I now have an official website and everything over at www.idovillainy.com.
May your villainy increase!
:)
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Sunday, October 10, 2010
The Hierarchy of Villainy vs. The League of Evil Exes
Evil Overlord’s List #71 If I decide to test a lieutenant's loyalty and see if he/she should be made a trusted lieutenant, I will have a crack squad of marksmen standing by in case the answer is no.
I’ll admit it; I had absolutely no desire to see Scott Pilgrim vs. The World. This is probably mostly due to the fact that I hate Michael Cera’s face. I don’t know why, it‘s just true. I was dragged to the theater kicking and screaming, but when the lights went down and the 8-bit Universal Studios theme started blaring, I fell in love. In a summer bereft of good films Scott Pilgrim stands out as a shining beacon of snappy dialogue, intriguing characters and epic cinematography. It is quirky and weird and fun and awesome and completely and totally flawed. I also take issue with the villains. There were, you see, far too many of them: seven to be exact.
Here there be spoilers.
Scott Pilgrim is a twenty-three-year-old lazy dude who likes to play videogames and bass guitar. Enter, Ramona Flowers. Scott falls instantly in love only to learn that to be with her, he must defeat her seven evil exes. Now, I do in fact; realize that Scott Pilgrim based on a comic series. (No, I’ve never read it, I’m nerdy, but not that nerdy). And in the comics, there are indeed seven villains, these seven personages forming the League of Evil Exes. This is fine for a series of comic books where you have one or two villains per volume, but in a two-hour film, cramming in all seven exes is a bit of an issue. For it has the effect of completely destroying the film’s hierarchy of villainy.
To begin with, there are virtually no henchmen. With the exception of a few who are attached to various villains and a couple that Scott dispatches at the very end of the film in G-Man’s lair there is basically zilch in the henchman department. This is not generally an issue other than that it casts a glaring on the fact that there are six villains. Count’em SIX. Okay, maybe five and a half. (Even with their dragons the Katayanagi twins are kind of a let down).
Skip the fact that these villains have virtually no motivation for doing as they do and making Scott’s life a mess. They’re not fighting for Ramona, they are simply battling to make sure no one other than the uber villain can have her. It’s made even more ridiculous by the fact that half of them were dated back in grade school and the other half were dated for a grand total of like 9.2 second. So, these presumably successful rock stars, movie stars and music moguls should be long over their infatuation with the girl with rainbow hair. But, no apparently they cannot rip themselves away from Ramona’s gravitational pull and so these villains zip on and off the screen with bright colors, crashes and bangs, but little emotional motivation.
As for the uber villain, he was to be quite frank, not nearly uber enough. A smarmy, smirking, charmer who himself had little enough motivation to go after Ramona when she was obsessed with him, but who has now formed the League of Evil Exes in order to brow beat Ramona back to him in order to slake his own obsession. He is not a compelling character and frankly, having him played by Jason Schwartzman did not help matters at all. When you have the future Captain America in Chris Evans, and the former Man of Steel in Brandon Routh as mere precursors to your uber villain, you seriously need to step up your game. In short, though charming, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World just can’t get over the suck of its villains.
Despite of all this and over my strenuous objections, I still love this film. Go figure.
When writing your villains, please, please, please! Make sure your villains and uber villain have sound emotional reasons for making your hero’s life a living hell, or else it all just seems silly. Also, be sure that your hierarchy of villainy is sound. Don’t make your villains more intriguing than your uber villain and leave some henchmen lying about for the hero to beat up on, it does so boost his ego.
Yes, me and Michael Cera have still got beef. It’s his face.
I’ll admit it; I had absolutely no desire to see Scott Pilgrim vs. The World. This is probably mostly due to the fact that I hate Michael Cera’s face. I don’t know why, it‘s just true. I was dragged to the theater kicking and screaming, but when the lights went down and the 8-bit Universal Studios theme started blaring, I fell in love. In a summer bereft of good films Scott Pilgrim stands out as a shining beacon of snappy dialogue, intriguing characters and epic cinematography. It is quirky and weird and fun and awesome and completely and totally flawed. I also take issue with the villains. There were, you see, far too many of them: seven to be exact.
Here there be spoilers.
Scott Pilgrim is a twenty-three-year-old lazy dude who likes to play videogames and bass guitar. Enter, Ramona Flowers. Scott falls instantly in love only to learn that to be with her, he must defeat her seven evil exes. Now, I do in fact; realize that Scott Pilgrim based on a comic series. (No, I’ve never read it, I’m nerdy, but not that nerdy). And in the comics, there are indeed seven villains, these seven personages forming the League of Evil Exes. This is fine for a series of comic books where you have one or two villains per volume, but in a two-hour film, cramming in all seven exes is a bit of an issue. For it has the effect of completely destroying the film’s hierarchy of villainy.
To begin with, there are virtually no henchmen. With the exception of a few who are attached to various villains and a couple that Scott dispatches at the very end of the film in G-Man’s lair there is basically zilch in the henchman department. This is not generally an issue other than that it casts a glaring on the fact that there are six villains. Count’em SIX. Okay, maybe five and a half. (Even with their dragons the Katayanagi twins are kind of a let down).
Skip the fact that these villains have virtually no motivation for doing as they do and making Scott’s life a mess. They’re not fighting for Ramona, they are simply battling to make sure no one other than the uber villain can have her. It’s made even more ridiculous by the fact that half of them were dated back in grade school and the other half were dated for a grand total of like 9.2 second. So, these presumably successful rock stars, movie stars and music moguls should be long over their infatuation with the girl with rainbow hair. But, no apparently they cannot rip themselves away from Ramona’s gravitational pull and so these villains zip on and off the screen with bright colors, crashes and bangs, but little emotional motivation.
As for the uber villain, he was to be quite frank, not nearly uber enough. A smarmy, smirking, charmer who himself had little enough motivation to go after Ramona when she was obsessed with him, but who has now formed the League of Evil Exes in order to brow beat Ramona back to him in order to slake his own obsession. He is not a compelling character and frankly, having him played by Jason Schwartzman did not help matters at all. When you have the future Captain America in Chris Evans, and the former Man of Steel in Brandon Routh as mere precursors to your uber villain, you seriously need to step up your game. In short, though charming, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World just can’t get over the suck of its villains.
Despite of all this and over my strenuous objections, I still love this film. Go figure.
When writing your villains, please, please, please! Make sure your villains and uber villain have sound emotional reasons for making your hero’s life a living hell, or else it all just seems silly. Also, be sure that your hierarchy of villainy is sound. Don’t make your villains more intriguing than your uber villain and leave some henchmen lying about for the hero to beat up on, it does so boost his ego.
Yes, me and Michael Cera have still got beef. It’s his face.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Henchmen, Villains and Uber Villains: What Videogames Can Teach Us about Drama
SIDEBAR - Greetings to the folks visiting from justeffing today! It was very cool of Julie to send you on over to check out my humble beginnings. I’m pretty new at this whole blogging endeavor so things may be moving around and resettling some, but feel free to stick around and to add your two cents.
Evil Overlord List # 75 I will instruct my Legions of Terror to attack the hero en masse, instead of standing around waiting while members break off and attack one or two at a time.
Poor Mario, it’s a good thing he’s so super, because he has the worst luck. If it’s not his girl getting kidnapped, it’s his castle being overrun or his brother disappearing. And as any child given any variation of a Nintendo gaming system in the last thirty years knows, he’s going to have to fight through Goombas, Koopas and Chomps before taking on Kammy Koopa and then finally, his arch-nemesis Bowser.
A good action film is set up very much like a good videogame. The larger and more varied the force of villains arrayed against your hero, the more he has to overcome, the stronger both your hero and your story will grow.
In videogames villainy is broken down into three categories: henchmen, villains and uber villains. Henchmen are on the lowest level they generally don’t have names, are terrible shots and rack up body counts like no other. These are the stormtroopers in Star Wars, the orcs in The Lord of the Rings and the Nazis in… well most any movie involving Nazis.
Villains are usually the hired muscle of the big bad; they do have names and can get personal with the hero, but are not the main event. Think Count Rugen (aka the six-fingered man) in The Princess Bride, Frederick Sykes (aka the one-armed man) in The Fugitive and Darth Vader in Return of the Jedi. They are usually defeated in a prolonged physical struggle that weakens the hero before his battle with his ultimate nemesis: the uber villain.
The uber villain is an entirely different kettle of fish. He is the puppet master, the perpetrator of some great evil against the world at large and (hopefully) the hero in particular. He is smart and cunning and usually his confrontation with the hero involves some sort of chicanery. Theirs can be a physical fight, but it can also be a battle of wits and not infrequently the hero is, at the last minute, saved by some kind of outside help or piece of hidden knowledge. Entering at stage right we have Commodus from Gladiator, Agent Smith from The Matrix and The Joker in The Dark Knight. One film that utilizes all three categories with verve and panache is Die Hard.
Die Hard is the story of our hero, John McClane, who is in the wrong place, at the wrong time, who faces one of the great villains in action film history. The stage is set, Christmas Eve, an unhappy couple, a mostly empty skyscraper and a truckload of villains intent on robbery and mayhem.
Our henchmen are the nameless and numerous bank robbers, these are the ones toting machine guns and looking tough, but not doing much else. Karl moves from nameless tough to the role of villain when McClane kills his brother, Tony making the conflict quite personal. Their fight rages throughout the film, Karl becoming further and further enraged by McClane’s antics. The final conflict between Karl and McClane is an epic, bare-knuckled brawl from which, McClane barely escapes; whereupon he goes after Hans Gruber, who is of course, the uber villain.
The relationship between McClane and Gruber in this film is truly marvelous for they are in constant contact through the use of a pilfered two-way radio. Midway through the story they have their meet-epic cementing their mutual wish for the other’s destruction. Their final clash comes at the climax of the film when Gruber has finally figured out that one of his hostages is McClane’s wife. Broken, bloody and very near the end of his rope, McClane confronts Gruber in the building’s vault. McClane is forced to throw down his machine gun, but distracts Gruber and pulls a handgun from where he’d taped it to his back. Gruber’s not dead yet though and drags McClane’s wife with him as he goes out a window. Fortunately, McClane manages to grab his wife and cheerfully drops Gruber ten stories; thereby, assuring all the Die Hard sequels are that much more lame.
When building your story, look at the world, who are the henchmen? Where is the villain? And what are the personal motivations of your uber villain to kill your hero. Figure those things out and you’re well on your way to a decent action franchise.
Evil Overlord List # 75 I will instruct my Legions of Terror to attack the hero en masse, instead of standing around waiting while members break off and attack one or two at a time.
Poor Mario, it’s a good thing he’s so super, because he has the worst luck. If it’s not his girl getting kidnapped, it’s his castle being overrun or his brother disappearing. And as any child given any variation of a Nintendo gaming system in the last thirty years knows, he’s going to have to fight through Goombas, Koopas and Chomps before taking on Kammy Koopa and then finally, his arch-nemesis Bowser.
A good action film is set up very much like a good videogame. The larger and more varied the force of villains arrayed against your hero, the more he has to overcome, the stronger both your hero and your story will grow.
In videogames villainy is broken down into three categories: henchmen, villains and uber villains. Henchmen are on the lowest level they generally don’t have names, are terrible shots and rack up body counts like no other. These are the stormtroopers in Star Wars, the orcs in The Lord of the Rings and the Nazis in… well most any movie involving Nazis.
Villains are usually the hired muscle of the big bad; they do have names and can get personal with the hero, but are not the main event. Think Count Rugen (aka the six-fingered man) in The Princess Bride, Frederick Sykes (aka the one-armed man) in The Fugitive and Darth Vader in Return of the Jedi. They are usually defeated in a prolonged physical struggle that weakens the hero before his battle with his ultimate nemesis: the uber villain.
The uber villain is an entirely different kettle of fish. He is the puppet master, the perpetrator of some great evil against the world at large and (hopefully) the hero in particular. He is smart and cunning and usually his confrontation with the hero involves some sort of chicanery. Theirs can be a physical fight, but it can also be a battle of wits and not infrequently the hero is, at the last minute, saved by some kind of outside help or piece of hidden knowledge. Entering at stage right we have Commodus from Gladiator, Agent Smith from The Matrix and The Joker in The Dark Knight. One film that utilizes all three categories with verve and panache is Die Hard.
Die Hard is the story of our hero, John McClane, who is in the wrong place, at the wrong time, who faces one of the great villains in action film history. The stage is set, Christmas Eve, an unhappy couple, a mostly empty skyscraper and a truckload of villains intent on robbery and mayhem.
Our henchmen are the nameless and numerous bank robbers, these are the ones toting machine guns and looking tough, but not doing much else. Karl moves from nameless tough to the role of villain when McClane kills his brother, Tony making the conflict quite personal. Their fight rages throughout the film, Karl becoming further and further enraged by McClane’s antics. The final conflict between Karl and McClane is an epic, bare-knuckled brawl from which, McClane barely escapes; whereupon he goes after Hans Gruber, who is of course, the uber villain.
The relationship between McClane and Gruber in this film is truly marvelous for they are in constant contact through the use of a pilfered two-way radio. Midway through the story they have their meet-epic cementing their mutual wish for the other’s destruction. Their final clash comes at the climax of the film when Gruber has finally figured out that one of his hostages is McClane’s wife. Broken, bloody and very near the end of his rope, McClane confronts Gruber in the building’s vault. McClane is forced to throw down his machine gun, but distracts Gruber and pulls a handgun from where he’d taped it to his back. Gruber’s not dead yet though and drags McClane’s wife with him as he goes out a window. Fortunately, McClane manages to grab his wife and cheerfully drops Gruber ten stories; thereby, assuring all the Die Hard sequels are that much more lame.
When building your story, look at the world, who are the henchmen? Where is the villain? And what are the personal motivations of your uber villain to kill your hero. Figure those things out and you’re well on your way to a decent action franchise.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Making it Personal: The Meet-Epic
Evil Overlord List # 81 If I am fighting with the hero atop a moving platform, have disarmed him, and am about to finish him off and he glances behind me and drops flat, I too will drop flat instead of quizzically turning around to find out what he saw.
Romantic comedies are stories about relationships. Boy meets girl, boy gets girl, hijinks ensue, boy loses girl, boy eventually wins girl back. Without the meet-cute, or the meet-awkward or the meet-whatever, there is no story. I will be the first to admit that romcom is not exactly my go to genre, however a good writer takes their story tips where they can be found and I believe that a good action-adventure writer can learn an important tidbit from (gasp!) romantic comedies.
A good action adventure film is also about relationship. (Anyone who says differently was probably involved in Transformers 2). Yes, an action movie is about the explosions, yes it’s about the stunts and yes, there is the love interest with his or her requisite URST (unresolved sexual tension) that is obligatorily resolved somewhere deep in the heart of act two, but there is a more important connection at work in the action-adventure genre; the relationship between the hero and the villain.
In order to write an action-adventure story that will stand the test of time I submit that you must consider the relationship between the hero and the villain as important as the boy-girl shenanigans in a romantic comedy. Think about it, Star Wars, Die Hard, The Silence of the Lambs, all classics, have thrillingly evil villains who through word, blood or deed are quite thoroughly tied to the hero. In short the stronger the personal connection between hero and villain, the better the film.
All relationships are defined by moments. Small instances and interactions snowball into relational explosions that drive your characters into the good, the bad or the ugly. In order to cement the relationship of your hero and your villain there must be a moment that I am affectionately calling the "meet-epic". Feel free to coin your own term. This moment can be found at any point during the story, where the hero and villain at last come face to face, clash and then live to fight another day. Joss Whedon’s Serenity is a film that set this moment up quite nicely.
Serenity is a nifty little gem of a film. If you haven’t seen it, go netflix it right now. Seriously, I’ll wait.
Alrighty, now that you’ve experienced the glory that is cowboys in space, awesome dialogue and kick ass characters galore, we can move on.
Serenity’s meet-epic happens fairly early in the story when Mal (Nathan Fillion), our hero, allows himself to be lured into an ambush set by our villain, The Operative (Chiwetel Ejiofor) in order to save his lady-love, Inara (Morena Baccarin). The trap springs, allowing Mal and The Operative to take each other’s measure. It is a fraught moment that reveals both Mal’s cunning and the Operative’s fanatical belief that he is in the Right. The situation quickly devolves from a game of wits into a knock down, drag out brawl wherein The Operative reveals his scary ninja skills and Mal manages to get his ass quite thoroughly kicked. Until, through trickery of her own, Inara manages to bail Mal out of trouble by temporarily incapacitating The Operative.
Our hero’s escape made, this chase very suddenly gets quite personal for our formerly emotionless villain. This is no longer just a mission, there are now personal stakes. The Operative cannot allow himself to have lost to the hasty, reckless mess that is our hero. This confrontation sets the stage for the rest of the film. The Operative does not even have a name, the audience is not given one scrap of personal information about him until the very end of the story and yet we have everything we need to know about him, because he is utterly defined by his conflict with our hero.
There are many other films that use this technique of binding characters in mortal combat, Die Hard, The Matrix and Casino Royale to name just a few. All have moments where the hero and villain takes the other's measure and declares through word or action "Game on". The meet-epic is of incredible importance when writing an action-adventure that will last. So, when next you sit down to write, ask yourself where does this scene fall in your script? How does it define both the hero and the villain? How does it raise the stakes? And how can you make it better?
Romantic comedies are stories about relationships. Boy meets girl, boy gets girl, hijinks ensue, boy loses girl, boy eventually wins girl back. Without the meet-cute, or the meet-awkward or the meet-whatever, there is no story. I will be the first to admit that romcom is not exactly my go to genre, however a good writer takes their story tips where they can be found and I believe that a good action-adventure writer can learn an important tidbit from (gasp!) romantic comedies.
A good action adventure film is also about relationship. (Anyone who says differently was probably involved in Transformers 2). Yes, an action movie is about the explosions, yes it’s about the stunts and yes, there is the love interest with his or her requisite URST (unresolved sexual tension) that is obligatorily resolved somewhere deep in the heart of act two, but there is a more important connection at work in the action-adventure genre; the relationship between the hero and the villain.
In order to write an action-adventure story that will stand the test of time I submit that you must consider the relationship between the hero and the villain as important as the boy-girl shenanigans in a romantic comedy. Think about it, Star Wars, Die Hard, The Silence of the Lambs, all classics, have thrillingly evil villains who through word, blood or deed are quite thoroughly tied to the hero. In short the stronger the personal connection between hero and villain, the better the film.
All relationships are defined by moments. Small instances and interactions snowball into relational explosions that drive your characters into the good, the bad or the ugly. In order to cement the relationship of your hero and your villain there must be a moment that I am affectionately calling the "meet-epic". Feel free to coin your own term. This moment can be found at any point during the story, where the hero and villain at last come face to face, clash and then live to fight another day. Joss Whedon’s Serenity is a film that set this moment up quite nicely.
Serenity is a nifty little gem of a film. If you haven’t seen it, go netflix it right now. Seriously, I’ll wait.
Alrighty, now that you’ve experienced the glory that is cowboys in space, awesome dialogue and kick ass characters galore, we can move on.
Serenity’s meet-epic happens fairly early in the story when Mal (Nathan Fillion), our hero, allows himself to be lured into an ambush set by our villain, The Operative (Chiwetel Ejiofor) in order to save his lady-love, Inara (Morena Baccarin). The trap springs, allowing Mal and The Operative to take each other’s measure. It is a fraught moment that reveals both Mal’s cunning and the Operative’s fanatical belief that he is in the Right. The situation quickly devolves from a game of wits into a knock down, drag out brawl wherein The Operative reveals his scary ninja skills and Mal manages to get his ass quite thoroughly kicked. Until, through trickery of her own, Inara manages to bail Mal out of trouble by temporarily incapacitating The Operative.
Our hero’s escape made, this chase very suddenly gets quite personal for our formerly emotionless villain. This is no longer just a mission, there are now personal stakes. The Operative cannot allow himself to have lost to the hasty, reckless mess that is our hero. This confrontation sets the stage for the rest of the film. The Operative does not even have a name, the audience is not given one scrap of personal information about him until the very end of the story and yet we have everything we need to know about him, because he is utterly defined by his conflict with our hero.
There are many other films that use this technique of binding characters in mortal combat, Die Hard, The Matrix and Casino Royale to name just a few. All have moments where the hero and villain takes the other's measure and declares through word or action "Game on". The meet-epic is of incredible importance when writing an action-adventure that will last. So, when next you sit down to write, ask yourself where does this scene fall in your script? How does it define both the hero and the villain? How does it raise the stakes? And how can you make it better?
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Hawaii Five-O and the Straw that Broke the Camel's Back
Evil Overlord’s List #40 I will be neither chivalrous nor sporting. If I have an unstoppable superweapon, I will use it as early and as often as possible instead of keeping it in reserve.
Ah, fall in Los Angeles, filled with the familiar scents of pumpkin lattes, forest fires, and the not-so-subtle undertone of desperation seeping from nervous showrunners all over town.
These proverbial shifts in the weather signal the beginning of The Great New TV Show Hunt, wherein I set my sights on finding a shiny new story in which to lose myself. Each premiere offers up a bright and shining promise that all too quickly fades within moments of the series lead opening their pretty little mouth. All of this brings me to last Monday night when I, in my innocence, turned my attention to “Hawaii Five-O.”
It begins with promise: lush scenery and a tense moment, quickly followed by serious explosions. The hero, McGarrett, is a pretty enough piece of eye candy, but Anton, our villain, immediately arrests attention. Shackled, surrounded by grim-faced men with very large machine guns and on his way to a secret military prison, Anton is obviously a prisoner, yet he radiates creeping menace, utterly stealing the scene.
It is revealed that this is the end of a protracted cat and mouse game the series lead has been playing with Anton and his brother, Victor. A mere 90 seconds into this interaction I’m muttering imprecations at the aforementioned showrunners, intimating 17 kinds of violence if they decide to kill off Anton, as he is such a compelling villain.
Victor chooses this moment to call McGarrett to let him know that he is now in possession of our hero’s father and he wants a prisoner exchange. McGarrett whines about not being able to negotiate, stalling for time. Meanwhile, Victor goes ahead and triangulates the convoy’s position using the call’s cell signal. A chopper swoops in, wreaking havoc on the convoy, prompting Anton to attempt his escape. Despite my firm warnings, 240 seconds into the episode, McGarrett shoots Anton quite dead.
Victor is, understandably, rather peeved at this turn of events and in return kills off daddy dearest. Setting up what could have been an interesting season arc. However, yes, you guessed it. McGarrett tracks Victor down and executes him before the end of the episode. Coincidentally, my interest in the show is now riddled with McGarrett’s stray bullets.
A good villain is hard to come by. Seriously, let me say it again. A good villain is hard to come by. A good villain with fascinating and personal ties to the hero is pure gold. If precious moments of a pilot are wasted setting up a face-off between two men who have each absolutely devastated each other only to have this tension squandered by ending their potentially epic confrontation with a few hasty bullets, I have nothing to say to you. It is a horrifying waste of story potential and in its first episode, “Hawaii Five-O” manages to kill off not one, but two fascinating villains.
Truly chill-inducing villains are a dying breed. So much focus has been cast onto the development of the hero that we’ve allowed our scoundrels to languish. This must end. We need antagonists who are just as fascinatingly flawed as our protagonists. We need characters who will raise the level of storytelling without resorting to the crutch of cliché. We need villains who will come screaming off the page, setting imaginations and worlds on fire.
Who will meet this challenge? Who will write the next great villain?
Who will rise up in defense of villainy?
Ah, fall in Los Angeles, filled with the familiar scents of pumpkin lattes, forest fires, and the not-so-subtle undertone of desperation seeping from nervous showrunners all over town.
These proverbial shifts in the weather signal the beginning of The Great New TV Show Hunt, wherein I set my sights on finding a shiny new story in which to lose myself. Each premiere offers up a bright and shining promise that all too quickly fades within moments of the series lead opening their pretty little mouth. All of this brings me to last Monday night when I, in my innocence, turned my attention to “Hawaii Five-O.”
It begins with promise: lush scenery and a tense moment, quickly followed by serious explosions. The hero, McGarrett, is a pretty enough piece of eye candy, but Anton, our villain, immediately arrests attention. Shackled, surrounded by grim-faced men with very large machine guns and on his way to a secret military prison, Anton is obviously a prisoner, yet he radiates creeping menace, utterly stealing the scene.
It is revealed that this is the end of a protracted cat and mouse game the series lead has been playing with Anton and his brother, Victor. A mere 90 seconds into this interaction I’m muttering imprecations at the aforementioned showrunners, intimating 17 kinds of violence if they decide to kill off Anton, as he is such a compelling villain.
Victor chooses this moment to call McGarrett to let him know that he is now in possession of our hero’s father and he wants a prisoner exchange. McGarrett whines about not being able to negotiate, stalling for time. Meanwhile, Victor goes ahead and triangulates the convoy’s position using the call’s cell signal. A chopper swoops in, wreaking havoc on the convoy, prompting Anton to attempt his escape. Despite my firm warnings, 240 seconds into the episode, McGarrett shoots Anton quite dead.
Victor is, understandably, rather peeved at this turn of events and in return kills off daddy dearest. Setting up what could have been an interesting season arc. However, yes, you guessed it. McGarrett tracks Victor down and executes him before the end of the episode. Coincidentally, my interest in the show is now riddled with McGarrett’s stray bullets.
A good villain is hard to come by. Seriously, let me say it again. A good villain is hard to come by. A good villain with fascinating and personal ties to the hero is pure gold. If precious moments of a pilot are wasted setting up a face-off between two men who have each absolutely devastated each other only to have this tension squandered by ending their potentially epic confrontation with a few hasty bullets, I have nothing to say to you. It is a horrifying waste of story potential and in its first episode, “Hawaii Five-O” manages to kill off not one, but two fascinating villains.
Truly chill-inducing villains are a dying breed. So much focus has been cast onto the development of the hero that we’ve allowed our scoundrels to languish. This must end. We need antagonists who are just as fascinatingly flawed as our protagonists. We need characters who will raise the level of storytelling without resorting to the crutch of cliché. We need villains who will come screaming off the page, setting imaginations and worlds on fire.
Who will meet this challenge? Who will write the next great villain?
Who will rise up in defense of villainy?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)