ST Villain/Evil Archetypes Of The ST

I think its a common misconception. Illusion of grey morality in ST exists but behind it Kylo is an aggressive murderer, just as Hux, Phasma and Snoke. Tell me how much of a good behind them? Nothing behind Hux, Phasma and Snoke for sure, there is no even illusion of it.
Take a look at "interesting, conflicted Kylo, da best character in the ST or even SW". How much time he show the real glimpse of humanity and goodness?
He couldnt kill his mother. Thats it. And he didn't look bothered at all after she supposedly got killed by his comrades though. And he for some reason doesnt even care about her ordering to destroy the base on Crait.
We hear Kylo mumbling about how the Light pulling him back in TFA. What does that mean? Just a vague statement, another example of weak writing, when JJ can't show us how Kylo was torn apart, so he straight up tells us. Because of that it doesnt look like "grey morality", it looks like hypocrisy to confuse the audience, because while Kylo mumbling "The Light is pulling me back", before my eyes still stand the images of him killing LST, torturing Poe/Rey, ordering to wipe out the village, looking at the destruction of Hosnian System and then killing Han.
They show me Kylo is the straight up villain, probably the most aggressive one, with bigger on screen death count than Vader had in all three movies, and then they tell me he was torn(!?)
Why were we supposed to think Kylo is the great complicated and conflicted character if they weren't able to show us his good side?
Why were we supposed to think there is the grey morality, if they failed to show us the "good" part of it?
That still bugs me, that after 3 years the misconception of "grey" spectrum of ST still exists, as well as misconception of Kylo being the conflicted guy. He is conflicted on paper, while in reality everything he show was murder intentions and straight up sadism. The same comes to other villains in ST. Where is the grey morality? All of them are straight up evil dudes and gals.

 

I think there is a great disturbance in the Force here: the fact that Hux and Co. destroyed Hosnian Prime does not make Hux a "great villain we are looking for". The real villain must terrify YOU, the audience. They should give you a certain level of nigthmare... pull you into the movie, to be part of it. And meanwhile the great villain also must start to interest you from another aspect as well: you start to look for answers why he/she is doing it, start to analyze the personality, in most extreme cases you start to admire him/her or/and start to try to save him/her. Hux had some potential in TFA, but now he is an idiot "with a bigger red button that he used and it worked". Congrats.

Another misconception that Vader and Palpy had 6 films to shine so that is why they are special. Sorry guys but here the older fans are in advantage. I remember the first time I saw the OT, the PT was not even a dream... and Vader came through as a fantastic, terrifying villain after ANH, Tarkin too (he had Vader's leash obviously, so no joking there). And Palpy's lightning show and clever trap were also convincing after ROTJ, I did not need the PT to acknowledge him as a great villain. Yes, both Tarkin and Palpy must be examined in relation to Vader: Vader was so great, so awesome and so terrifying that anyone who controlled him must also be someone special. But the OT never, never made a comic relief out of the villains (unlike PT which is not a clear case, see Neimodians and too many stupid droid jokes).

 

I see you only count his most extreme actions of morality, and that's it. That's fine I guess, but you're oversimplifying it if that's all you choose to focus your efforts on. We can see during scenes with Han and Rey that he's being pulled. The dialogue itself is not what shows you his conflict, it's how his dialogue is delivered.

Just for example, the scene you just said, when he's mumbling about being pulled to the light. It's not the what it's the how. How he delvers the "I feel it again, the pull to the light." line. How he's sitting down looking back and forth between the floor and Vader's mask. This is the what shows his conflict, and that he's not just saying these things for the fun of it.

Or when he's begging Rey to join him. He walks closer to her, sticks his hand out and says "Please". The delivery, body language and facial expressions all manage to show so much about the character, while speaking so little.

This isn't weak writing, it's great directing and acting. There's a reason why Adam Driver's performance is one of the most praised things of the trilogy, because he's had a huge part in making people believe that Kylo can go anywhere from murderous psychopath, to pulling himself out of the pit of darkness and into the light without feeling like two completely different charterers.

 

I guess we just have the different needs when it comes to show vs tell rule.
For me actions speaks more then words or acting. Kylo may sit and look at Vader helmet and the floor whenever he want, but he still murders people and does nothing that make me think there is good in him. For some people thats the conflict, but for me its just lame writing.
Just imagine the serial killer who sometimes think "Damn, im a bad guy", and then he goes to kill again. I wont call that the conflicted guy. Its very weak illusion of conflict.

He tortured her and killed her Father "for a few days" Figure before her eyes. Then he tried to recruit her. Id call him either kid or dumb for that matter. Dont see how is this well written character's move.

There can be actor's good execution of the bad writtten scene/character/dialogue. That doesnt mean Kylo's character is good or well written.

p.s. Just came to my mind another example. Do you remember that short scene with DJ who gave Rose her sister's necklace after Finn, Rose and We thought he is a douchebag who want that necklace because its worth much money? Now thats little scene made DJ somehow sympathetic. Thats the scene that Kylo doesnt have like at all. If he had the scene like this that would help much to see if not the colnflict but at least the glimpse of humanity in him.

 

These things are still actions. They're just less extreme, consequential actions than the examples your using, which. Which is in line, since the conflict is more an 75/25 dark/light than a 50/50. Nobody's saying Kylo isn't bad person, he's a very bad person. But to completely deny the conflict that is clearly shown is strange.

Holding hands with Rey is in action, looking at the Vader mask for guidance is an action, the way he pleaded for Rey to join him is an action. These examples just by themselves shows there's a glimmer of hope, and it's alot more than we got from Vader in OT before his turn.

Showing conflict isn't just "Hey, he did a good guy thing, that's cool".

Well written character doesn't necessarily mean smart character. Lets not confuse the two.

 

Kylo Ren is one of the best bad guys in Star Wars - Snoke is maybe the worst and I'm glad he got slit up.

The only problems I have with the ST bad guys is they should have made Hux a stronger character instead of the wimp he is and they've maybe made Kylo Ren a bit too vulnerable and defeatable. I love what the character in general but he shouldn't have lost the fight with Rey.

 

Ever heard of Loki and the Winter Soldier?

 

I disagree, Kylo Ren is the personification of our dark/ambitious side, you know, like "If I could rule the world..."

 

It’s a different era of antagonism all over the arts. In the 1980s there was a super high level of testosterone in most action films and horror films. The bad guys were huge and strong and physically imposing. The last big villains who sort of remind me of that physically imposing killing machine like Vader or the Terminator were in that way are probably Antoine from No Country for Old men and maybe Bane for Dark Knight Rises.

I’m not sure when the shift truly happened but I remember when they first announced Heath Ledger as the next Joker and people being upset for a time and thinking that he was not up to the task versus the masculine physicality of Bale’s batman and then everyone left blown away. Some time around then or possibly a little before that villains sort of shifted to being a little younger and more disturbed and creepy for psychological reasons or the lengths they’d go to win and less about them being physically imposing or not. A lot of the new villains come off like kids that would have been bullied or been twerpy bullies that never grew up. They’re not sympathetic. Some younger and/or not super physically imposing villains of the past 17 years or so that come to mind:

Loki - Thor
Hans Landa - Inglorious Bastards
Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight
Draco Malfoy - Potter
Commodus - Gladiator
Calvin Candie - Django Unchained
King Joffrey - Game of Thrones
Ramsay Bolton - Game of Thrones
Cersei Lannister - Game of Thrones

Now, I am NOT saying Ben Solo or Hux are at the best levels of the above. I am saying that antagonism has changed a little over the past 2 decades and become a little less about physical overpowerment and more about nerdy villains that seem s little off power tripping and being cruel and twisted but thinking they’re justified in their actions.

I do think Ben Solo might end up closer to that above list by the end than Hux except for the fact that Hux has some Malfoy and Joffrey qualities with his spoiled brat in power character.

 

Hux Phasma and Kylo are also even more evil if you read any of the new canon novels. Let’s just say I was really happy when Phasma kicked the bucket in 8.

 

R.E. Emo-Honeypot-sex-Kylo, both he and his grandfather tend to get the Draco-in-leather-pants treatment from some segments of fandom. The point of Kylo being conflicted about his allegiance to the Dark Side is to make him different from Vader, and I like that at the end of this film he surpasses his Grandfather by declaring himself ruler of the Galaxy. That said, I agree that, since we know very little about his initial fall, that conflict can ring a bit false.

Wasn't a fan of Snoke in TFA, as he felt a bit Emperor 2.0, however in TLJ I thought he was entertaining and had real presence. As for Hux, I like both versions.

 

I am also a bit disappointed with Hux in TLJ. He was rather funny like that too, but in the last movie I thought he felt more threatening and more serious- now he just became just a joke. They missed the opportunity to show him as competent tactician, kind of cold and calculating villain like Tarkin or Thrawn. Hux is character I was most disappointed in the film really. Hux could've potentially been very interesting if he would have been shown as staunch defender of imperial identity because his parents were and there would have been potential to make him deeper and more complex villain. But they wanted to focus only on Kylo Ren and leave other villains uninteresting bad guys, kill Snoke and Phasma and make Hux a comic relief.

 

The Joker isn't known to be physically imposing. At least, not like Batman. I don't remember it being the reason why some were judging Heath Ledger's casting.

 

Is Kylo some sort of emo murder machine, or is he not sufficiently threatening?

I mean, which is it?

It has to be one or the other.

 

Interesting premise but I don't think I would at this point buy that this was some plan for the ST or JJ or RJ.

Evil isn't better presented.

Sidious, Vader, Maul, Dooku, Grievous, Tarkin VS Snoke, Ren, Hux and Phasma.

The archetypes of evil are awesome while the idiots of evils are trivial.

The weaker the evil the less impressive the heroes are because they don't have to overcome or face failure.

Unfortunately. Instead of having villains who have it together in their villainy and the heroes actually fear we have ones that are falling apart on their own.

Krennic was good in R1 in that it shows what a minor-league player he was. Except a Krennic-type would look really good in the ST.

Nah the prequels already did that and far, far better. It's the entire basis of the Anakin storyline. If anything it's not complexity but confusion which really takes away from the story and characters. The ST world really makes little sense and shifts so characters do the same. That's why Hux and Phasma went from possible threats to being joke characters that are punchlines.

Multiple characters over multiple movies that creates threat, tension, raises the stakes and makes the heroes more heroic because the villains are more villainous while also seeing that there are complexities.

Tarkin could (and did) work for the Republic and Empire, Dooku was a Jedi and a Sith. Could Hux or Phasma work for the Republic? No way. They would never be able to fit in because they are weak and foolish bad guys who only know how to work that way.

 

He is more threatening with the mask.

 

The First Order is the remnants of the Empire essentially as lead by many of the Empire’s children, along with children stolen and forced into their trooper conditioning program. There were some old Empire types who survived and found the FO like Canady but it’s a younger movement overall. You could really sense that Canady hates the setback and crew he has in comparison to the height of the Empire. “We should have had our fighters out 5 bloody minutes ago!” he shouted.

Hux was probably a Star at the academy as far as grades go. He’s probably quite book smart. Kylo Ren is Vader’s grandson ans Snoke’s Star protege and that’s why he was fast-tracked.

There likely are Krennic types in the FO but Snoke has held them down and back in middle management because he knows his crew is younger and wants them to have leaders they can be relate to and can better see a path to promotion if they do their jobs well. It’s the same reason so many companies put younger leaders up front.

 

The First order is controlled by second-generation empire. With only a few Empire people still in positions of power.

 

I see the anthology films as being more aimed at the fans 25 and up who primarily love the past era and the ST more for the general audience and younger fans and more the future of Star Wars. Same with Rian Johnson’s trilogy. That’s more laying out the future of what Star Wars will feel like in the 2020s.

 

I am okay with that since so far I like it.

 

Same. I think it’s a good road map for fun. As a Star Wars fan I like the idea of having some different flavors to enjoy.

 

Star Wars needed to change, but hopefully, in the future, the villains will be more menacing.

 

Makes me think the whole thing was set-up for eventual failure.