I'll take the bait, sure. Thats not why hes the best, Anon. Rex is the best because he's a force of sheer personality. He steals every scene he's in. He's even got a perfectly understandable backstory. If you were forced to sit and watch every single one of your friends forget about you and party, never once paying you one thought it's understandable to snap a bit. His powerset is also a good development of the whole system that the first movie established, with Master Builders. Emmet being the one to figure out destruction is also a great way to expand on how he's really the best Master Builder there is, doing things nobody even thought of before.
One could dumb down the whole conflict between Rex and the Sistar System into Boy v Girl, but its not that. Rex says himself that its the "expression of the death of imagination in the subconscious of an adolescent." It's about a kid realizing that his imagination isnt the only one that matters, that he was being just like his dad was in the first film and only letting his way of playing matter when what he should be doing to trying to build a collaborative experience to have genuine family time with one another. It's about him growing older and opening up more with his sister than locking everything away.
It's a fun movie, Anon, and you should really revisit it without ragebait goggles on.
11 months ago
Anonymous
forgot to add, he's even vindicated in the end really. He's got no regrets (except one) even as he vanishes from existence. He did everything right. Through his actions Emmet was able to keep his friends and even grow as a person. His chadly masculinity is part of what makes him correct in his actions.
The scene with him was so funny >wait, if we’re not that bad guys, and you’re actually a good guy. Who’s the antagonist? >*cuts to future emmet about to nuke all of playmobile/duplo land
>Darth Vader clone
That was always the joke with him, though
But at least with a Vader clone you can build on top of that to make him a more interesting character, like in Star Command
You could potentially do the same with evil old Buzz, but they just made him the most basic version of the "you from the future" trope imaginable >"See, Buzz? This is what you'll become if you don't learn to let go!" >"Okay, I guess I'll learn to let go, IDK lol" >Movie over
God, what shit movie Lightyear was
Because prior to her reveal that yes she is evil, the film seemingly tries to subvert that by having her form a seemingly genuine bond with Ruby with aspirations to try and bring peace to their races
Remember this moment from Frozen?
How people say it makes no sense on a rewatch?
Chelsea has fricking three of those
He's not around anyone, nobody can see him from down there so there's no reason he'd be faking that endearing and loving smile. This scene is totally written as Hans being in love with Anna, and thus it makes no sense in retrospect.
11 months ago
Anonymous
People irl don't make evil faces out in the open.
11 months ago
Anonymous
They also don't make faces that signal falling in love for no good reason when nobody is looking
11 months ago
Anonymous
People irl also don't do evil monologues before (failing) killing someone.
Also he did make an evil face out in the open, when he was just about to strike Elsa.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Hans should've won
11 months ago
Anonymous
Lol no, instead of guaranteeing Anna's death by killing her right then and there while she was fragile, he left her the possibility of living >But there was no way he would have known that a magical snowman was going to come and save her!
He is planning a commit a regicide and a coup, anything less than a 100% chance of victory is not enough
11 months ago
Anonymous
How Hans could have won: >Do literally nothing >Elsa basically abdicated from the throne as she was planning on staying on that mountain exiled anyway, making Anna queen >If Anna lives, great! You become king-consort, if she dies, also great! You become the king >And not even once need to drop the facade
Or >Take a pillow and smother Anna while she is almost dying from the frozen heart >Now that Anna is 100% dead do what he already did by declaring Elsa to be executed >Kill Elsa since Anna isn't there to stop you >Become king
But no, he is a moron instead
11 months ago
Anonymous
Only if Elsa lives, enslaved, and they have a very toxic relationship
11 months ago
Anonymous
Go full Koeran Romance-Fantasy webcomic timetravel fix the past >Hans wakes up as a child prince in his home kingdom with memories of long after the events of both movies >his first task is going to Arendelle on a ship as a stowaway >learned at some point some evil person in a mythical 3rd movie (thay showcased how shit Anna was as Queen) ate the fire salamander from 2 and that's Hans' goal, to get the fire powers to fight against Elsa >retcon most of the second movie into something not moronic and the original of Elsa's powers >Hans ends up breaking into the castle and befriending little Anna and later young Elsa on accident >accidently stumbles his way into a good ending when his intention was to burn the place down >finally make the trolls the real villians those frickers were ment to be
11 months ago
Anonymous
Also >kid Hans is missing for months during his trip and adventures with the princesses >his family didn't even notice he was gone (his brothers were already ignoring his existence and thought he was hiding) >Hans' introduction to Anna sounds like he's a street rat that is pretending to be a prince and taking advantage of naive Anna >Elsa at first thinks Anna is trying to introduce her to an imaginary freind behind the door >Elsa's impression of Hans is a street rat that conned her naive sister and can't get the guards on him becasue the castle staff is stretched thin
11 months ago
Anonymous
Also >kid Hans is missing for months during his trip and adventures with the princesses >his family didn't even notice he was gone (his brothers were already ignoring his existence and thought he was hiding) >Hans' introduction to Anna sounds like he's a street rat that is pretending to be a prince and taking advantage of naive Anna >Elsa at first thinks Anna is trying to introduce her to an imaginary freind behind the door >Elsa's impression of Hans is a street rat that conned her naive sister and can't get the guards on him becasue the castle staff is stretched thin
Disney would never, but I'd love to see it
11 months ago
Anonymous
he's not out in the open? for all intents and purposes he's by himself here so there's nobody to act for
11 months ago
Anonymous
The audience in the theatre. Frozen is a musical.
11 months ago
Anonymous
You do understand that 99% of musicals don't have it so that the songs are literally happening in the world of the movie? It's usually just a representation of how these characters are feeling, there isn't a ghost band playing for these characters to literally sing with. The exceptions are movies like The Muppets which are incredibly self-referential anyway
11 months ago
Anonymous
Frozen II outright has references to song being sung as songs.
He's not around anyone, nobody can see him from down there so there's no reason he'd be faking that endearing and loving smile. This scene is totally written as Hans being in love with Anna, and thus it makes no sense in retrospect.
Hans' plan wasn't to murder the royal family.
Hans' plan was to marry one of the royal family and gain power that way.
Anna being clumsy and adorable just worked into that plan. She was always Plan B anyway. If he had to hook up with her anyway, then there's nothing wrong with enjoying the hookup. The fact that one of his potential wife-candidates was cute and into him as well was a bonus.
He didn't get into the plot of killing Elsa until later. Killing Anna was kind of moronic, although it's doubtful that she would've become his wife after he'd murdered Elsa so kind of makes sense. Very, very vaguely kind-of.
He's not around anyone, nobody can see him from down there so there's no reason he'd be faking that endearing and loving smile. This scene is totally written as Hans being in love with Anna, and thus it makes no sense in retrospect.
Repostan from someone else
Pre-twist: >Was polite to Anna before even knowing she was a princess and has genuinely nice chemistry with her, plus his backstory sort of mirrors hers >Casually drops that he's been emotionally abused by his siblings, not even realizing how messed up it sounds, implying that it's a normal occurrence in his household while shrouding him in the mystery of a dark past (which was left unexplored) >His proposal doesn't make him look manipulative because it's normal for royalty in that time period to marry total strangers and he and Anna actually like each other, what it makes him look like is naive and desperate to escape a bad home situation >Took care of the kingdom during a time of crisis even though he's a foreigner and it's literally not his responsibility >Is assertive and decisive when necessary without coming across as a jerk, like when he puts the Duke in his place, and doesn't take the opportunity to lord over people with his given authority >He's a leader who actually places himself on the front line and doesn't allow the chain of command to fall apart in the face of panic, and is courageous and puts his life on the line to recover a stranger and restore her land, literally almost dying in the process >Is good at psychologically reading people and providing for their needs, like when he talked Elsa down and resolved the confrontation without violence >A potentially tragic origin while striking a decent balance between being virtuous and having a personality without defaulting to being a cynical prick who needs to be fixed by the creator's self-insert princess
Hans is surprisingly nuanced before the awful shock-value scene and unironically came so close to being one of the most dimensional Disney prince characters, up there with the Beast, so of course the screenwriters had to go and totally screw that up. He had so much going for him and they utterly wasted his potential. But others are free to disagree.
11 months ago
Anonymous
I don't think he's that deep but he could have been explored more in a sequel.
It's funny how they had Hans turn evil so Anna would get with Kristoff, and then Kristoff has nothing to do in the second movie.
11 months ago
Anonymous
True, Kristoff had more to do in the Frozen Fever short
11 months ago
Anonymous
Kristoff isn't even mentioned in either of Olaf's summaries of their feature adventures.
Because prior to her reveal that yes she is evil, the film seemingly tries to subvert that by having her form a seemingly genuine bond with Ruby with aspirations to try and bring peace to their races
Remember this moment from Frozen?
How people say it makes no sense on a rewatch?
Chelsea has fricking three of those
because hans being a villain was something that writers bring from nothing, elsa was supposed to be the villain
This one is the biggest offender, since it happens during a conversation with Ruby and it seems like she has sympathy for her in this scene. But nah, all just a ploy to get the trident and doesn’t has a change of heart after being defeated.
>doesn’t has a change of heart after being defeated.
this sounds good, we need more pure evil villains and less tragic sympathetic figures who get le redemption
11 months ago
Anonymous
Except she sucks at it
She turns into a bland, boring capeshit villain after her reveal and doesn't have time to be effective
She regains a personality AFTER being defeated
11 months ago
Anonymous
Except her becoming pure evil literally ruins her character.
I wonder if Ruby was supposed to have aunts that died in the war, considering the only kraken that were able to transform were part of the royal family. It'd also explain why grandma was so racist, she lost her daughters.
Probably extended family at best
Considering Brill implies Krakens can live for centuries, I'm surprised Grandmamah didn't just make more kids to replace Agatha or have them to begin with
No because the movie barely tries to pretend Clayton is a good guy
He's condescending, trigger happy, and a dick to Tarzan from start to end
He goes from jerk to outright villain and it's not at all surprising
Chelsea at least seemingly genuinely befriends Ruby
You do realize Zurg-Buzz is basically a different person at that point right? He lived decades more than the one we're following and didn't go through the events of the movie.
I’d say Hans and Screenslaver.
Hans added zero to the movie. If anything, the twist made everything way too easy for the story instead of an interesting one about the hero choosing who she loves.
Screenslaver was bad because she’s following up Syndrome, and because her brother would’ve been a MUCH better choice for the villain. Her motivation was weak, but imagine if the brother made Screenslaver in an attempt to make supers seem necessary so the bill gets passed. Then the heroes would have to stop him despite it being good for them.
Her name was such a dead giveaway as a twist villain that it has still single-handedly kept me from ever wanting to bother seeing the film.
Evelyn Deavor
Evel yndeavor
It fits with the superhero theme of the movie. Bob Parr/ Above Par and going on from there. The movie itself is disappointing compared to the original though.
If you look at the idiot superhero team you'll notice one of the gaygier ones resembles a younger Winston Deavor. He was supposed to be Winston's younger brother and the twist villain, and Evelyn's design was the corresponding hero on that team. Someone in development swapped them, probably thinking a guy as Screenslaver was too creepy.
>Her motivation was weak, but imagine if the brother made Screenslaver in an attempt to make supers seem necessary so the bill gets passed. Then the heroes would have to stop him despite it being good for them.
That's actually good, frick you I want to live in the universe where that was the film's twist.
Turbo worked because he started as an antagonist plain and simple
You can say the same about Zurg but at least Turbo's plot twist was actually built up and didn't feel like a total asspull
But regarding twist villains who don't start off as antagonistic, good examples would be De La Cruz, Stinky Pete, Waternoose, and Muntz
more people should look at Stinky Pete for a twist villain. The thing is that he never breaks his motives. His post-twist character is the same as his pre-twist, it's just that he's desperate now.
Yeah that's the thing
It's something that was compared with to Chelsea since both only turn evil less than 20 minutes in their respective films and were built up as genuinely good people prior
Chelsea's personality and backstory was a lie, her personality just changes drastically and we're supposed to just accept that
Pete's wasn't, it was blatantly manipulative but he was also genuinely believing he was doing the right thing for Woody, Bullseye, and Jessie. His soft-spoken nature was him legit trying to be reasonable and when that failed, his desperation made him angry. It added layers to his character instead of taking them away
Rourke is an awesome twist villain
He's not a late minute reveal and his personality doesn't pull a complete 180, you can still recognize aspects of himself before the twist just reframed in a way that makes him an effective villain
Thing with him and Helga is that had people not been in Atlantis their escapades would’ve been just standard pilfering Indiana Jones style. Their bad sides only really came about when people got in the way of what they wanted. If their was no ancient civilization, there’d be no conflict, just standard artifact retrieval. It’s less a twist villain masquerading as a normal guy but rather the obstacles towards their initial goal eventually became immoral to cross.
I'm not a huge fan of Rourke but at the very least.
- His motivation makes sense and isn't a sudden shift in character. His plan doesn't really change, he just drops any pretenses of giving a shit about the Atlanteans.
- He's not the only one to betray Milo. Milo is actually the only one in the expedition group NOT to follow Rourke, initially.
- He gets a few fun scenes post-twist.
I would say he's mediocre, while OP's villains are trash.
>Schaffrilkas shits on this guy for acting callously about getting someone killed >Acts callously about getting his brother and friend killed
It's like poetry, it rhymes.
I'd say he works as a twist villain. But he never gets talked as much as Syndrome when it comes to good villains. Thinking about it more, Wreck-it Ralph doesn't get talked about as much as i thought.
I don't know all of them, but Hans being a villain was really stupid. He wasn't acting for the characters, he was acting for the audience, in a movie that doesn't break the 4th wall.
This isn't a "twist," this is on the same level as a movie with a mystery ending with "um actually the murderer is none of the suspects but this new character we hadn't seen before, ha, I bet you didn't know it was him :)."
hans was always meant to be a villain, but the way he is written is, as you say, not consistent with who he is. >gets left in charge by coincidence >selflessly hands out blankets and speaks nothing ill of the princesses >saves helpless elsas life for some reason >after she's in chains, is nice to helpless elsa again for some reason >WHOOPS AM VILLAIN
it's inconsistent. if he was this hammy traditional disney villain who couldn't wait to confess, you'd have seen cracks of that showing earlier through the nice boy facade. and if he was a cunning ice cold sociopath, he would have just smothered anna with a pillow instead of telling her everything and locking her in a room that had like 6 windows.
>hans was always meant to be a villain
Considering how fricked this movie's development was I wouldn't be surprised there were several concept art done for each slightest revision to the script
If Elsa was meant to be evil for so long, what the frick was Hans gonna do?
Hell, did he even exist at the start?
essentially there were 3 versions. in the one that was almost what we got, elsa is definitely a villain. she is cast as evil by society because of some prophecy about a ruler with a heart of ice and she plays into it. anna wants some handsome moron prince and finds hans, hans is a villain like in the final while elsa gets redemption arc. we know this because the prophecy mentions a 'sword sacrifice' which happens in the final movie.
>Hans was the first major frick-up
Watch The Da Vinci Code all the way through if you REALLY want to be disappointed by Disney, the reveal scene also takes place in an empty castle room in front of a roaring fireplace and the book was a NYT bestseller for YEARS before Frozen
>top left
Actually okay, I don't know why he gets so much shit >top middle
Pisses me off >top right
Literally who >bottom left
Literally who >bottom middle
Literally who >bottom right
Kino but was made conveniently stupid so she couldn't win
>I don't know why he gets so much shit
Because it’s the only twist villain that feels like an actual asspull. Like they finished the initial script with Elsa as the villain and decided they wanted her to be redeemed so they just grabbed Hans and made him suddenly murderous and evil.
Nothing prior to him just deciding to like Anna die gives you any indication he might be evil.
twist villains can work as a surprise at the end, but they work 1000% better when the audience knows they're a villain and the characters don't.
like Invincible. every fricking scene you're clenching your cheeks wondering if the SOB is gonna merc whoever he's talking to. No one feels safe.
That's good shit.
I don't remember who said it but I always remember this quote about building tension in a movie, where if you have two characters sitting at a table talking about normal shit and suddenly the table explodes, that is way worse at building tension than if you get a scene that shows someone else place a bomb underneath the table before the characters sit down. I probably just butchered that but it's the same sort of idea.
> Like they finished the initial script with Elsa as the villain and decided they wanted her to be redeemed so they just grabbed Hans and made him suddenly murderous and evil.
They had a complete storyboard, the fricking composers wrote "Let it Go" and then the moron screenwriters let their inner theater kids take over their thinking, instead of telling the composers to burn the song and start over. It's lyrically not that good either, it has great music and Idina Menzel's pipes to oversell it.
>not foreshadowed enough before the twist >constant personality changes to suit the current moment >stop protesting about Anna endangering herself the moment she gives him power >looks up before nearly 'accidentally' kills Elsa >everyone screams at Anna that instantly marrying a total stranger is a bad idea
What was he supposed to do, twirl a mustache? He was supposed to teach kids not to trust people just because they are initially charming.
And all that gets invalidated because of the stupid-ass scene at
I don't know all of them, but Hans being a villain was really stupid. He wasn't acting for the characters, he was acting for the audience, in a movie that doesn't break the 4th wall.
This isn't a "twist," this is on the same level as a movie with a mystery ending with "um actually the murderer is none of the suspects but this new character we hadn't seen before, ha, I bet you didn't know it was him :)."
It's like the writers were afraid people would notice the hints and just went full moron mode for shock value
I've heard somewhere that her style of story writing doesn't do outlining, as in, she writes as it goes instead of thinking of the beginning middle and end, probably explains why the story in these two movies is so shit, for instance, she wrote in Frozen 2 that Elsa was hearing that voice, but she only came up who that voice belonged to much later in the writing, it's baffling honestly.
I've heard somewhere that her style of story writing doesn't do outlining, as in, she writes as it goes instead of thinking of the beginning middle and end, probably explains why the story in these two movies is so shit, for instance, she wrote in Frozen 2 that Elsa was hearing that voice, but she only came up who that voice belonged to much later in the writing, it's baffling honestly.
dont you homos have some sibling incest to whack off to?
I don't know all of them, but Hans being a villain was really stupid. He wasn't acting for the characters, he was acting for the audience, in a movie that doesn't break the 4th wall.
This isn't a "twist," this is on the same level as a movie with a mystery ending with "um actually the murderer is none of the suspects but this new character we hadn't seen before, ha, I bet you didn't know it was him :)."
Yeah, if you watch that movie knowing full well they janked the script midway through because they got so obsessed with Elsa they didn't want her to be a villain it makes a lot more sense.
>I don't know all of them, but Hans being a villain was really stupid. He wasn't acting for the characters, he was acting for the audience, in a movie that doesn't break the 4th wall.
Sean Penn does the same thing in The Game, having a fake panic attack over something he himself set up that no one else is near to witness, completely for our benefit. Unforgivable.
For a vidya example, the killer from Heavy Rain counts as well, where he's apparently aware there's a player watching him and all of his thoughts at all times and constantly lies to himself for literally no reason during his inner monologues that take place entirely inside his own head. In a game that otherwise has zero supernatural elements(the original plan was to have some but they were canned).
>Hans
Saw the twist coming from miles away >Kabuki man or whatever the frick he was called
Good villain, not a good "twist" villain. >Chelsea
Haven't watched yet >Emperor Buzz
Dumb >Screenslaver
Okay villain, forgot how her twist worked, probably means it was forgettable. >Bellwether
The mayor was obviously not going to be the villain but it still caught me off guard because I forgot she even existed. Like did she do anything significant before the reveal?
On the topic of Bellwether, I think the fact people were tired of the twist villain aspect after Hans, everyone called her out on being the villain when her poster showed up.
>Okay villain, forgot how her twist worked, probably means it was forgettable.
It WAS forgettable.
She was butthurt that her father relied on superheroes to protect him and died because of it. Basically it's her brother's motivation but in reverse.
Also I assume all the stuff Screenslaver said is stuff she believes as well, like people being helpless consumers who prefer to live vicariously through others rather than do things themselves.
I think in a way it was Brad Bird's attempt to counteract the criticism of the first movie being Ayn Rand-esque, by having a villain who is a cynical individualist. It could have worked but it was executed in a lame way.
To this day I still believe in the theory that the Trolls bewitched Hans into being evil so Kristoff could be with Anna, the twist makes so little sense and comes out of nowhere, it's the only thing that could make sense out of that shit. >Trolls were evil in the original story >Have memory-altering magic >In their song they have a line about getting rid of the fiance >Also potentially kidnapped Kristoff and Sven >Their cryptic nonsense is what frightens Elsa so much that she loses confidence in her powers when she was a kid, which is the catalyst of her parents doing all that shit of isolating both her and Anna
It would have been a good retcon for why Hans was so twisted, instead of a more reasonable response of >kiss doesn't work >WHY ISN'T KISS NOT WORKING >OH FRICK TRUE LOVE'S NOT REAL >OH FRICK OH JEEZ WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE >YOU'RE GONNA DIE >UNLESS I KILL ELSA AND STOP THIS RIGHT NOW
And then it's a race against time to stop Hans from making everything worse, he still goes home because you know, pulled a knife on the queen, but it's a more reasonable resolution. Frozen didn't need a villain, it just needed to follow through on things. Hans didn't need to be evil, he just needed to finally snap after trying to balance everything and just failing nonetheless.
So you admit that Chelsea is just wearing whiteface.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>So you admit that Chelsea is just wearing whiteface.
Her default form is white
When she's defeated she turns back into her natural form which is white
Narrative intent says yes. Imagine if the trailers to Toy Story 2 said Stinky Pete was the bad guy. Doesn't make it less of a twist in the actual film.
Take away the trailers and she's a twist villain
The movie treats her as a twist villain
She's only a proper for the remaining 15 minutes of the movie and before that point she's nothing but nice and supportive albeit vain
Late ads of Up spoiled Muntz being the villain and Toy Story 3's merch spoiled Lotso being evil but that doesn't diminish them being framed in the movie as twist villains
I'll give Muntz this: he was only nice for a single scene before turning on Carl and Russell, and even then, he'd already been driven mad with paranoia between the opening scene and the time he shows up. So of course he'd be the villain.
The thing about Chelsea that makes her twist especially moronic isn't just that she becomes an antagonist, it's that they actually created a compelling backstory for her that made her an interesting foil only to throw it all away by revealing she was an evil mermaid queen the whole time and is at minimum as old as Ruby's mom. Any potential narrative weight that Ruby and Chelsea's fight could have had is just gone
I'm sort of inclined to agree but I know a guy who really loves that film because he relates to Hiro's loss of his brother so I wouldn't want to even think about ruining that for him
I can respect that and I really think Tadashi serves the story overall better as a dead brother but if they wanted a twist villain Callaghan has no impact or weight. Tadashi works better as a twist villain.
It makes no sense for him to be the villain considering the whole point of the explosion was to steal the microbot technology. What would his motivation even be?
1. Callaghan (had a cool fight scene at least)
2. Hans (oldest of these so it was sort of novel)
3. Evelyn
4. Bellweather (evil for like 4 total minutes)
I haven't seen Lightyear/Ruby Gillman and I never will
the original idea peresented by the fake Screenslaver is so much better than the real thing
the twist should have been that the Deavor siblings were working with him in revenge of Supers not being there to save their father.
He has a cool design and cool fights but his motivation, change of personality, etc comes out of nowhere
His dismissal over Tadashi's death and him trying to kill teenagers makes him hard to sympathize with
I will always vote for the Big Hero 6 guy, simply because that "twist" was the dumbest thing I have ever seen. Dumb twist, dumb reveal, dumb motivation.
They're all shit.
Hans is just lame and unnecessary. There was enough conflict between Anna and Elsa to sustain the movie.
I had to look up Robert Callaghan's name because he's THAT forgettable. Only remember him for the "THAT WAS HIS MISTAKE" meme. Something something his son died? Daughter? etc.
Haven't seen whatever the third one is.
Future Lightyear sucks because all twist villain sucks. He destroyed a pre-established character (Zerg). It's not the kind of plot point that would be in a late 80s/early 90s movie (the one that Andy supposedly watched and loved). It's a really hamhanded way to try to reinforce the themes/Buzz's character arc. etc
Evelyn is fresh on my mind because I just rewatched Incredibles 2. Aside from all the usual issues of a third-act twist villain, her design is just... lame. Syndrome was a dork but he LOOKED like a supervillain. Evelyn looks like a background character, even post-twist. There's just nothing fun or exciting about her.
Bellwether is just generic and dumb. It's hard to even describe her character traits because all these last-minute tweest villains feel the same.
A good twist retroactively makes the story better. You rewatch the movie and have a deeper understanding of what was really going on. "Oh, OH! That's why it was like that!" None of these twist villains have that. They all make the story -worse-.
I think part of the reason they suck is because they're all revealed in the third act. Syndrome is technically a twist villain but he's revealed at the start of the second act (less than an hour in), and he gets a lot of time to shine. The difference between good writing and hack writing.
Fake Screenslaver should have been the real villain, with the twist being the Deavor siblings were working with/financing him because of their common goals
at least we would have a cool and threatening villain
>Syndrome was a dork but he LOOKED like a supervillain.
She wasn't trying to be a supervillain after the Screenslaver decoy was taken down though
She loathes that stuff
You could cut Hans out of Frozen entirely and it wouldn't change anything. He simply isn't the villain of the actual story, he's just some irrelevant butthole doing his own thing.
>I think part of the reason they suck is because they're all revealed in the third act. Syndrome is technically a twist villain but he's revealed at the start of the second act (less than an hour in), and he gets a lot of time to shine. The difference between good writing and hack writing.
Ok, so not to deviate off course but in a DnD campaign I'm running I have been alluding that the mage of the BBEG has been plotting behind his back. The twist is he is in talks with a Succubus queen that has been imprisoned in a mirror and when the players defeat the current BBEG, the mage is going to make his play and set her free.
Hans cause he technically started it.
Boomer looking for his daughter for being too basic.
Chelsea for not even trying
Buzz for no setup
Evelyn cause no good reason
Bellweather despite being cute... for being too forgettable to normies
>be respected racer >some fricking snail develops flash superpower >the snail is sentient enough to like nascar and is somehow a fan of yours >supposed to take this snail seriously and actually treat him as an equal compared to the other racers
Why was he the antagonist
Anon he tried to murder the obviously sapient creature to win. Worst part is that he would've been fine just as an antagonist just being an egotistical rival instead of outright c**t. Also you take him seriously when the frickin snail is going faster than 90% of vehicles.
I think the most offensive out of all of these is the one from lightyear seeing how fricking lazy it is they couldnt come up with a design for emperor zerg other than make him be older buzz. That entire movie should be retconned. Chelsea doesn't even count as a twist villian as anyone who has seen a trailer for this film know shes evil already.
>Chelsea doesn't even count as a twist villian as anyone who has seen a trailer for this film know shes evil already.
She's a twist villain, marketing just spoiled the twist
Everything about her role in the story makes her a twist villain and no amount of awful marketing will negate that
fair enough. She was a meh twist villian as far as i saw. Kinda a joke of a threat to be honest if all it took were three krakens to destroy the trident.
Hans made the least sense. With him it seemed they made him a twist villain just for the sake of having one despite everything he did prior being reasonable and/or in the right.
Read the thread
The film literally treats her like a twist villain narratively
She's a villain when there's 15 minutes left of the film and it's written to be a surprise
An awful trailer spoiling a twist doesn't negate it being intended as a twist to begin with
Anon, if Toy Story 2's trailer spoiled Stinky Pete being the twist villain does he stop being the twist villain?
Is Metro Man being shown to be alive in commercials for Megamind make the reveal no longer a twist?
Does everyone on the planet knowing about Darth Vader's identity erase the intent that said identity was a twist?
Intent matters most, take away the trailer and Chelsea is blatantly a twist villain the people behind the film intended to be
Except in the film itself there's barely any hints Chelsea is actually evil until the big reveal when the movie has around 15 minutes left where her character and backstory undergoes a 180
This isn't like Columbo, the audience was intended to be surprised when Chelsea turns evil on a first view
She's as much as a twist villain as Hans from a writing standpoint
11 months ago
Anonymous
>This isn't like Columbo, the audience was intended to be surprised when Chelsea turns evil on a first view
yeah, no
11 months ago
Anonymous
See
This one is the biggest offender, since it happens during a conversation with Ruby and it seems like she has sympathy for her in this scene. But nah, all just a ploy to get the trident and doesn’t has a change of heart after being defeated.
I say Callahan. Might be because I have a soft spot for Ruby (as a movie and character), Incredibles 2 lady had some form of motivation (bad as it was) and the other three I didn't watch.
[...]
hans was always meant to be a villain, but the way he is written is, as you say, not consistent with who he is. >gets left in charge by coincidence >selflessly hands out blankets and speaks nothing ill of the princesses >saves helpless elsas life for some reason >after she's in chains, is nice to helpless elsa again for some reason >WHOOPS AM VILLAIN
it's inconsistent. if he was this hammy traditional disney villain who couldn't wait to confess, you'd have seen cracks of that showing earlier through the nice boy facade. and if he was a cunning ice cold sociopath, he would have just smothered anna with a pillow instead of telling her everything and locking her in a room that had like 6 windows.
>hans was always meant to be a villain
Considering how fricked this movie's development was I wouldn't be surprised there were several concept art done for each slightest revision to the script
If Elsa was meant to be evil for so long, what the frick was Hans gonna do?
Hell, did he even exist at the start?
I don't know all of them, but Hans being a villain was really stupid. He wasn't acting for the characters, he was acting for the audience, in a movie that doesn't break the 4th wall.
This isn't a "twist," this is on the same level as a movie with a mystery ending with "um actually the murderer is none of the suspects but this new character we hadn't seen before, ha, I bet you didn't know it was him :)."
>Frozen went through many different iterations, but here are some common elements from some of the early drafts: Frozen was to open with a prophecy that "a ruler with a frozen heart will bring destruction to the kingdom of Arendelle." We're then introduced to Anna, our pure-hearted heroine, and Elsa, an unrelated evil Snow Queen. We learn Elsa is a scorned woman; she was stood up at the altar on her wedding day and froze her own heart so she would never love again. Both Elsa and the audience assume she's the villain from the prophecy. Fast-forward to the final act: Elsa creates an army of snow monsters to attack our heroes while Kristoff has "a Han Solo moment" and comes to help Anna. To halt Elsa's attacking army, the two-faced Prince Hans triggers a massive avalanche—not caring that the avalanche also puts Anna, Elsa, and all of Arendelle in jeopardy. Anna realizes Elsa is their only hope, so she convinces her to use her powers to save the kingdom. The twist is that the prophecy from the beginning is actually not about Elsa, but about Hans—he's the one with a metaphorical frozen heart because he's an unfeeling sociopath. Elsa's heart is then unfrozen allowing her to love again.
essentially there were 3 versions. in the one that was almost what we got, elsa is definitely a villain. she is cast as evil by society because of some prophecy about a ruler with a heart of ice and she plays into it. anna wants some handsome moron prince and finds hans, hans is a villain like in the final while elsa gets redemption arc. we know this because the prophecy mentions a 'sword sacrifice' which happens in the final movie.
So basically....Hans being a villain was meant to subvert Elsa being a villain when she was still seen as the initial main villain and he was a more active participant leading to him possibly being hinted more as a villain but when Elsa being evil was scrapped completely they still thought Hans as a twist villain anyways but fricked it up
>the guy from frozen
actual twist villain >literally who >mermaid
there's no twist, it's painfully obvious that she's evil and the movie is shittier for it. >Lightyear
not a twist villain, it's a cautionary tale. >I never watched Incredibles 2
no comment >Bellwether
another real twist villain.
>painfully obvious that she's evil
She never acts malicious or aggressive toward Ruby before the reveal
Quite the opposite, she outright saves her life and doesn't even get too offended when Ruby rejects her offer of friendship at first
I think everyone saw The Indredibles 2's villain coming the moment she walked in. What's most frustrating is how shitty her background was and how underwhelming she felt compared to Syndrome.
Hans is kinda based tbh, he'd be a genuinely good king based on his action and tried to rid the country of its incompetent monarchs that did jack shit for the people when they needed them the most
Buzz is nuts cause they cut the little green men entirely, probably the second most iconic Buzz associated characters, then revealed his Arch nemesis (Probably the third most recogniy Buzz character associated character) was just him on a bad day. Leaving just Buzz.
I just never really understood screenslavers reason for being a villain >heroes are already outlawed >helps make them not outlawed >lol just kidding I want to make them outlawed.
It's dumb she could have just continued being a billionaire and been better off
Hans and Callaghan are bigger asspulls
Evelyn's plan made less sense
Bellwether has the least amount of screentime as a villain
Buzz is flat out the most idiotic
But Chelsea in my opinion is easily the one with the most wasted narrative potential as a character on her own before the twist and it was so easily fixable to keep her both as the same character we've known and keep an action based climax if they really needed one
Could've had Grandmamah just say the trident makes mermaids go crazy instead of the "Nerissa didn't have a daughter" line
Could've had her be conflicted over wanting to avenge her mother and her love for Ruby as a friend
100% Lightyear.
Hans made no sense, sure, but once the switch was flipped he was fun. The "If only somebody loved you" was a great line, even if the twist itself fell flat.
"That was his mistake" guy who no-one remembers at all has meme value and at the very very least has a cool design/power set when he's masked up. The twist is shit of course, but other than that the value he brings is enough.
Evil Endeavor has enough presence that she's alright, again even if the twist is absolute dogshit. Her plan's fricking moronic though. SHe's inoffensive and I appreciate the lesbian porn shes made.
Mermaid again is a terrible twist villain, but its so fricking vague and awful there's actually tons of ways to fix it if somehow the series continues in either a show format or another film. Unlikely, but easily fixable. I appreciate the lesbian porn shes in, too.
Bellweather is fine enough as a twist villain, as she's a present enough character in the film even if the twist, once again, falls flat and limp. The sheep in general are a fun twist though, so she's excused. I also appreciate the furry porn she's in.
Zerg being old Buzz though? That's the fricking worst. I hate it. It ruins a previously fun character for a stupid fricking twist. It bends what we know of a character for a twist nobody wanted or asked for and just like everyone else the twist fricking sucks. I hate it and I hope everyone that worked on that film dies. The self-cest porn isnt even worth it. a genuine 0/10 fricking twist. "Guess Ill let go then" holy frick what an awful goddamn movie. At least the other movies were fun until the twist, Lightyear was just awful through and through.
I really like the Hans from the first and second acts, up there with my favorite Disney princes and love interests, Hans from the third act not so much, I don't mind him being a villain but his plan was stupid and the twist nonsensical.
Why is this such a bad trope? I feel like this only works in murder mysteries because of the very nature of finding out whodunit. But otherwise it always manages to piss me off.
its the execution of the trope, not the trope itself. Lazy writers use it when they need some sort of etra conflict, and what easier way is there than "X was a villain the whole time?!?!!?!?!?!?". Proper twist villains need either setup or consistent execution. If an episode of the 1960's Scooby has more set up of its twist villain than your modern movie then thats just lazy writing.
It isn't, Disney/Pixar just fricking ruined it because of their sheer incompetence and laziness even though they did great twist villains in the past
That and doing this for several movies in a row expecting people to fall for it
Jafar's problem wasn't the Sultan being an idiot, because he trusted him completely and could be easily hypnotized besides. His problem was that he had to pretend to be subordinate to the Sultan. That's Jafar's thing, he absolutely needs everyone to know he's number one. That's why he used his last wish to become a genie himself, Aladdin rubbed it in that even after having Genie make him Sorcerer Supreme Jafar was still only the second most powerful person in the room.
>so they made Hans the baddie.
Hans was meant to be the twist villain even when Elsa was still evil
See
[...]
[...]
[...] >Frozen went through many different iterations, but here are some common elements from some of the early drafts: Frozen was to open with a prophecy that "a ruler with a frozen heart will bring destruction to the kingdom of Arendelle." We're then introduced to Anna, our pure-hearted heroine, and Elsa, an unrelated evil Snow Queen. We learn Elsa is a scorned woman; she was stood up at the altar on her wedding day and froze her own heart so she would never love again. Both Elsa and the audience assume she's the villain from the prophecy. Fast-forward to the final act: Elsa creates an army of snow monsters to attack our heroes while Kristoff has "a Han Solo moment" and comes to help Anna. To halt Elsa's attacking army, the two-faced Prince Hans triggers a massive avalanche—not caring that the avalanche also puts Anna, Elsa, and all of Arendelle in jeopardy. Anna realizes Elsa is their only hope, so she convinces her to use her powers to save the kingdom. The twist is that the prophecy from the beginning is actually not about Elsa, but about Hans—he's the one with a metaphorical frozen heart because he's an unfeeling sociopath. Elsa's heart is then unfrozen allowing her to love again.
Haven't watched Incredibles 2 nor Lightyear so I can't comment on them.
Hans' twist came out of literally nowhere and his motivations are incredibly stupid, but hey, he's one of the first so I guess he gets points for "originality".
Callahan's twist was also fricking dumb (oh yeah let's trashtalk your dead protege even though you've never been shown hating him beforehand), but at least he had presence as a villain after the reveal and there was a clear attempt at making him an image of what Hiro could've become if he let his grief consume him.
Bellwether's plan was interesting but that's about it in terms of what she had going for. She has the issue Hans had where we never saw any hints to her true nature and her time as a villain was in the literal last moments of their movies. Worst one IMO.
It's hard to talk about Chelsea as a twist villain because I was there for the entirety of the movie's marketing season and more than anything else in the film her whole deal was completely fricking spoiled. I mean, I guess she counts, but I'll give her points for being funny both before and after the twist reveal.
Chelsea's funny after the reveal when she's no longer a threat and has to don a teenage girl persona again
When she's an active villain her charisma plummets
Lightyear might be the shittiest because he already had an established character of being a Darth Vader clone.
The only reason they changed it so it wouldn't be predictable.
Star Command used that as a joke, so it wasn't completely necessary.
Still, better than it being Buzz from the future, that was moronic.
Pixar:
No regrets
The best twist villain in this whole thread.
>masculinity is...... le toxic!
Turn in your balls, Anon.
I'll take the bait, sure. Thats not why hes the best, Anon. Rex is the best because he's a force of sheer personality. He steals every scene he's in. He's even got a perfectly understandable backstory. If you were forced to sit and watch every single one of your friends forget about you and party, never once paying you one thought it's understandable to snap a bit. His powerset is also a good development of the whole system that the first movie established, with Master Builders. Emmet being the one to figure out destruction is also a great way to expand on how he's really the best Master Builder there is, doing things nobody even thought of before.
One could dumb down the whole conflict between Rex and the Sistar System into Boy v Girl, but its not that. Rex says himself that its the "expression of the death of imagination in the subconscious of an adolescent." It's about a kid realizing that his imagination isnt the only one that matters, that he was being just like his dad was in the first film and only letting his way of playing matter when what he should be doing to trying to build a collaborative experience to have genuine family time with one another. It's about him growing older and opening up more with his sister than locking everything away.
It's a fun movie, Anon, and you should really revisit it without ragebait goggles on.
forgot to add, he's even vindicated in the end really. He's got no regrets (except one) even as he vanishes from existence. He did everything right. Through his actions Emmet was able to keep his friends and even grow as a person. His chadly masculinity is part of what makes him correct in his actions.
The scene with him was so funny
>wait, if we’re not that bad guys, and you’re actually a good guy. Who’s the antagonist?
>*cuts to future emmet about to nuke all of playmobile/duplo land
>Star Command used that as a joke, so it wasn't completely necessary.
It was established in Toy Story 2.
I mean they reference it in lightyear too
Buzz literally says "dad?" on meeting zurg
>Darth Vader clone
That was always the joke with him, though
But at least with a Vader clone you can build on top of that to make him a more interesting character, like in Star Command
You could potentially do the same with evil old Buzz, but they just made him the most basic version of the "you from the future" trope imaginable
>"See, Buzz? This is what you'll become if you don't learn to let go!"
>"Okay, I guess I'll learn to let go, IDK lol"
>Movie over
God, what shit movie Lightyear was
I don't think the mermaid counts as a twist villain seeing how the clears made it clear she's the villain.
She's a twist villain who becomes evil literally at the last 15 minutes of the film
The piss poor marketing just spoiled it
but the grandma kraken said that all mermaids are evil, how's that a twist?
Because prior to her reveal that yes she is evil, the film seemingly tries to subvert that by having her form a seemingly genuine bond with Ruby with aspirations to try and bring peace to their races
Remember this moment from Frozen?
How people say it makes no sense on a rewatch?
Chelsea has fricking three of those
You have no idea what's running through his mind.
He's not around anyone, nobody can see him from down there so there's no reason he'd be faking that endearing and loving smile. This scene is totally written as Hans being in love with Anna, and thus it makes no sense in retrospect.
People irl don't make evil faces out in the open.
They also don't make faces that signal falling in love for no good reason when nobody is looking
People irl also don't do evil monologues before (failing) killing someone.
Also he did make an evil face out in the open, when he was just about to strike Elsa.
Hans should've won
Lol no, instead of guaranteeing Anna's death by killing her right then and there while she was fragile, he left her the possibility of living
>But there was no way he would have known that a magical snowman was going to come and save her!
He is planning a commit a regicide and a coup, anything less than a 100% chance of victory is not enough
How Hans could have won:
>Do literally nothing
>Elsa basically abdicated from the throne as she was planning on staying on that mountain exiled anyway, making Anna queen
>If Anna lives, great! You become king-consort, if she dies, also great! You become the king
>And not even once need to drop the facade
Or
>Take a pillow and smother Anna while she is almost dying from the frozen heart
>Now that Anna is 100% dead do what he already did by declaring Elsa to be executed
>Kill Elsa since Anna isn't there to stop you
>Become king
But no, he is a moron instead
Only if Elsa lives, enslaved, and they have a very toxic relationship
Go full Koeran Romance-Fantasy webcomic timetravel fix the past
>Hans wakes up as a child prince in his home kingdom with memories of long after the events of both movies
>his first task is going to Arendelle on a ship as a stowaway
>learned at some point some evil person in a mythical 3rd movie (thay showcased how shit Anna was as Queen) ate the fire salamander from 2 and that's Hans' goal, to get the fire powers to fight against Elsa
>retcon most of the second movie into something not moronic and the original of Elsa's powers
>Hans ends up breaking into the castle and befriending little Anna and later young Elsa on accident
>accidently stumbles his way into a good ending when his intention was to burn the place down
>finally make the trolls the real villians those frickers were ment to be
Also
>kid Hans is missing for months during his trip and adventures with the princesses
>his family didn't even notice he was gone (his brothers were already ignoring his existence and thought he was hiding)
>Hans' introduction to Anna sounds like he's a street rat that is pretending to be a prince and taking advantage of naive Anna
>Elsa at first thinks Anna is trying to introduce her to an imaginary freind behind the door
>Elsa's impression of Hans is a street rat that conned her naive sister and can't get the guards on him becasue the castle staff is stretched thin
Disney would never, but I'd love to see it
he's not out in the open? for all intents and purposes he's by himself here so there's nobody to act for
The audience in the theatre. Frozen is a musical.
You do understand that 99% of musicals don't have it so that the songs are literally happening in the world of the movie? It's usually just a representation of how these characters are feeling, there isn't a ghost band playing for these characters to literally sing with. The exceptions are movies like The Muppets which are incredibly self-referential anyway
Frozen II outright has references to song being sung as songs.
Hans' plan wasn't to murder the royal family.
Hans' plan was to marry one of the royal family and gain power that way.
Anna being clumsy and adorable just worked into that plan. She was always Plan B anyway. If he had to hook up with her anyway, then there's nothing wrong with enjoying the hookup. The fact that one of his potential wife-candidates was cute and into him as well was a bonus.
He didn't get into the plot of killing Elsa until later. Killing Anna was kind of moronic, although it's doubtful that she would've become his wife after he'd murdered Elsa so kind of makes sense. Very, very vaguely kind-of.
Repostan from someone else
Pre-twist:
>Was polite to Anna before even knowing she was a princess and has genuinely nice chemistry with her, plus his backstory sort of mirrors hers
>Casually drops that he's been emotionally abused by his siblings, not even realizing how messed up it sounds, implying that it's a normal occurrence in his household while shrouding him in the mystery of a dark past (which was left unexplored)
>His proposal doesn't make him look manipulative because it's normal for royalty in that time period to marry total strangers and he and Anna actually like each other, what it makes him look like is naive and desperate to escape a bad home situation
>Took care of the kingdom during a time of crisis even though he's a foreigner and it's literally not his responsibility
>Is assertive and decisive when necessary without coming across as a jerk, like when he puts the Duke in his place, and doesn't take the opportunity to lord over people with his given authority
>He's a leader who actually places himself on the front line and doesn't allow the chain of command to fall apart in the face of panic, and is courageous and puts his life on the line to recover a stranger and restore her land, literally almost dying in the process
>Is good at psychologically reading people and providing for their needs, like when he talked Elsa down and resolved the confrontation without violence
>A potentially tragic origin while striking a decent balance between being virtuous and having a personality without defaulting to being a cynical prick who needs to be fixed by the creator's self-insert princess
Hans is surprisingly nuanced before the awful shock-value scene and unironically came so close to being one of the most dimensional Disney prince characters, up there with the Beast, so of course the screenwriters had to go and totally screw that up. He had so much going for him and they utterly wasted his potential. But others are free to disagree.
I don't think he's that deep but he could have been explored more in a sequel.
It's funny how they had Hans turn evil so Anna would get with Kristoff, and then Kristoff has nothing to do in the second movie.
True, Kristoff had more to do in the Frozen Fever short
Kristoff isn't even mentioned in either of Olaf's summaries of their feature adventures.
because hans being a villain was something that writers bring from nothing, elsa was supposed to be the villain
This one is the biggest offender, since it happens during a conversation with Ruby and it seems like she has sympathy for her in this scene. But nah, all just a ploy to get the trident and doesn’t has a change of heart after being defeated.
>doesn’t has a change of heart after being defeated.
this sounds good, we need more pure evil villains and less tragic sympathetic figures who get le redemption
Except she sucks at it
She turns into a bland, boring capeshit villain after her reveal and doesn't have time to be effective
She regains a personality AFTER being defeated
Except her becoming pure evil literally ruins her character.
Think of it like if in HTTYD it turns out Toothless was evil all along and Hiccup's dad was right
I wonder if Ruby was supposed to have aunts that died in the war, considering the only kraken that were able to transform were part of the royal family. It'd also explain why grandma was so racist, she lost her daughters.
Probably extended family at best
Considering Brill implies Krakens can live for centuries, I'm surprised Grandmamah didn't just make more kids to replace Agatha or have them to begin with
You wouldn't expect a movie in Current Year to say "racism is good actually, around finbacks never relax".
I think she was a good villain, mainly because even if she wasn't revealed to be the Narissa, she'd still be a douchebag meangirl.
>she'd still be a douchebag meangirl.
Except she wasn't even that when she pretended to be human
The fricking trailer spell it to you.
OP: Holy shit I didn't saw that comming!
>OP: Holy shit I didn't saw that comming!
A twist you already know is coming is still a twist if it was meant to be a twist in the script's narrative
Would you consider Clayton from Tarzan a twist villain?
No because the movie barely tries to pretend Clayton is a good guy
He's condescending, trigger happy, and a dick to Tarzan from start to end
He goes from jerk to outright villain and it's not at all surprising
Chelsea at least seemingly genuinely befriends Ruby
As much as the Mayor from Rango
Zurg being future Buzz is a plot twist, but no a twist villain
It's literally an established character we thought was good turning out to be the main bad guy.
It's very much a twist villain.
But he was only "good" for like, one scene. He's bad 95% of the movie.
Buzz is good through the whole movie, then he turns out to be the villain.
Sounds like a twist villain to me.
You do realize Zurg-Buzz is basically a different person at that point right? He lived decades more than the one we're following and didn't go through the events of the movie.
I’d say Hans and Screenslaver.
Hans added zero to the movie. If anything, the twist made everything way too easy for the story instead of an interesting one about the hero choosing who she loves.
Screenslaver was bad because she’s following up Syndrome, and because her brother would’ve been a MUCH better choice for the villain. Her motivation was weak, but imagine if the brother made Screenslaver in an attempt to make supers seem necessary so the bill gets passed. Then the heroes would have to stop him despite it being good for them.
Her name was such a dead giveaway as a twist villain that it has still single-handedly kept me from ever wanting to bother seeing the film.
Evelyn Deavor
Evel yndeavor
It fits with the superhero theme of the movie. Bob Parr/ Above Par and going on from there. The movie itself is disappointing compared to the original though.
If you look at the idiot superhero team you'll notice one of the gaygier ones resembles a younger Winston Deavor. He was supposed to be Winston's younger brother and the twist villain, and Evelyn's design was the corresponding hero on that team. Someone in development swapped them, probably thinking a guy as Screenslaver was too creepy.
>Her motivation was weak, but imagine if the brother made Screenslaver in an attempt to make supers seem necessary so the bill gets passed. Then the heroes would have to stop him despite it being good for them.
That's actually good, frick you I want to live in the universe where that was the film's twist.
Top left because he wasn't intended as the villain and some of his earlier actions don't make any sense because of it.
The sheep was so embarrassingly bad it feels like a parody
The only good twist villain was Turbo in Wreck-It Ralph
Turbo worked because he started as an antagonist plain and simple
You can say the same about Zurg but at least Turbo's plot twist was actually built up and didn't feel like a total asspull
But regarding twist villains who don't start off as antagonistic, good examples would be De La Cruz, Stinky Pete, Waternoose, and Muntz
more people should look at Stinky Pete for a twist villain. The thing is that he never breaks his motives. His post-twist character is the same as his pre-twist, it's just that he's desperate now.
Yeah that's the thing
It's something that was compared with to Chelsea since both only turn evil less than 20 minutes in their respective films and were built up as genuinely good people prior
Chelsea's personality and backstory was a lie, her personality just changes drastically and we're supposed to just accept that
Pete's wasn't, it was blatantly manipulative but he was also genuinely believing he was doing the right thing for Woody, Bullseye, and Jessie. His soft-spoken nature was him legit trying to be reasonable and when that failed, his desperation made him angry. It added layers to his character instead of taking them away
He also had a respectable amount of screentime and subtle hints
Peak twist villain
What about him?
He just needed even more money.
Rourke is an awesome twist villain
He's not a late minute reveal and his personality doesn't pull a complete 180, you can still recognize aspects of himself before the twist just reframed in a way that makes him an effective villain
Isn't he Russian?
You'd be an idiot to think he wasn't going to turn evil.
American
He isnt russian, he was from Texas.
rent free
Thing with him and Helga is that had people not been in Atlantis their escapades would’ve been just standard pilfering Indiana Jones style. Their bad sides only really came about when people got in the way of what they wanted. If their was no ancient civilization, there’d be no conflict, just standard artifact retrieval. It’s less a twist villain masquerading as a normal guy but rather the obstacles towards their initial goal eventually became immoral to cross.
The difference between Rourke and all the characters in the OP is that Rourke is actually still fun to watch after the reveal
I'm not a huge fan of Rourke but at the very least.
- His motivation makes sense and isn't a sudden shift in character. His plan doesn't really change, he just drops any pretenses of giving a shit about the Atlanteans.
- He's not the only one to betray Milo. Milo is actually the only one in the expedition group NOT to follow Rourke, initially.
- He gets a few fun scenes post-twist.
I would say he's mediocre, while OP's villains are trash.
T H A T W A S H I S M I S T A K E
>Schaffrilkas shits on this guy for acting callously about getting someone killed
>Acts callously about getting his brother and friend killed
It's like poetry, it rhymes.
Was Sydrome the only well received twist villain?
King Candy was good but I’m not exactly sure if he qualifies for twist villain
I'd say he works as a twist villain. But he never gets talked as much as Syndrome when it comes to good villains. Thinking about it more, Wreck-it Ralph doesn't get talked about as much as i thought.
WIR2 poisoned it.
it doesn't have waifus
hans was always meant to be a villain, but the way he is written is, as you say, not consistent with who he is.
>gets left in charge by coincidence
>selflessly hands out blankets and speaks nothing ill of the princesses
>saves helpless elsas life for some reason
>after she's in chains, is nice to helpless elsa again for some reason
>WHOOPS AM VILLAIN
it's inconsistent. if he was this hammy traditional disney villain who couldn't wait to confess, you'd have seen cracks of that showing earlier through the nice boy facade. and if he was a cunning ice cold sociopath, he would have just smothered anna with a pillow instead of telling her everything and locking her in a room that had like 6 windows.
>hans was always meant to be a villain
Considering how fricked this movie's development was I wouldn't be surprised there were several concept art done for each slightest revision to the script
If Elsa was meant to be evil for so long, what the frick was Hans gonna do?
Hell, did he even exist at the start?
essentially there were 3 versions. in the one that was almost what we got, elsa is definitely a villain. she is cast as evil by society because of some prophecy about a ruler with a heart of ice and she plays into it. anna wants some handsome moron prince and finds hans, hans is a villain like in the final while elsa gets redemption arc. we know this because the prophecy mentions a 'sword sacrifice' which happens in the final movie.
https://disney.fandom.com/wiki/Spring_Pageant
https://disney.fandom.com/wiki/We_Know_Better
>doesn't have waifus
Felix literally is banging one and nothing has stopped these sick freaks from wanting to touch the Sugar Rush racers
Is Syndrome really a twist villain? He has a big reveal sure when Mr. Incredible realizes who he is but there’s no real twist involved.
To say Syndrome is a twist villain is like saying Darth Vader is a twist villain
Was Hans well received back then?
Kind of feels like the backlash against him is more of hindsight
People thought his motivation made no sense and the trolls made him evil.
Buzz is objectively the worst. Bellwether gets a pass from me because she's cute.
where’s my boy humpty and the best villain reveal in animation?
Zurg is the dumbest
Chelsea had the most wasted potential
Hans was the first major frick-up
>Hans was the first major frick-up
Watch The Da Vinci Code all the way through if you REALLY want to be disappointed by Disney, the reveal scene also takes place in an empty castle room in front of a roaring fireplace and the book was a NYT bestseller for YEARS before Frozen
>top left
Actually okay, I don't know why he gets so much shit
>top middle
Pisses me off
>top right
Literally who
>bottom left
Literally who
>bottom middle
Literally who
>bottom right
Kino but was made conveniently stupid so she couldn't win
>don't know why he gets so much shit
Comes across as an asspull
>I don't know why he gets so much shit
Because it’s the only twist villain that feels like an actual asspull. Like they finished the initial script with Elsa as the villain and decided they wanted her to be redeemed so they just grabbed Hans and made him suddenly murderous and evil.
Nothing prior to him just deciding to like Anna die gives you any indication he might be evil.
Was Elsa originally gonna fricking die?
Who knows. The Snow Queen in the original story didn't since she is a force, but maybe she would fall over a cliff and shatter.
Most of them are asspulls
Callaghan, Future Buzz, and Chelsea especially
twist villains can work as a surprise at the end, but they work 1000% better when the audience knows they're a villain and the characters don't.
like Invincible. every fricking scene you're clenching your cheeks wondering if the SOB is gonna merc whoever he's talking to. No one feels safe.
That's good shit.
What's funny about Invincible is Omni-Man isn't even a villain for long, in the comics he realises that Mark was right and goes off to have bug sex.
I don't remember who said it but I always remember this quote about building tension in a movie, where if you have two characters sitting at a table talking about normal shit and suddenly the table explodes, that is way worse at building tension than if you get a scene that shows someone else place a bomb underneath the table before the characters sit down. I probably just butchered that but it's the same sort of idea.
bruh of course it would be hitchwiener. Thanks anon
> Like they finished the initial script with Elsa as the villain and decided they wanted her to be redeemed so they just grabbed Hans and made him suddenly murderous and evil.
They had a complete storyboard, the fricking composers wrote "Let it Go" and then the moron screenwriters let their inner theater kids take over their thinking, instead of telling the composers to burn the song and start over. It's lyrically not that good either, it has great music and Idina Menzel's pipes to oversell it.
>not foreshadowed enough before the twist
>constant personality changes to suit the current moment
>stop protesting about Anna endangering herself the moment she gives him power
>looks up before nearly 'accidentally' kills Elsa
>everyone screams at Anna that instantly marrying a total stranger is a bad idea
What was he supposed to do, twirl a mustache? He was supposed to teach kids not to trust people just because they are initially charming.
And all that gets invalidated because of the stupid-ass scene at
It's like the writers were afraid people would notice the hints and just went full moron mode for shock value
Jennifer Lee is all about shock value. Shit writers only care about audience reaction and not story quality.
I've heard somewhere that her style of story writing doesn't do outlining, as in, she writes as it goes instead of thinking of the beginning middle and end, probably explains why the story in these two movies is so shit, for instance, she wrote in Frozen 2 that Elsa was hearing that voice, but she only came up who that voice belonged to much later in the writing, it's baffling honestly.
dont you homos have some sibling incest to whack off to?
Meds
thats right, go back to your containment thread
What are you even talking about schizo?
>Kino
Waternoose from Monsters Inc. wasn't terrible but compared to Hardscrabble he is quite bland. Randall at least is a cooler antagonist in the movie.
Waternoose works BECAUSE Randall is a prominent and fun to watch antagonist throughout the movie who then ties directly too Waternoose's villainy.
I'd say he's memorable enough because of the contrast in personality and motivations with Randall, but how they're tied together too.
I don't know all of them, but Hans being a villain was really stupid. He wasn't acting for the characters, he was acting for the audience, in a movie that doesn't break the 4th wall.
This isn't a "twist," this is on the same level as a movie with a mystery ending with "um actually the murderer is none of the suspects but this new character we hadn't seen before, ha, I bet you didn't know it was him :)."
Hans was an useless filler villain, he only existed as an scapegoat for elsa fricking everything up
I remember posting Hans just to give little Frozen girls ptsd. I wonder how those girls grew up.
Yeah, if you watch that movie knowing full well they janked the script midway through because they got so obsessed with Elsa they didn't want her to be a villain it makes a lot more sense.
>I don't know all of them, but Hans being a villain was really stupid. He wasn't acting for the characters, he was acting for the audience, in a movie that doesn't break the 4th wall.
Sean Penn does the same thing in The Game, having a fake panic attack over something he himself set up that no one else is near to witness, completely for our benefit. Unforgivable.
For a vidya example, the killer from Heavy Rain counts as well, where he's apparently aware there's a player watching him and all of his thoughts at all times and constantly lies to himself for literally no reason during his inner monologues that take place entirely inside his own head. In a game that otherwise has zero supernatural elements(the original plan was to have some but they were canned).
Why are twist villains good in live-action but shit in animation?
A number of Pixar villains before Evelyn were twist villains done effectively
Name one
Muntz, Waternoose, Stinky Pete, Auto
Muntz is kinda lame tbh, but then again so is most of that movie
before Hans*
Hans isn't Pixar
Because in live-action, no one cares to keep tally on dumbass armchair terms like "Liar Revealed"
>Hans
Saw the twist coming from miles away
>Kabuki man or whatever the frick he was called
Good villain, not a good "twist" villain.
>Chelsea
Haven't watched yet
>Emperor Buzz
Dumb
>Screenslaver
Okay villain, forgot how her twist worked, probably means it was forgettable.
>Bellwether
The mayor was obviously not going to be the villain but it still caught me off guard because I forgot she even existed. Like did she do anything significant before the reveal?
On the topic of Bellwether, I think the fact people were tired of the twist villain aspect after Hans, everyone called her out on being the villain when her poster showed up.
you are 100% correct, everything you said is fact
>Okay villain, forgot how her twist worked, probably means it was forgettable.
It WAS forgettable.
She was butthurt that her father relied on superheroes to protect him and died because of it. Basically it's her brother's motivation but in reverse.
Also I assume all the stuff Screenslaver said is stuff she believes as well, like people being helpless consumers who prefer to live vicariously through others rather than do things themselves.
I think in a way it was Brad Bird's attempt to counteract the criticism of the first movie being Ayn Rand-esque, by having a villain who is a cynical individualist. It could have worked but it was executed in a lame way.
To this day I still believe in the theory that the Trolls bewitched Hans into being evil so Kristoff could be with Anna, the twist makes so little sense and comes out of nowhere, it's the only thing that could make sense out of that shit.
>Trolls were evil in the original story
>Have memory-altering magic
>In their song they have a line about getting rid of the fiance
>Also potentially kidnapped Kristoff and Sven
>Their cryptic nonsense is what frightens Elsa so much that she loses confidence in her powers when she was a kid, which is the catalyst of her parents doing all that shit of isolating both her and Anna
It would have been a good retcon for why Hans was so twisted, instead of a more reasonable response of
>kiss doesn't work
>WHY ISN'T KISS NOT WORKING
>OH FRICK TRUE LOVE'S NOT REAL
>OH FRICK OH JEEZ WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE
>YOU'RE GONNA DIE
>UNLESS I KILL ELSA AND STOP THIS RIGHT NOW
And then it's a race against time to stop Hans from making everything worse, he still goes home because you know, pulled a knife on the queen, but it's a more reasonable resolution. Frozen didn't need a villain, it just needed to follow through on things. Hans didn't need to be evil, he just needed to finally snap after trying to balance everything and just failing nonetheless.
This would work WAY better than what we got and the character himself would be less hated
huh they're all white
not the sheep
can't believe they made the israelite evil
It's the one role white men can still have in society.
all the protags were white except hiro, though
>Krakens
>Rabbits
>Foxes
>White
>Mermaids
>Sheep
>White
>Chelsea
>Not white as frick
By that logic Ariel was not white and now that she's black she suddenly has a race
Fricking lol
Her final form has dark scales all over her body.
Is Al Jolson a black guy?
So you admit that Chelsea is just wearing whiteface.
>So you admit that Chelsea is just wearing whiteface.
Her default form is white
When she's defeated she turns back into her natural form which is white
She's fish.
Mermaids come in a variety of races
The statues shown in the movie with the clearly adult mermaids have one of them be black
Is Chelsea really a "twist" villain when the trailer gave away that she was the antagonist?
Narrative intent says yes. Imagine if the trailers to Toy Story 2 said Stinky Pete was the bad guy. Doesn't make it less of a twist in the actual film.
Take away the trailers and she's a twist villain
The movie treats her as a twist villain
She's only a proper for the remaining 15 minutes of the movie and before that point she's nothing but nice and supportive albeit vain
Late ads of Up spoiled Muntz being the villain and Toy Story 3's merch spoiled Lotso being evil but that doesn't diminish them being framed in the movie as twist villains
Lotso isn't really a twist villain, he was already antagonistic to the toys before the Buzz getting reset scene. He was just nice about it.
I'll give Muntz this: he was only nice for a single scene before turning on Carl and Russell, and even then, he'd already been driven mad with paranoia between the opening scene and the time he shows up. So of course he'd be the villain.
Yes it's called a bad trailer
The thing about Chelsea that makes her twist especially moronic isn't just that she becomes an antagonist, it's that they actually created a compelling backstory for her that made her an interesting foil only to throw it all away by revealing she was an evil mermaid queen the whole time and is at minimum as old as Ruby's mom. Any potential narrative weight that Ruby and Chelsea's fight could have had is just gone
>Mermaids are le bad
>No wait, mermaids aren't le bad
>No wait, mermaids really are le bad
She's a twist villain, a really bad one
Is there a fricking way to fix ALL TRAILERS?
Big Hero Six's twist villain should have been Tadashi.
I'm sort of inclined to agree but I know a guy who really loves that film because he relates to Hiro's loss of his brother so I wouldn't want to even think about ruining that for him
I can respect that and I really think Tadashi serves the story overall better as a dead brother but if they wanted a twist villain Callaghan has no impact or weight. Tadashi works better as a twist villain.
It makes no sense for him to be the villain considering the whole point of the explosion was to steal the microbot technology. What would his motivation even be?
He should of been Silver Samurai.
It was before the buyout of Fox, so the more X-Many characters were to be ignored.
1. Callaghan (had a cool fight scene at least)
2. Hans (oldest of these so it was sort of novel)
3. Evelyn
4. Bellweather (evil for like 4 total minutes)
I haven't seen Lightyear/Ruby Gillman and I never will
>1. Callaghan (had a cool fight scene at least)
>didn't list the true worst twist villain in animation
Filename
Say it with me, kids...
the original idea peresented by the fake Screenslaver is so much better than the real thing
the twist should have been that the Deavor siblings were working with him in revenge of Supers not being there to save their father.
In your scenario, I wouldn't have Screenslaver ever be unmasked
Takes away from the character to see it just be some regular rando
yes
don't even give him a detailed backstory, just an brilliant man with a deep hatred of modern society and what created it.
Is clayton a twist villain
He's like the Mayor from Rango
The movie doesn't even pretend he's anything but what he blatantly is
I haven't seen Big Hero 6 in a while so I forgot that the in-betweener between Chelsea and Hand was Yokai/Robert Callaghan. He was Kino IMO
He has a cool design and cool fights but his motivation, change of personality, etc comes out of nowhere
His dismissal over Tadashi's death and him trying to kill teenagers makes him hard to sympathize with
I will always vote for the Big Hero 6 guy, simply because that "twist" was the dumbest thing I have ever seen. Dumb twist, dumb reveal, dumb motivation.
They're all shit.
Hans is just lame and unnecessary. There was enough conflict between Anna and Elsa to sustain the movie.
I had to look up Robert Callaghan's name because he's THAT forgettable. Only remember him for the "THAT WAS HIS MISTAKE" meme. Something something his son died? Daughter? etc.
Haven't seen whatever the third one is.
Future Lightyear sucks because all twist villain sucks. He destroyed a pre-established character (Zerg). It's not the kind of plot point that would be in a late 80s/early 90s movie (the one that Andy supposedly watched and loved). It's a really hamhanded way to try to reinforce the themes/Buzz's character arc. etc
Evelyn is fresh on my mind because I just rewatched Incredibles 2. Aside from all the usual issues of a third-act twist villain, her design is just... lame. Syndrome was a dork but he LOOKED like a supervillain. Evelyn looks like a background character, even post-twist. There's just nothing fun or exciting about her.
Bellwether is just generic and dumb. It's hard to even describe her character traits because all these last-minute tweest villains feel the same.
A good twist retroactively makes the story better. You rewatch the movie and have a deeper understanding of what was really going on. "Oh, OH! That's why it was like that!" None of these twist villains have that. They all make the story -worse-.
I think part of the reason they suck is because they're all revealed in the third act. Syndrome is technically a twist villain but he's revealed at the start of the second act (less than an hour in), and he gets a lot of time to shine. The difference between good writing and hack writing.
Fake Screenslaver should have been the real villain, with the twist being the Deavor siblings were working with/financing him because of their common goals
at least we would have a cool and threatening villain
Screenslaver should have been that driver guy who seemed to know a lot about the Deavors' plans.
>Syndrome was a dork but he LOOKED like a supervillain.
She wasn't trying to be a supervillain after the Screenslaver decoy was taken down though
She loathes that stuff
You could cut Hans out of Frozen entirely and it wouldn't change anything. He simply isn't the villain of the actual story, he's just some irrelevant butthole doing his own thing.
Hans at least had an attempted moral by making him a villain
Don't marry someone immediately, love isnt that spontaneous
Yes because Disney is the one to say that
Them adding this stupid line mocking their old movies was the starting point where their movies went to shit
>I think part of the reason they suck is because they're all revealed in the third act. Syndrome is technically a twist villain but he's revealed at the start of the second act (less than an hour in), and he gets a lot of time to shine. The difference between good writing and hack writing.
Ok, so not to deviate off course but in a DnD campaign I'm running I have been alluding that the mage of the BBEG has been plotting behind his back. The twist is he is in talks with a Succubus queen that has been imprisoned in a mirror and when the players defeat the current BBEG, the mage is going to make his play and set her free.
Hans cause he technically started it.
Boomer looking for his daughter for being too basic.
Chelsea for not even trying
Buzz for no setup
Evelyn cause no good reason
Bellweather despite being cute... for being too forgettable to normies
>for not even trying
That'd be Guy Gagne
>be respected racer
>some fricking snail develops flash superpower
>the snail is sentient enough to like nascar and is somehow a fan of yours
>supposed to take this snail seriously and actually treat him as an equal compared to the other racers
Why was he the antagonist
I hope you never have fans anon.
Anon he tried to murder the obviously sapient creature to win. Worst part is that he would've been fine just as an antagonist just being an egotistical rival instead of outright c**t. Also you take him seriously when the frickin snail is going faster than 90% of vehicles.
Guy Gagne vs Ken from Bee movie
The man who got mogged by a snail vs the man who got cucked by a bee
Who wins?
>nascar
Indy 500 actually
Robert is the most redeemable out of these shitty 6 with Evelyn in a close 2nd then. 2014-2018 Disney isn't as bad as post pandemic Disney.
Technically one of them is DreamWorks
I think the most offensive out of all of these is the one from lightyear seeing how fricking lazy it is they couldnt come up with a design for emperor zerg other than make him be older buzz. That entire movie should be retconned. Chelsea doesn't even count as a twist villian as anyone who has seen a trailer for this film know shes evil already.
>Chelsea doesn't even count as a twist villian as anyone who has seen a trailer for this film know shes evil already.
She's a twist villain, marketing just spoiled the twist
Everything about her role in the story makes her a twist villain and no amount of awful marketing will negate that
fair enough. She was a meh twist villian as far as i saw. Kinda a joke of a threat to be honest if all it took were three krakens to destroy the trident.
Light year was a travesty. We could’ve got space ranger kino but instead they wanted to make interstellar for kids.
Incredibles 2 girl and the zootopia sheep. So bad that i don't remember their names.
The mermaid was presented like a twist? It was in the one trailer that I watched.
She only turns evil when the movie has 15 minutes left
It's hardly a "twist", just a way to raise third act stakes in your non-musical kids movie
Hans made the least sense. With him it seemed they made him a twist villain just for the sake of having one despite everything he did prior being reasonable and/or in the right.
I hate that such a cool design was wasted on such a mid villain. Evelyn didn't even wear the full costume.
Evelyn was just Mezmerella but worse.
I fricking laughed so hard when future buzz/zurg was revealed because it was so moronic lmao. Everyone I know whos seen it thinks its dumb
>notAriel
>literally shown to be evil in the trailer
>twist villain
Read the thread
The film literally treats her like a twist villain narratively
She's a villain when there's 15 minutes left of the film and it's written to be a surprise
An awful trailer spoiling a twist doesn't negate it being intended as a twist to begin with
>An awful trailer spoiling a twist doesn't negate it being intended as a twist to begin with
It really does though
Anon, if Toy Story 2's trailer spoiled Stinky Pete being the twist villain does he stop being the twist villain?
Is Metro Man being shown to be alive in commercials for Megamind make the reveal no longer a twist?
Does everyone on the planet knowing about Darth Vader's identity erase the intent that said identity was a twist?
Intent matters most, take away the trailer and Chelsea is blatantly a twist villain the people behind the film intended to be
most stories make the villain being "a surprise" for the heroes, it was never the definition for the twist, the twist is for the audience.
Except in the film itself there's barely any hints Chelsea is actually evil until the big reveal when the movie has around 15 minutes left where her character and backstory undergoes a 180
This isn't like Columbo, the audience was intended to be surprised when Chelsea turns evil on a first view
She's as much as a twist villain as Hans from a writing standpoint
>This isn't like Columbo, the audience was intended to be surprised when Chelsea turns evil on a first view
yeah, no
See
You've clearly never seen Carrie
I say Callahan. Might be because I have a soft spot for Ruby (as a movie and character), Incredibles 2 lady had some form of motivation (bad as it was) and the other three I didn't watch.
Hans. Removing Elsa as the villain was a way bigger mistake than the Buzz/Zurg retcon.
>Frozen went through many different iterations, but here are some common elements from some of the early drafts: Frozen was to open with a prophecy that "a ruler with a frozen heart will bring destruction to the kingdom of Arendelle." We're then introduced to Anna, our pure-hearted heroine, and Elsa, an unrelated evil Snow Queen. We learn Elsa is a scorned woman; she was stood up at the altar on her wedding day and froze her own heart so she would never love again. Both Elsa and the audience assume she's the villain from the prophecy. Fast-forward to the final act: Elsa creates an army of snow monsters to attack our heroes while Kristoff has "a Han Solo moment" and comes to help Anna. To halt Elsa's attacking army, the two-faced Prince Hans triggers a massive avalanche—not caring that the avalanche also puts Anna, Elsa, and all of Arendelle in jeopardy. Anna realizes Elsa is their only hope, so she convinces her to use her powers to save the kingdom. The twist is that the prophecy from the beginning is actually not about Elsa, but about Hans—he's the one with a metaphorical frozen heart because he's an unfeeling sociopath. Elsa's heart is then unfrozen allowing her to love again.
https://ew.com/movies/2017/03/29/frozen-original-ending/
So basically....Hans being a villain was meant to subvert Elsa being a villain when she was still seen as the initial main villain and he was a more active participant leading to him possibly being hinted more as a villain but when Elsa being evil was scrapped completely they still thought Hans as a twist villain anyways but fricked it up
I blame Jennifer Lee. She's such a shit writer.
>the guy from frozen
actual twist villain
>literally who
>mermaid
there's no twist, it's painfully obvious that she's evil and the movie is shittier for it.
>Lightyear
not a twist villain, it's a cautionary tale.
>I never watched Incredibles 2
no comment
>Bellwether
another real twist villain.
>painfully obvious that she's evil
She never acts malicious or aggressive toward Ruby before the reveal
Quite the opposite, she outright saves her life and doesn't even get too offended when Ruby rejects her offer of friendship at first
I think everyone saw The Indredibles 2's villain coming the moment she walked in. What's most frustrating is how shitty her background was and how underwhelming she felt compared to Syndrome.
Hans is kinda based tbh, he'd be a genuinely good king based on his action and tried to rid the country of its incompetent monarchs that did jack shit for the people when they needed them the most
If there was any justice in the world, Anna would be outed as a shit queen.
Buzz is nuts cause they cut the little green men entirely, probably the second most iconic Buzz associated characters, then revealed his Arch nemesis (Probably the third most recogniy Buzz character associated character) was just him on a bad day. Leaving just Buzz.
I just never really understood screenslavers reason for being a villain
>heroes are already outlawed
>helps make them not outlawed
>lol just kidding I want to make them outlawed.
It's dumb she could have just continued being a billionaire and been better off
Chelsea confirmed best villain
That says more about
A. How despised everyone else is (especially Future Buzz)
B. How little people actually watched her movie
Hans and Callaghan are bigger asspulls
Evelyn's plan made less sense
Bellwether has the least amount of screentime as a villain
Buzz is flat out the most idiotic
But Chelsea in my opinion is easily the one with the most wasted narrative potential as a character on her own before the twist and it was so easily fixable to keep her both as the same character we've known and keep an action based climax if they really needed one
Could've had Grandmamah just say the trident makes mermaids go crazy instead of the "Nerissa didn't have a daughter" line
Could've had her be conflicted over wanting to avenge her mother and her love for Ruby as a friend
*Hans and Callaghan are bigger asspulls or at least on the same level of asspull
100% Lightyear.
Hans made no sense, sure, but once the switch was flipped he was fun. The "If only somebody loved you" was a great line, even if the twist itself fell flat.
"That was his mistake" guy who no-one remembers at all has meme value and at the very very least has a cool design/power set when he's masked up. The twist is shit of course, but other than that the value he brings is enough.
Evil Endeavor has enough presence that she's alright, again even if the twist is absolute dogshit. Her plan's fricking moronic though. SHe's inoffensive and I appreciate the lesbian porn shes made.
Mermaid again is a terrible twist villain, but its so fricking vague and awful there's actually tons of ways to fix it if somehow the series continues in either a show format or another film. Unlikely, but easily fixable. I appreciate the lesbian porn shes in, too.
Bellweather is fine enough as a twist villain, as she's a present enough character in the film even if the twist, once again, falls flat and limp. The sheep in general are a fun twist though, so she's excused. I also appreciate the furry porn she's in.
Zerg being old Buzz though? That's the fricking worst. I hate it. It ruins a previously fun character for a stupid fricking twist. It bends what we know of a character for a twist nobody wanted or asked for and just like everyone else the twist fricking sucks. I hate it and I hope everyone that worked on that film dies. The self-cest porn isnt even worth it. a genuine 0/10 fricking twist. "Guess Ill let go then" holy frick what an awful goddamn movie. At least the other movies were fun until the twist, Lightyear was just awful through and through.
Not as much Hansgayging in this thread as I thought there'd be
I really like the Hans from the first and second acts, up there with my favorite Disney princes and love interests, Hans from the third act not so much, I don't mind him being a villain but his plan was stupid and the twist nonsensical.
What do you guys prefer in Disney movies
Twist villain (Hans)
Unknowing villian (Abuelita from Encanto)
Ones that wear their cruelty on their sleeve and only aren't fought by the heroes because they have a positioning advantage.
Abuelita's more effective than Hans so her I guess
Really, I just love villains are up front about being villains from the start
Why is this such a bad trope? I feel like this only works in murder mysteries because of the very nature of finding out whodunit. But otherwise it always manages to piss me off.
its the execution of the trope, not the trope itself. Lazy writers use it when they need some sort of etra conflict, and what easier way is there than "X was a villain the whole time?!?!!?!?!?!?". Proper twist villains need either setup or consistent execution. If an episode of the 1960's Scooby has more set up of its twist villain than your modern movie then thats just lazy writing.
It isn't, Disney/Pixar just fricking ruined it because of their sheer incompetence and laziness even though they did great twist villains in the past
That and doing this for several movies in a row expecting people to fall for it
So why did they go through with the gratuitous heel turn?
Jafar's problem wasn't the Sultan being an idiot, because he trusted him completely and could be easily hypnotized besides. His problem was that he had to pretend to be subordinate to the Sultan. That's Jafar's thing, he absolutely needs everyone to know he's number one. That's why he used his last wish to become a genie himself, Aladdin rubbed it in that even after having Genie make him Sorcerer Supreme Jafar was still only the second most powerful person in the room.
*pretend to be subordinate to the idiot Sultan
I mean like, why did they need a baddie?
>so they made Hans the baddie.
Hans was meant to be the twist villain even when Elsa was still evil
See
The lyrics are still villainous and selfish as frick, all it took was an upbeat tune for people to think that shit was sympathetic
Someone else who noticed that? I felt like I was taking crazy pills when I was in the theater and registered what was happening.
Haven't watched Incredibles 2 nor Lightyear so I can't comment on them.
Hans' twist came out of literally nowhere and his motivations are incredibly stupid, but hey, he's one of the first so I guess he gets points for "originality".
Callahan's twist was also fricking dumb (oh yeah let's trashtalk your dead protege even though you've never been shown hating him beforehand), but at least he had presence as a villain after the reveal and there was a clear attempt at making him an image of what Hiro could've become if he let his grief consume him.
Bellwether's plan was interesting but that's about it in terms of what she had going for. She has the issue Hans had where we never saw any hints to her true nature and her time as a villain was in the literal last moments of their movies. Worst one IMO.
It's hard to talk about Chelsea as a twist villain because I was there for the entirety of the movie's marketing season and more than anything else in the film her whole deal was completely fricking spoiled. I mean, I guess she counts, but I'll give her points for being funny both before and after the twist reveal.
Chelsea's funny after the reveal when she's no longer a threat and has to don a teenage girl persona again
When she's an active villain her charisma plummets