Favorite/most memorable villain?
" saitama's "goal" is to find somebody that doesn't die from a single hit, thats why he is dissapointed constantly. Even in the current final episode in the anime he bassicaly faces an intergalactic saitama.(strongest being in the known galaxy's in search of a worthy foe) That's why i call him an anti-hero with a bad moral drive. If his wish was fullfiled it would bassicaly imply the end of the earth by default. I thought it was obvious that by ending i mean the current final episode of the anime '-.- Peace, -Boem- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes
| |
|
Anime covers about a third of the source material, so basing an opinion on it and not the entire thing is ignorant at best.
You're completely off on Saitama's goal. 76th/77th Punch feature Saitama musing about his situation. Spoiler alert though; I suspect that the second anime season will only cover up to 75th Punch. |
|
" Well perhaps i will change my mind when viewing that when it comes out, but so far i enjoy the show a lot more while viewing him as an anti-hero figure. Just a regular guy doing his thing not really based on "saving the world ethics" but turning things out that way as a consequence of stuff like "going to the supermarket and pummeling a villain on the road there" The contrast makes the comedy better for me. Peace, -Boem- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes
| |
" The concept of an anti-hero makes a lot more sense in our time. It's bassically a depiction of the inherent flaw of man and how lose the path is to either hero status or villain. A simple error in judgement and the extent of it's repercusions over time. Like you say, usually promoted by concepts we all align ourselves with, the protection of our family enabling an error on morality. I think it boils down to something like "morality of the heart" and "morality of the mind" and the tension and blind spots both of those create within man. One could argue that in a post war society that has a rich economy with a lot of opportunity's and is very socially inviting in nature that morality takes a "backseat" and as such promotes the story telling of the "pure hero" devoid of personal hypocrisy between mind and heart. And the more society starts to converge on social unrest and instability the anti hero get's promoted again in story telling to enable discussion around the questions of morality such a society demands of it's citizens. Bluntly put, the "hero" is the easiest depiction of the correct/best moral behavior in an easy to live in society. While the "anti-hero" is a much more complex variation of those behaviors in a more complex society in flux. Like you suggest, people can be empathic to even the very cruel deeds persons act out in game of thrones because they can contemplate being in those situations themselves. My proposition would be that that thought space would not be present in a post war society that easily sustains the social fabric between man being just exposed to it's worst side. The more cruel nature need not be thought or contemplated, since it is ever present and obvious. Peace, -Boem- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes
| |
 |
|
"That's a secondary goal, not a primary one; it's a means to an end, not an end in itself. Saitama's primary goal is to have fun. He outright says that is why he's a hero, multiple times. Now I could totally dig a Jordan B. Peterson type of analysis of Saitama, wherein his discontent is explained by his refusal to take on any real responsibility bigger than coupon day at the supermarket. Arguing that Saitama is the villain of 1PM along those lines would be fun. But that's not what the content is saying. It's clear who the creators of 1PM chose as the villain, even if it's not who I would have picked. And what they picked was essentially inverse that of Lobster Daddy. The villain of 1PM is social hierarchy. 1PM doesn't see responsibility as self-assigned, but as involuntarily given, and the society of that world doesn't recognize Saitama's merit. It puts him in Rank C while putting his protogé in Rank S, by putting undo emphasis on irrelevant factors. 1PM takes aim at social issues like mandatory schooling and emphasis on book smarts, maintenance of appearances, and even demonstration of dedication and obedience in terms of whether our society should place the emphasis on them that it does. The whole point of 1PM is that social hierarchy is determined by something other than merit, such that Superman could be in our very midsts and he'd be living in a bad neighborhood like a typical working-class schmuck. At first, this villain is personified in Amai Mask and the Superhero Organization, but as things develop it becomes clear the Organization is in the service of people in general. In other words, it's not the government, but millions of ordinary people responsible for the system that treats Saitama like shit. In a way, it's a much more eligant version of Lex Luthor's belief: that mundane humanity and Superman are fundamentally incompatible, and therefore in existential conflict with each other. That's why Saitama doesn't experience joy until he meets extraterrestrials, even in a world full of powered humans. Of course I don't agree with Luthor — I prefer the Peterson perspective — but I'm at least trying not to strawman 1PM's point. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Mar 12, 2019, 3:33:30 PM
|
|
"Fake news.
original
 When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Mar 13, 2019, 3:22:31 PM
|
|
" The hero journey's not really about being moral according to the society, it's about going outside that society to bring back a boon to it, invigorating what was unquestioned and possibly not functional. But yes, it is a simple arc, despite being a good one and one that will never disappear. Just we need more stories than just that one. I'd say the anti-hero mucks through without leaving on any kind of journey. Another way of looking at it: like I said on page what three or so, it's all related to dirt. Heroes are clean, villains (true to the tillers of the earth they share a name with) are dirty, and anti-heroes have a bit of grit around the collar. I notice a lot of mention of "man", and "mankind". Habit, I suppose, fellas. Possibly, as people in mass media producing countries have become sexually liberated (and in times where there were more freedoms and less repression) we can be frank that we like a protagonist with bit of dirt around the collar, rather than a squeaky clean hero, and so the writing has adapted to suit. Heroes are handsome and clean cut though they can be emotionally complex and fascinating, anti-heroes are unconventionally attractive. Which leaves me wondering if that's not a bit simplistic, thinking about one of the best heroes, wily Odysseus. Still the very pure hero like ol' Galahad? Hm. Luke Skywalker v Han Solo? No bloody contest, amirite. There are so so many examples. I'd even say "sexy" is an anti-hero attribute. Do they not dress well, invariably? Some signature look. Diego Brando and Hermes Costello because JoJo and fashion, this is what the fams suggested after a lively debate, as I went up and asked them because anime hehe. Last edited by erdelyii#5604 on Mar 14, 2019, 7:14:43 AM
|
|
|
A good comparison between an anti-hero and a hero would be Superman and that one movie where Will Smith played the fuck up superhero.
" Problem is, you're completely strawmanning it. You're reading into meanings that aren't there. On some points you're just flat out wrong. If you've only watched the Wanpanman anime, you shouldn't be commenting about the series in the first place. |
|
" One could make a very easy "chicken vs egg" point here. On the note of "appeal" i think it's pretty obvious why a pure hero is trumped by the anti-hero. The pure hero will put the greater good before his own selfish interest's every single time. Though magically the world will align with his will and obviously everybody ends up a winner.(though variations obviously exist and are interesting) The anti hero has no such tendency's but still has the framework to protect and take action. That's why the thing that "corrupts" is usually family related. And people are not blind obviously they prefer a "hero" that would say "fuck the world" and save his own family. Now i can circle back to my previous point and connect to the "easy morals easy world easy superhero" vs "complex morals world in flux anti hero" In the first state(think post war) people need to as a group denie all questionable morality and go back to basics (do good and do no evil) because the lingering pain of war demands this of the society. Think of it like a society's "fear response" to look the other way. But not in a denying sort of way, it's pretty obvious to anybody in a post war society what "bad" means. The problem arrises when this "fear response" is instilled in the next generation. That next generation doesn't have the "experiental knowledge"(is that a word?) of a post war world and as such ends up "looking the other way" without comprehension of what is "bad". Gradually the anti-hero becomes relevant as older generation for whom such a figure would be an insult to their intellect fade out. And the epos of "bad" with all it's complexity becomes relevant and pulled open. It is no longer understood how deep "bad" can go or to what extend it is a dangerous thing. The body doesn't know and neither does it feel it, the "looking away" ended up creating a hole that needs to be filled by writers, painters and what have you creative folks which play with such things on a daily basis. Peace, -Boem- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes
|
