Le sad villain backstory fags need to kill themselves. Antagonists should not be sympathetic...

Le sad villain backstory fags need to kill themselves. Antagonists should not be sympathetic. That undermines the whole point of your story, which is to promote certain ideals that you believe in and thus your protagonist believes in as well. If you're staging someone as sympathetic, they should be the protagonist, otherwise what is even the point if we're not following them? Antagonists are meant to be refuted and proven wrong, wasting time to give credit to the ideology that you're going to be refuting anyway is pointless and is a sign of a weak and insecure mind.

Attached: Aku with tits.png (1203x607, 806.22K)

This. A good example is on Dragon where people hates the old Broly while loving the new one even if the older has much more character.

The point of stories isn’t to promote ideals or teach a gay ass lesson. It’s to entertain

Not per se

A well written villain can be sympathetic or unsympathetic

You can have the greatest concept ever but that means nothing if you can’t write

No, get fucked, stop trying to limit fiction. Both kinds of villain are great.

>and is a sign of a weak and insecure mind.
That came out of nowhere, are you projecting or something? Because it sure looks like so.

No it's because he seethed that goku cried a lot as a baby
Even by dbz standards that's pretty stupid

>DUDE, I’M A POS JUST CAUSE LOL
Die, subhuman. Tragic villains will forever be the most interesting type and there is nothing you can do about it.

>the older has much more character.
HE HAS TEN LINES!!!
HE HAS TEN FUCKING LINES THROUGHOUT THE THREE MOVIES HE'S IN!!!
WHAT FUCKING CHARACTERS DOES HE HAVE???

HOW IS HIS PERSONALITY DIFFERENT FROM BOJACK??? OR KID BUU?? OR TURLES??? OR SLUG???? OR THE MAJORITY OF VILLAINS???

BROLY SUCKS ASS

Not necessarily. It can be both. Or neither.

Nah, if you wanna instill some lessons, do a lecture, don’t make some story just so you can preach. Entertainment is where it’s at. If you get mad about morals in stories, you’re just a boomer/soccer mom

Sympathetic stories help establish the antagonist as a foil to the protagonist. Both could've gone through similar circumstances, but both took very different path in reaction. Kipo season 2 recently did a good job establish that.

>Or neither.
What's the worth of a story that doesn't have any points to make or any entertainment value?

I'm pretty sure you wouldn't enjoy nazi/communist propaganda, even if it was the most entertaining shit ever.

That’s up to me. You’re just like Mr Enter who bitches about mean spirited shit. If it was up to you, Three Stooges wouldn’t exist

>That undermines the whole point of your story, which is to promote certain ideals that you believe in
No, the point is to tell an interesting story.

>Le sad villain backstory fags
What?

Doesn't matter, it has more character because he isn't sympathetic.

He boring and not very likable

Character =/= aesthetic.

>TLDR OP is a retard who doesn't enjoy different types of writing

Stories that exist purely to evoke one type of emotuon (pure comedy and pure horror) have a time and a place to exist, but if nothing else ever existed, then it'd be really hard to stand out and make something memorable.

They don’t gotta evoke anything, they gotta entertain, morals can eat ass

OK, now sad backstory villains are deuteragonists :^)

Here is the main point people should look at. Sympathetic or not, is the villain fun, interestings, or entertaining to watch? If not, you have a bad villain.

For artists, character absolutely = aesthetic. And Toriyama is an artist.

Artists usually make for shitty writers, just as writers usually make for shitty artists.

Entertaining is evoking emotions.

Toriyama created his look, but not his story for the old movie iirc.

Anyway this is all moot point. On'e just mad because modern sympathetic villains are better written than the hero to the point of people disliking the hero, or the villain's poorly written to the point where they really did nothing wrong.

Pure propaganda usually isn't very entertaining. I could say BlacKkKlansman was pretty decent and intense if viewed purely as a thriller, but it's not JUST a thriller, it's a piece of a very obnoxious leftist Oscarbait propaganda with zero self-awareness, and that takes away from the entertainment.

Kipo does it good.

Mother-fucker-monkey Scarlemange in his 'redemption arc' hard swerves into even more psychotic actions and the "lesson" reinforces his initial evil intents in his mind even harder than before. (Kipo does everything right too, but she didn't count on him just being fucking busted to the core)

Attached: lostcause.png (1920x1080, 3.11M)

>Antagonists should not be sympathetic
An antagonist just has to oppose the protagonist, whatever the fuck the writer wants to do, he can do.

Here's a good example I can think of

Attached: Ouja_(Episode_Final).jpg (1280x720, 201.97K)

>the older has much more character.
Old Broly’s outfit is leagues better but you really must be trolling.

Attached: 61EF32B8-7A77-45C5-8DA0-9BFCFF3B9177.jpg (806x603, 34.97K)