Every story needs characters to root for and characters to root against. 
Posting about ­­­­­­­­movie villains and their appeal from In All Things - an online journal for critical reflection on faith, culture, art, and every ordinary-yet-graced square inch of God’s creation.
https://inallthings.org/the-attraction-of-and-response-to-villain-retellings-part-1

Jayaputra, Lydia

English

Dordt College

Digital Collections @ Dordt Student Work 2-21-2022 Voice of the Villains: The Attraction of and Response to Villain Retellings (Part 1) Lydia Jayaputra Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/student_work  Part of the American Popular Culture Commons Voice of the Villains: The Attraction of and Response to Villain Retellings (Part 1)  Lydia Jayaputra  February 21, 2022   In 2003, the musical, Wicked, premiered on Broadway and went on to become arguably “one of musical theatre’s biggest success stories.”1 The musical, based on a 1995 book which itself is a spin-off The Wizard of Oz, follows the Wicked Witch of the West—except instead of the villain, she is a misunderstood heroine. The musical turns the movie The Wonderful Wizard of Oz on its head, making the bad guys good and the good guys either bad or altogether dumb.   Wicked is not the only successful creation to re-spin popular fairy tales; since its release, other big-time companies (Disney, Sony, and Warner Bros) have recently retold their own villainous characters through film. In 2014, Disney released Maleficent, turning their own Sleeping Beauty villain into a betrayed but inherently good heroine who saves Aurora herself. In 2018, Sony released Venom, a movie about one of comic Spiderman’s enemies. In the film, he is instead a lovable symbiote with a soft heart for the losers. In 2019, the slightly controversial film Joker was released, Batman’s crazy comic-book rival transformed into a heavily bullied and misunderstood aspiring comedian. In 2021, Disney’s Cruella re-told the tale of Cruella De Vil, former villain of 101 Dalmatians, recreating her as an orphan seeking revenge on the woman who killed her mother. While the complicated villain is not a new character trope (think Sympathy for the Devil by Rolling Stones, or even Richard III by Shakespeare), such a quick string of villain retellings within leading major entertainment companies is enough to be considered a new trend within U.S. culture.   What caused an influx of such movies? And how should we, as Christians, react? To answer the second question, we must first solve the first question. In other words, we are trying to ask why we like villain retellings and what messages they tell us. After these questions are solved, we can discern what we, as Christians, should take away from the films.  Reason 1: We like them because they are relatable.  The first cultural aspect to look at is relatability. Some people, particularly young adults, resonated with movie villains (particularly Disney villains) even before filmmaking companies made the characters sympathetic.2 Their identities fell closer to the sarcastic outsider than to the perfect, well-adjusted Mary Sues, even if that sarcastic outsider was ultimately evil. Take the professions of Jessica Kirker, for example, who as an adult realizes her “critical, feminist, troublemaking self would squarely construct as a villain.”3 Now that film villain retellings fully embrace the ‘countercultural,’ sassy sides of these characters, adults can further embrace their resonance with them.  These remakes also give relatability to something typical heroes don’t fully represent—being misunderstood. Without exception, each character within the string of villain retellings is misunderstood by the larger society and remains that way to an extent. Some main characters go as far as to say, “I wasn’t for everyone,”4 or “I pass you every day and you don’t notice me.”5 Seeing a misunderstood character resonates with others who feel misunderstood by society (which in a pluralistic, diverse society like the United States, can be a lot of people). Not only would anyone who feels like an outcast find security in such a movie, but they would find justification in their otherness.  Reason 2: We like them for their modern morality.  Every story needs characters to root for and characters to root against. Since villain retellings ask the audience to root for morally questionable characters, they present even worse characters as the ‘true’ bad guys. For Cruella, this is Baroness Von Hellman; for Maleficent, King Stefan; for Venom, the Riot Symbiote and Carlton Drake, and the list continues. It seems there is a layered spectrum of badness, ranging from murder to petty theft, and if the protagonist is fighting an antagonist further down the spectrum, people feel ethically permitted to accept the retold villain.6 This is fundamentally an ethic of perspective.  In addition to a negative counterpart, the sheer amount of time spent in the villain’s perspective allows us to view them as more morally just. In modern psychological terms, this phenomenon is called “Fundamental Attribution Error,” defined by “the tendency to attribute another person’s behavior to their internal characteristics as opposed to the situation they are in at the time.”7 If a stranger were to shoot someone, the first ethical instinct of many is to assume the morality of that person is just as evil as the action they committed. However, if you were to shoot someone, you are much less likely to avoid assigning the morals of that action to your inner self. We see our own perspective and understand why the action was taken, whereas with a stranger, we do not see why the action was taken, and therefore equate the morality of the action with the collective morality of the person.8 Villain retellings spend all their time in a villain’s perspective, allowing the audience to bypass Fundamental Attribution Error and accept the villain’s negative behavior as situational.  Reason 3: We like them for the aesthetics.  The power behind Sony, Disney, and Warner Bros allows them the budget to create stunning works of art through their villain retellings through visual design, audio quality, and/or skillful writing. In addition to using aesthetics for aesthetics’ sake, each film uses the appearance of the character themselves to make villains more likable than they were in their previous movies. To be frank, the villains get a hot glow-up. The reasoning behind why we associate this with likability is aptly described in Keen’s analysis in “Rooting for the Bad Guy”:  “In traditional media, the protagonist is portrayed as more physically attractive than the antagonist, leading audiences to prefer him… In current media, the protagonist of the story is also often the bad guy…Thus, when attractive villains are cast, we assume they possess more positive qualities than the less attractive good guys in the show, so unsurprisingly, we prefer them.”9  Evidence of Disney, Sony, and Warner Bros’ use of this effect is best seen visually. Compare the retold villains side-by-side to the older, more corrupt version of themselves, or simply look at the leading actors. In addition to physical attractiveness making villains more likable, studies have shown that people assign the characteristics of intelligence and competence to attractive people, but do not automatically assign integrity or empathy to them.10 This means a retold villain’s good looks help the viewer to see them as likable, smart, and competent, but also lets the viewer give them a pass in behaving positively.    1. Freeman, Sarah. “How Wicked Became One of Musical Theatre’s Biggest Success …” Yorkshire post, 2016. https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/arts-and-culture/theatre-and-stage/how-wicked-became-one-musical-theatres-biggest-success-stories-615345.   2. Mandracchia C. It’s Good to Be Bad: Resistance, Rebellion, and Disney Villain Merchandise. In: Kokai J., Robson T. (eds) (2019). Performance and the Disney Theme Park Experience. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29322-2_12   3. Kirker, Jessica L. “CHAPTER FIFTEEN: Learning to Live as a Disney Villain.” Counterpoints 477 (2016): 207–18. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45157197.   4. Gillespie, Greg, director. 2021. Cruella. Walt Disney Pictures.   5. Phillips, Tod, director. 2019. Joker. Warner Bros. Pictures.   6. Keen, Richard, Monica L. McCoy, and Elizabeth Powell. “Rooting for the Bad Guy: Psychological Perspectives.” Studies in Popular Culture 34, no. 2 (2012): 129–48. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23416402. 130.   7. Keen, 130.   8. Keen, 130.   9. Keen, Richard, Monica L. McCoy, and Elizabeth Powell. “Rooting for the Bad Guy: Psychological Perspectives.” Studies in Popular Culture 34, no. 2 (2012): 129–48. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23416402.   10. Keen, 135.    

Voice of the Villains: The Attraction of and Response to Villain Retellings (Part 1)

While villain retellings show that perspective does indeed change our moral boundaries, theology begs us to remember that God’s perspective, being all-encompassing, cannot be wrong. 
Posting about movie villains and their appeal from In All Things - an online journal for critical reflection on faith, culture, art, and every ordinary-yet-graced square inch of God’s creation.
https://inallthings.org/voice-of-the-villains-the-attraction-of-and-response-to-villain-retellings-part-2

Digital Collections @ Dordt Student Work 2-24-2022 Voice of the Villains: The Attraction of and Response to Villain Retellings (Part 2) Lydia Jayaputra Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/student_work  Part of the American Popular Culture Commons, and the Christianity Commons Voice of the Villains: The Attraction of and Response to Villain Retellings (Part 2) Lydia Jayaputra  February 24, 2022  Villain retellings (defined as popular modern movies which take a former antagonist character and turn them into a protagonist) have a variety of reasons for their success, including their relatability for those who feel outcast, their modern morality, and their aesthetics. Now that we are aware of the messages of villain retellings, we can discern what to take away from them.  Reaction 1: Christianity and Otherness  Otherness, in and of itself, is not something to feel ashamed by. Jesus interacted and ate with the cultural outsiders of his community (Mark 2:13-17, John 4:1-10, John 8:4-11, Luke 7:1-10). In this sense, villain retellings encourage us to “welcome all parties” to the table of Christianity, as Jesus invites all.1 However, unlike Jesus, villain retellings make the character’s identity inseparable from their morally questionable actions. For some, even their names are evil: think of the meanings behind Venom (a poisonous substance), Cruella De Vil (Cruel Devil), and Maleficent (an adjective that means causing harm or destruction). Jesus separates one’s identity from their moral actions through the forgiveness of sins (Luke 7:47-48, John 8:11). Perhaps the phrase “hate the sin, love the sinner” comes to mind when making these distinctions, and indeed, the difference between accepting identity and accepting behaviors is the balancing act Christians must engage in when interacting with villain retellings.  Reaction 2: Christianity and Modern Morality  The morality of perspective has connections to empathy, an incredibly important trait for Christians, since it allows us to “love your neighbor as yourself.”2 It also reminds us that we are fallible, as it asks us to understand how our actions can negatively impact others. These effects should be celebrated because they encourage deeply important Christian virtues, like humility and love for others. However, the morality of perspective can easily justify any behavior, no matter how heinous or destructive it is. In Joker, the Joker murders three men, but it’s perceived as okay because those men beat him up and abused him beforehand. Even the face of moral evil himself, Satan, can get rebranded through the morality of perspective (see Netflix’s TV show, Lucifer). While villain retellings show that perspective does indeed change our moral boundaries, theology begs us to remember that God’s perspective, being all-encompassing, cannot be wrong.  Reaction 3: Christianity and Aesthetics.  Our love for aesthetics is a good, God-given aspect of humanity’s existence. But as with anything good, it becomes a problem when it is prioritized above everything else. Goudzwaard and Bartholomew liken the modern age to a “hurricane of desire,” containing consumers easily swayed by what feels the most aesthetically pleasing.3 Combined with the modern age’s emphasis on authenticity, this train of thought changes what people want at a rapid pace and then encourages them to follow whatever they desire all the time.4 In terms of villain retellings, this could lead people to incorrectly assign positive attributes to attractive people who do not actually display them—and by contrast, people we do not find attractive may be unfairly judged. It can also lead people to follow in the villain’s footsteps as they “feel” their way forward, letting the hurricane of desire dictate their goals instead of a moral compass or outside authority.    Reaction 4: Christianity and Power  Every villain retelling listed had a wealthy and powerful organization behind it, whether it be Disney, Sony, or Warner Bros.5 While power was not necessarily a reason we like villain retellings, it is still an important aspect of the films to discern.   The most obvious emphasis of power within villain retellings is the sheer monetary force of the companies that make them. In 2020, Disney made over $4.3 billion in revenue through their streaming service, Disney+. Sony and Warner Bros may look small in comparison, but they earned a modest $493 and $259 million in box office sales despite COVID-19 related setbacks. These companies are household names—it would be almost impossible to exaggerate the popularity of their products in the U.S.   Disney holds a surprising amount of influence over the average North American. In the 1990s, the general public of the U.S. started to blame violent entertainment outlets for creating violent children, fueled by incidents such as school shootings and other violent law-breaking behavior.6 The train of thought was “if bad media create bad kids, then surely good media will create good ones. If violent children…had grown up on a steady diet of Disney products, perhaps more than one tragedy might have been averted.”7 Disney movies became the family-friendly staple, the entertainment company trusted to help every parent turn their child into a good citizen.8 Disney’s cultural influence amongst families with children has persisted to the point where Disney-themed children’s parties are entirely normal events. The company’s family-friendly reputation protects them; who is going to a child’s parents to address Disney’s racism or classism within the movies their child adores?9 Disney’s legacy protects their products, including their recent villain retellings.  To be perfectly clear, holding power in and of itself is not a sin. Power starts as a gift, as a God-given ability to achieve justice and beauty in the world around us.10 Its bad rap comes from the ability to use it for injustice or idolatry. The practical repercussions of injustice are easy to define, whether as instances of racism, mistreatment of workers, or hoarding of wealth. The more difficult power play to notice is injustice as idolatry.  In Crouch’s book Playing God, injustice and idolatry are defined as the same thing: “the introduction into God’s very good world of false images, images that destroy the true images God has placed in the world.”11 These instances of power play are aptly called “playing God,” as the party committing idolatry is attempting to grasp control away from God.12 If a company is inflated to a status of utter control and authority, if they can do no wrong, they are playing God. Whenever we assign ethics or loyalty to an institution more than we assign them to God, we allow the institution to play God in our lives. Think of the expectation of consistently ethical and entertaining products from these companies as “having faith” in them; think of the fear of criticizing Disney as the fear of “committing heresy” within a social group. The good news is that breaking the power play of idolatry does not necessarily mean one has to stop consuming entertainment from these companies altogether. Instead, it requires agency that lets us admit the flaws of the company and product, and giving control to God, not to entertainment or to ourselves.13  Villain retellings, like their main characters, are a mixed bag of the wonderful and corrupt. Their popularity is due to their cultural resonance to many people—in many ways, the movies get something right in portraying what it means to be human. Yet, their downfalls require us to use a discerning eye when interacting with villain retellings. The only way a discerning examination can occur is if we take a “non-reductive, non-dismissive, and non-anxious” stance to each film.14 If any lesson is to be taken away from villain retellings, let it be that man-made works are complex and worth a discerning eye.   1. Bailey, 46.   2. Mathew 22:39.   3. Bob Goudzwaard, and Craig G. Bartholomew. Beyond the Modern Age : An Archaeology of Contemporary Culture. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2017. https://search-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.dordt.edu:8085/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=1679740&site=ehost-live&scope=site.   4. Goudzwaard and Batholemew, 166.   5. Bailey, 50.   6. Sammond, Nicholas. Babes In Tomorrowland: Walt Disney and the Making of the American Child, 1930-1960. Durham: Duke University Press, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822386834   7. Sammond, 2.   8. Sammond, 8.   9. Kirker, 211.   10. Crouch, Andy, Playing God : Redeeming the Gift of Power, 2003. Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Books. https://search-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.dordt.edu:8085/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=639790 &site=ehost-live&scope=site. 9.   11. Crouch, 71.   12. Crouch, 69.   13. Crouch, 73.   14. Bailey, 152.   

Voice of the Villains: The Attraction of and Response to Villain Retellings (Part 2)

https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1074&context=student_work

Voice of the Villains: The Attraction of and Response to Villain Retellings (Part 1)

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Dordt College

Dordt College