yeah. Then Triton's 'perfect' daughter has the sheer cheek to ask her for help to get the one thing she doesn't have in her perfect little life. It's pretty easy to see why Ursula was such a manipulative cow during that film, and it makes perfect sense she'd want revenge on Triton after all that...
- The Rescuers Down Under - Okay, the villain's a poacher. Unless he had some traumatic childhood that drove him to poaching, he can't really have any excuse except sheer greed. Although he does deserve some sympathy, as he dies (it's implied) at the end of the film, which is kind of overkill for a mere poacher, right?
- Beauty and the Beast - Gaston is simply an arrogant tool. He's not exactly evil, simply big-headed, and prone to the same nasty displays of prejudice against anything he sees as 'wrong', like the people in Dumbo. Although he does deserve his fate at the end because he was arrogant enough to actively try and kill said 'monster' even when the Beast saved his life. So not evil, simply an idiot.
- Aladdin - Power crazed. Not massively evil. Though he may have ended up becoming pretty evil (as if the 'devil' form he takes as a genie wasn't a big enough hint) because of the power he gained, but at firs he was simply a power-crazed arrogant smart arse. Albeit with the basic evilness present necessary to be willing to kill anyone in his way, such as the 'street rat'.
- The Lion King - Scar is actually bizarrely justified here. True, he killed his brother and framed his nephew, and even made said nephew believe the lie, but he was the runt of the litter and was basically all but exiled to the Badlands and the Elephant Graveyard, by his own brother. He really got the short end of the stick here, he can be sympathised with a lot until you factor in the fratricide. And he wasn't even that bad a ruler, he was simply unlucky. It's hardly his fault that the draught happened to appear while he was king, if he hadn't killed Mufasa then the Pridelands would have been fucked anyway but during Mufasa's reign, meaning he'd have been blamed instead of Scar. So on the whole, unlucky but not evil, and simply prone to exaggerating the solutions to his problems.
- Pocahontas - Ratcliffe was pretty bad here, but not evil. He was simply blinded by greed. And his views on the Indians was the same as most people's back then, so that can't be counted as a character flaw save from a modern perspective, which is unfair on the character. On the Indian's side, no real villains at all, not even that warrior guy who got killed. They were simply defending their lands and lives, after all. Though there's a clear cut villain in this film, he's misunderstood added to greediness, so no evilness there.
- The Hunchback of Notre Dame - One of my favourite villains here, Frollo. And also one of the most complex. I'm going to summarise rather than give an in-depth analysis here, but on the whole Frollo isn't evil. He's simply too devout for his own good, while also being somewhat prejudiced as others who I mentioned before. He does some good in caring for Quasimodo, which redeems him slightly, and is another layer of complexity to him. His views on the gypsies aren't that different from the views of most characters who aren't spelled out as being 'good' (i.e. modern thinkers rather than people who thought the common thoughts of the time) in the film, like Phoebus and Quasimodo. Frollo is also quite insane near the end, as everything he's worked for as a justice is brought down around him and Paris is burning by his own hand. He's tempted by the flesh, and fights against that, and that drives him deeper into mental decline. He knows he's a hypocrite on multiple levels too, and that's more torment for him. So on the whole, Frollo is a pretty conflicted character, and although certainly a bad character, he's not particularly evil. He's simply a tortured soul who faces a continuous struggle as a man of faith, and makes the wrong choices in that fight.
- Hercules - Now first of all, in the original Greek mythology Hades was by no means evil, he was simply another god who was screwed over by his brothers Zeus and Poseidon (who weren't exactly angels themselves) and was pretty damn sympathetic, kidnapping and marrying Persephone notwithstanding. In the film, they make him out to be a pretty evil character instead, and Zeus as being this amazing God-like figure. No pun intended. But all things considered, when you apply the real life myths to the story, you find yourself on Hades' side, and even if you don't you have to admit that it's pretty unfair no matter how bad he may be that Zeus gets everything good and then has an amazing son, while Hades is stuck in the Underworld with nothing but the rocking tunes of Styx and a couple of goons (and a multitude of tortured souls) to keep him company. So he becomes a bit more sympathetic either way, how much depends on which idea you prefer...
- Mulan - Can't say much here about Shan Yu, except that there may have been political motivations and such for the invasion that were never revealed on-screen. Other than that, he seems pretty damn evil, but then again he's the ruler of a nation/people (the Hun) and he's hardly the first leader in the world to have ever invaded another country. If you want to claim he's pure evil, first compare him to one of your favourite world leaders who was ever in a war. Yeah.
- Tarzan - Clayton's a hunter. That's his job. And he's hardly evil, he's simply another bog-standard English guy travelling to Africa who doesn't see animals as being equal to humans. Not evil, just arrogance again. As for the other villains, they're all animals, so they fall under my previous 'food chain' justification.
- Fantasia 2000 - Like with my previous Fantasia explanation, no real villains to speak of...
- Dinosaur - If there are any villains, they're other animals and dinosaurs. So again, food chain explanation comes into play.
- The Emperor's New Groove - Yzma's a minister in the government. Not evil, simply political ambition. Kronk, meanwhile, is simply an idiot who follows the leader every time.
- Atlantis: The lost Empire - Not evil, simply greed, since the villain is pretty much out for profit. Basic human trait.
- Lilo and Stitch - Well, the villain didn't long escape from jail, so he's pretty bad presumably, but I guess you have to consider the fact he was a supervillain mad scientist, making the experiments. Actually, yeah, that does sound pretty evil to me...
- Treasure Planet - See the book Treasure Island for this one. However, mostly it's simply pure greed again, more than anything else.
- Brother Bear - No villain, simply character development of the 'not-so-good' characters into decent people again.
- Home On The Range - A cattle rustler, so only as evil as you can really say a thief is evil, since it's not like he murders anyone to achieve his goals or anything like that...
- Chicken Little - It's an alien 'invasion' which turns out to be a misunderstanding, so there aren't any villains at all. Despite first glances, of course...
- Meet The Robinsons - Goob and a robot, both of whom have a grudge against the protagonist, which is fairly justifiable in the film. Not necessarily evil, therefore, though since the film deals with time travel they do mess things up (or risk messing things up) quite a bit...
- Bolt - Again, no real villain, the film's plot is driven by a misunderstanding where Bolt thinks there's a villain but it's all really simply part of filming for a show he works on. It makes sense in context...
- The Princess And The Frog - Okay, I have to hand it to Disney this time. Doctor Facilier does everything to get his hands on a fortune and tries to do it by turning people into animals, ruining their lives, and even by attempting to murder a guy, all for the sake of wealth and fortune, so he's pretty damn evil here.
- Tangled - Okay, this is a tricky one. You can kind of sympathise with Mother Gothel, as she does everything mainly out of fear, specifically her fear of death. However, she does do some pretty horrible things, and even kills (temporarily) a guy, so she becomes a lot less decent as a villain through these things. On the whole, I'd say she's not entirely evil, but the way she tries to achieve her aims is wildly overblown and out of proportion, and she's fighting nature itself which is never a good idea...
- Pinocchio - The only real villains are the donkey-slave-owners, who aren't really given much screen time to flesh them out properly, and the fox dude and that Lampwick guy, both of whom seem more like tricksters out for a quick buck or as peer pressure models. I guess in a way you can justify it as being all they really know how to do, though they aren't exactly morally upstanding at any point, and are really there as metaphors for the audience to make their own decisions and not follow people blindly into stupid decisions... the jury's out on this one I guess
.- Fantasia - No real 'villain' at all here, except perhaps Chernabog, who's a demon anyway so he's meant to be evil
.- Dumbo - The only real villains here are the bullies in the circus, including the ringmaster, and in a way their behaviour is justifiable (though not excusable) by the fact that Dumbo has abnormally large ears, which they see as an abomination. A common view by people for other such deformities at the time, and even now, so although I don't agree with them, they can be justified to some degree.
- Bambi - Only 'villain' here is the hunter, who can be justified completely here because he's simply following the food chain. Humans are predators, and higher than deer on said chain, regardless of whether he's killing deer to eat or use their fur or whatever. The only way he could be morally in the wrong is if his use of the deer carcass is then morally wrong. So it mainly depends, but from what we see we can infer he's not so bad here...
- Saludos Amigos/The Three Caballeros/Make Mine Music/Fun and Fancy Free/Melody Time/The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr Toad - These six films were all 'package films' released in the 40's and were made up of unrelated segments, without any sorts of villain (save in retellings of fairy tales and in the Sleepy Hollow story).
- Cinderella - On the one hand, this seems like a given, as the wicked stepmother and stepsisters are simply jealous of the much prettier and kinder Cinderella. However, although it's hard to spin a case for the stepmother, the sisters can be seen as slightly sympathetic, as they are mean to Cinderella but mostly under the yoke of their mother, and can be inferred to simply have been raised that way and aren't inherently nasty people.
- Alice in Wonderland - The Red Queen is pretty nasty, however, it's more in an eccentric way rather than an evil way. Also, since the Wonderland events are implied to take place in Alice's own head, you can argue that the characters inside are simply aspects of her personality, meaning our villain is actually Alice herself (well, a part of her at least).
- Peter Pan - On the one hand, Captain Hook is a bastard, but then again he's dealing with a really cheeky young boy who'll never age, unlike Hook himself, and to top it off a crocodile bit his hand off, which would make anyone cranky. So not entirely evil, simply a bit overblown in how he deals with that justifiable anger.
- Lady and the Tramp - Was there a villain in this? Well, I guess the family who dislike Tramp for not being pedigree count, but then again, they don't understand puppy love anyway, being a different species, so we can put this down to simple ignorance.
- Sleeping Beauty - I won't argue, Maleficent is one of the most evil Disney villains. However, though I agree she is already pretty evil anyway, as the 'good' fairies state themselves beforehand, Maleficent can at least be justified in her actions. Everyone else was invited to Aurora's christening except her, so again, like with Hook, simple anger management issues to deal with
.- One Hundred and One Dalmatians - Cruella deVille. Yes, evil, but only towards animals. Can't really spin much justification here except that perhaps she'd been pissed off by PETA one too many times? Either way, a bit evil for wanting to skin so many dogs purely for a coat, but nevertheless, it was mostly simple greed and anger management issues that she had to deal with, which most people have anyway (one or the other).
- The Sword In The Stone - Should I really bother with this? Just look at any other adaptation of the Arthurian legends to get a better response. However, in particular to this film (which takes a lot of liberties even for an Arthur legend), Madame Mim was basically a rival to Merlin. Not surprising as any wizard with such power would have enemies, and it's only the narration point of view that suggests Merlin is all that good anyway. So really, the power struggles between them in the film suggest the two are both as good, or bad, as each other...
- The Jungle Book - They're animals. That eat humans as well as other things. Mowgli is a human. It's basic biology, no-one in this is evil at all, it's simply something called the food chain.
- The Aristocats - The butler was a bit of a bastard for trying to kill the cats, but to be fair to him, he did just see everything he had been hoping for get given away to a bunch of animals. And he doesn't know they can talk, so what do you expect him to think? Doesn't excuse his actions, but it does give him some mild justification, and besides, it's not like he tried to bump off the old lady himself, which any actual evil person would do, right?
- Robin Hood - Okay, the Sheriff of Nottingham and King John are bastards, but to be fair, Robin was stealing all their money then giving it away. It's basically saying that the ends justify the means, which isn't necessarily always true. The film claims it's okay to steal if you give the money away. And the taxes were needed anyway to pay for a very costly war, i.e. the Crusades, though conveniently this is changed in the film to 'funding the Sheriff and John's lavish lifestyles'. In real life, King John was actually a decent enough ruler, what with the Magna Carta, and having to keep the realm stable and economically solvent while his brother kept on fighting a pointless war and getting captured all the time (which John had to pay the bail for). So I'm firmly on the monarchy's side here.
- The Many Adventures of Winnie The Pooh - Yeah, there's no villain in Winnie the Pooh. Unless Christopher Robin suddenly decided he fancied pork for dinner and killed Piglet. We can skip this one.
- The Rescuers - Again, a case of a will, except unlike in The Aristocats we see the villains are pretty despicable. I can't find any more justification for them really, they abuse and potentially try to kill the young girl (if you read between the lines). They're pretty evil.
- The Fox And The Hound - This one is pretty simple, the animal villain is the dog Chief, who simply follows both nature and orders, and the human villain is a hunter who thinks that foxes are vermin creatures who go after smaller animals like chickens and cause a nuisance. I personally like foxes, but since the human is simply subscribing to the widespread (and actually FALSE) belief that foxes are pests, he can be excused and justified here. It's simple ignorance again, no malevolence whatsoever.
- The Black Cauldron - Okay, since the Horned King is simply trying to take over the world (and not in the comedic Pinky and the Brain way), I'll have to give Disney this one. He's simply evil.
- The Great Mouse Detective - Ratigan is basically your
- Oliver and Company - Bill Sykes. That's all there is to say. He's a gangster type guy, with a pair of Dobermen (actually lovely dogs, my family has always had Dobermen who are more likely to lick you to death than bite you, except perhaps playfully and gently). He's based on the guy from Oliver Twist. Not much more to say really, I can't say anything else except try doing a character study of Dickens villains for a better idea. Aside from that, yeah, he's fairly evil, but we don't have all the pieces to the puzzle at any point... as for Fagin, same case, except he redeems himself and he's more the lovable buffoon type of guy in this film, so not really a villain at all
.- The Little Mermaid - Okay, I'll grant that Ursula is pretty damn evil. However, she does have some excuse to a certain degree, she was banished by King Triton for not much more reason than 'she's ugly' and 'she's a witch' - this coming from the guy who wields a massive MAGIC TRIDENT... yeah. Then Triton's 'perfect' daughter has the sheer cheek to ask her for help to get the one thing she doesn't have in her perfect little life. It's pretty easy to see why Ursula was such a manipulative cow during that film, and it makes perfect sense she'd want revenge on Triton after all that...
- The Rescuers Down Under - Okay, the villain's a poacher. Unless he had some traumatic childhood that drove him to poaching, he can't really have any excuse except sheer greed. Although he does deserve some sympathy, as he dies (it's implied) at the end of the film, which is kind of overkill for a mere poacher, right?
- Beauty and the Beast - Gaston is simply an arrogant tool. He's not exactly evil, simply big-headed, and prone to the same nasty displays of prejudice against anything he sees as 'wrong', like the people in Dumbo. Although he does deserve his fate at the end because he was arrogant enough to actively try and kill said 'monster' even when the Beast saved his life. So not evil, simply an idiot.
- Aladdin - Power crazed. Not massively evil. Though he may have ended up becoming pretty evil (as if the 'devil' form he takes as a genie wasn't a big enough hint) because of the power he gained, but at firs he was simply a power-crazed arrogant smart arse. Albeit with the basic evilness present necessary to be willing to kill anyone in his way, such as the 'street rat'.
- The Lion King - Scar is actually bizarrely justified here. True, he killed his brother and framed his nephew, and even made said nephew believe the lie, but he was the runt of the litter and was basically all but exiled to the Badlands and the Elephant Graveyard, by his own brother. He really got the short end of the stick here, he can be sympathised with a lot until you factor in the fratricide. And he wasn't even that bad a ruler, he was simply unlucky. It's hardly his fault that the draught happened to appear while he was king, if he hadn't killed Mufasa then the Pridelands would have been fucked anyway but during Mufasa's reign, meaning he'd have been blamed instead of Scar. So on the whole, unlucky but not evil, and simply prone to exaggerating the solutions to his problems.
- Pocahontas - Ratcliffe was pretty bad here, but not evil. He was simply blinded by greed. And his views on the Indians was the same as most people's back then, so that can't be counted as a character flaw save from a modern perspective, which is unfair on the character. On the Indian's side, no real villains at all, not even that warrior guy who got killed. They were simply defending their lands and lives, after all. Though there's a clear cut villain in this film, he's misunderstood added to greediness, so no evilness there.
- The Hunchback of Notre Dame - One of my favourite villains here, Frollo. And also one of the most complex. I'm going to summarise rather than give an in-depth analysis here, but on the whole Frollo isn't evil. He's simply too devout for his own good, while also being somewhat prejudiced as others who I mentioned before. He does some good in caring for Quasimodo, which redeems him slightly, and is another layer of complexity to him. His views on the gypsies aren't that different from the views of most characters who aren't spelled out as being 'good' (i.e. modern thinkers rather than people who thought the common thoughts of the time) in the film, like Phoebus and Quasimodo. Frollo is also quite insane near the end, as everything he's worked for as a justice is brought down around him and Paris is burning by his own hand. He's tempted by the flesh, and fights against that, and that drives him deeper into mental decline. He knows he's a hypocrite on multiple levels too, and that's more torment for him. So on the whole, Frollo is a pretty conflicted character, and although certainly a bad character, he's not particularly evil. He's simply a tortured soul who faces a continuous struggle as a man of faith, and makes the wrong choices in that fight.
- Hercules - Now first of all, in the original Greek mythology Hades was by no means evil, he was simply another god who was screwed over by his brothers Zeus and Poseidon (who weren't exactly angels themselves) and was pretty damn sympathetic, kidnapping and marrying Persephone notwithstanding. In the film, they make him out to be a pretty evil character instead, and Zeus as being this amazing God-like figure. No pun intended. But all things considered, when you apply the real life myths to the story, you find yourself on Hades' side, and even if you don't you have to admit that it's pretty unfair no matter how bad he may be that Zeus gets everything good and then has an amazing son, while Hades is stuck in the Underworld with nothing but the rocking tunes of Styx and a couple of goons (and a multitude of tortured souls) to keep him company. So he becomes a bit more sympathetic either way, how much depends on which idea you prefer...
- Mulan - Can't say much here about Shan Yu, except that there may have been political motivations and such for the invasion that were never revealed on-screen. Other than that, he seems pretty damn evil, but then again he's the ruler of a nation/people (the Hun) and he's hardly the first leader in the world to have ever invaded another country. If you want to claim he's pure evil, first compare him to one of your favourite world leaders who was ever in a war. Yeah.
- Tarzan - Clayton's a hunter. That's his job. And he's hardly evil, he's simply another bog-standard English guy travelling to Africa who doesn't see animals as being equal to humans. Not evil, just arrogance again. As for the other villains, they're all animals, so they fall under my previous 'food chain' justification.
- Fantasia 2000 - Like with my previous Fantasia explanation, no real villains to speak of...
- Dinosaur - If there are any villains, they're other animals and dinosaurs. So again, food chain explanation comes into play.
- The Emperor's New Groove - Yzma's a minister in the government. Not evil, simply political ambition. Kronk, meanwhile, is simply an idiot who follows the leader every time.
- Atlantis: The lost Empire - Not evil, simply greed, since the villain is pretty much out for profit. Basic human trait.
- Lilo and Stitch - Well, the villain didn't long escape from jail, so he's pretty bad presumably, but I guess you have to consider the fact he was a supervillain mad scientist, making the experiments. Actually, yeah, that does sound pretty evil to me...
- Treasure Planet - See the book Treasure Island for this one. However, mostly it's simply pure greed again, more than anything else.
- Brother Bear - No villain, simply character development of the 'not-so-good' characters into decent people again.
- Home On The Range - A cattle rustler, so only as evil as you can really say a thief is evil, since it's not like he murders anyone to achieve his goals or anything like that...
- Chicken Little - It's an alien 'invasion' which turns out to be a misunderstanding, so there aren't any villains at all. Despite first glances, of course...
- Meet The Robinsons - Goob and a robot, both of whom have a grudge against the protagonist, which is fairly justifiable in the film. Not necessarily evil, therefore, though since the film deals with time travel they do mess things up (or risk messing things up) quite a bit...
- Bolt - Again, no real villain, the film's plot is driven by a misunderstanding where Bolt thinks there's a villain but it's all really simply part of filming for a show he works on
. It makes sense in context...- The Princess And The Frog - Okay, I have to hand it to Disney this time. Doctor Facilier does everything to get his hands on a fortune and tries to do it by turning people into animals, ruining their lives, and even by attempting to murder a guy, all for the sake of wealth and fortune, so he's pretty damn evil here
.- Tangled - Okay, this is a tricky one. You can kind of sympathise with Mother Gothel, as she does everything mainly out of fear, specifically her fear of death. However, she does do some pretty horrible things, and even kills (temporarily) a guy, so she becomes a lot less decent as a villain through these things. On the whole, I'd say she's not entirely evil, but the way she tries to achieve her aims is wildly overblown and out of proportion, and she's fighting nature itself which is never a good idea...
There are three more films in the Canon, but they haven't been released yet so I can't comment on any of them. Save the first of those, Winnie The Pooh, which by my earlier comment more than likely won't have a villain unless Christopher Robin turns psycho and develops a taste for honey-glazed rabbit with a side order of Owl eggs and bear pate.
Feel free to dispute any of my theories, even if it did take me about an hour and a half to write this post (yes, seriously, I started this after 1.30am local time and it's now 3.10am - I take my posting VERY seriously...). It's pretty much just my own ideas and conclusions, all of which could easily be discussed further with in-depth theories and analysis, though I won't be doing any of that because of how late it is (especially with Frollo
). And finally, I believe this is apt for now to some extent...[HEADING=1][/thread][/HEADING]
Yes! he was soo evl. But i think Scar has to be the worst by far! I hear theres a modern remake of the Lion King coming soon! I wonder how that will pan out? I got Captn Hook but I never seen Peter Pan. Can anyone tell me how evil he is?Tasachan said:
He's not the Devil, he is god of death and ruler of the underworld. Think grim reaper, not Satan. In the actual mythology he isn't that bad a dude, He deals with humans and if they hold up their end he holds up his. Now Zeus... that guy had problems...Kipohippo said:
OT; mother Maddie from Tangled. It's new and i thought she was pretty f-ed up in the head. a)she hid the cure to a disease from the kingdom thus sending the queen to a slow demise b)she kidnapped a baby c)Shen hair cutting relvealed that the magic essence left she forbade hair cutting. d)she hid the kidnapped child and would not allow her to leave.
I dunno she seemed pretty evil to me.
Jafar ranks high as he was also a genius and smart and evil is the worst possible scenario... Ursula was pretty evil but i think people overstate her because she hangs out in the uncanny valley. Rollo... He's a catholic priest what did you expect? do you watch the news? Gaston was a ball of ego and really more an antagonist than an actual villain. Lots o' Huggins bear from to story 3 was unnecessarily evil but he did have a reason. Although when he crushed big baby's heart pendant... Damn... also from Pixar Hopper and that guy from Monster's Inc.. Scar really was evil and probably indirectly responsible more deaths in the years following.
Also maleficent and the witch from snow white bad people... just bad bad people. and maleficent actually got worse in kingdoms hearts...
If you mean evil for evil's sake, I would have to say Maleficent, for attempted murder of the King's daughter just for being not invited to a burthday party. Scar at least was trying to feed the starving hynias while he was grabbing power. Jafar and the rest just desired power (and his case the princess's bed rights). If you do believe the giant monster at the end of Fantasia is the devil, that is evil incarnate.Vern5 said:
However, if you mean the person that has the most tortured and evil soul, I would have to say Frollo. The guy only thought he was doing the work of God, only ever doing good. Deep down, really deep down, he knew what he did was wrong, but he lied to himself to believing he was doing good.
Literally, one of the Latin chants by the red cloaked figures after Frollo said "It isn't my fault" was "it is my fault."
I hadnt thought about it all that much til now =P Im gonna be thinking about this for a while now...
For the time being I'll say that guy from Journey to Atlantis (that is Disney isnt it?) who was gonna let an entire ancient civilization die cause he wanted a quick buck.
But other strong contenders are "The Shadow man" from Princess and the Frog since he was gonna take the souls of an entire city, which is kinda up there in my opinion, Frollo - cause he's just that damn scary, and Cruella De Ville - for the worst reason for her actions. I mean really, a coat? THATS why she was going to skin PUPPIES? Thats the sort of evil you joke about! =O
EDIT: Someone mentioned Shan Yu from Mulan, who definitely should be getting more mentions! Cant believe I forgot about him. We cant say he wasnt unsuccessful - he's probably killed more people than any other Disney villian! At least of all the ones I can think of... Can anyone prove me wrong? Its not a challenge, Im actually just struggling to remember all the villians and if any did succeed in mass genocide?
For the time being I'll say that guy from Journey to Atlantis (that is Disney isnt it?) who was gonna let an entire ancient civilization die cause he wanted a quick buck.
But other strong contenders are "The Shadow man" from Princess and the Frog since he was gonna take the souls of an entire city, which is kinda up there in my opinion, Frollo - cause he's just that damn scary, and Cruella De Ville - for the worst reason for her actions. I mean really, a coat? THATS why she was going to skin PUPPIES? Thats the sort of evil you joke about! =O
EDIT: Someone mentioned Shan Yu from Mulan, who definitely should be getting more mentions! Cant believe I forgot about him. We cant say he wasnt unsuccessful - he's probably killed more people than any other Disney villian! At least of all the ones I can think of... Can anyone prove me wrong? Its not a challenge, Im actually just struggling to remember all the villians and if any did succeed in mass genocide?