Hello my friends! 
Here’s another instalment in Duckyworth’s Edits – a little variation on my usual film reviews where I either talk about a mistake or a changing opinion from one of my film reviews, or talk about my thoughts on a certain aspect of film that I want to share my opinions on.
In today’s Duckyworth’s Edits, I’ll be talking about one of my favourite aspects of film – villains. 
Yep, in most cases, you can’t have a brilliant protagonist without an equally brilliant antagonist to go up against, and in most cases, the villains can end up becoming even more popular and cherished than the actual hero of the film. 
Now, there are many types of villain in films - comedic villains, tragic villains, terrifying villains – but the type of villains I will be talking about today are one-dimensional villains.
Now, some people criticise villains that are ‘one-dimensional’ – those that don’t really have as much development as far as motivation, personality or relatability is concerned. Some people say that these villains are immediately weaker than three-dimensional villains, those with a more relatable personality range or motivation, which makes them more sympathetic. While I will say that I do respect a film like Big Hero 6 or Bram Stoker’s Dracula that makes more sympathetic (Professor Callaghan and the Gary Oldman version of Dracula are more tragic and have a more sympathetic reason for carrying out their evil deeds), if they’re written very well, I can love them just as much as three dimensional villains if they’re done right. So, what’s the way that one dimensional villains can be written correctly, at least for me?
Well, believe it or not, but a lot of my favourite villains are actually one-dimensional ones – even some of the most popular Disney villains are one dimensional, but are so intimidating and so entertaining to watch that I actually find myself really enjoying watching them. Maleficent, for example, is a villain who has a very odd motivation – wanting to kill Aurora simply because she wasn’t invited to her birthday party, and has no humanity to her whatsoever, but is just so enjoyable to watch in how deliciously evil she is and in how driven she is carry out her goal. The same can be said for a villain like Ursula – all she wants is power, but the fact that she has so much fun with carrying out her goal makes me have fun along with her. Even the less popular villains from Disney like the Horned King and Bill Sykes have gained points with me over the years – I’ve been thinking back on my review of Oliver and Company, and I originally said I wasn’t too keen on Bill Sykes. Looking back, and after reading some thoughts on the villain from my friend :iconkurvosvickey:, after he made some very good points about the villains in an Underrated Villains meme of his, I’ve been thinking about it – and Sykes, while not having the most original motivation, is pretty damn formidable now that I think about it. Also, outside of Disney, villains like Castle in the Sky’s Muska, Ginga Nagareboshi Gin’s Akakabuto, Watership Down’s General Woundwort and Friendship is Magic’s King Sombra are villains who don’t really want anything more than power, and while they don’t really have much as far as backstory is concerned, the fact that they’re so menacing and so enjoyably malicious is something that gives me enjoyment out of watching them. I know many of you may be surprised that I included King Sombra here, but much like Tirek, the way that he goes ABOUT trying to get power is what makes him such a memorable villain for me. Also, with King Sombra, one thing that many people seem to forget about is that unlike some villains who make it up as they go along, Sombra had planned everything BEFORE he was imprisoned by Celestia and Luna – if it wasn’t for Spike’s intervention, he would have definitely succeeded, and even then, if Shining Armour and Cadence weren’t there, Spike may have very well been EATEN. Sombra had planned all the traps VERY far in advance – which gives him bonus points, in my opinion. That’s just one example of how a villain that may appear as bland to some people can be made all the more threatening.
They don’t necessarily have to look like they’re having fun doing what they’re doing, but making villains with less original motivations SCARY is one thing than earn some points with me and make them more enjoyable. Take a good look at The Coachman from Pinocchio – all there is to him is that he kidnaps disobedient children to turn them into donkeys – but as little development as this villain has – I don’t think ANY of us could forget him even if we wanted to – remember that scary face he makes? 
Even if a villain is a Generic Doomsday Villain, I personally feel that if you write them to be intimidating enough, they can still be entertaining. 
Another prime example of a villain who doesn’t really have much of a deep motivation or deep personality but manages to be memorable for me nonetheless is Mrs Tweedy from Chicken Run. When I think about this villain, all there really is to her personality wise is this surly farm owner whose motivation is to bring Tweedy’s Farm out of the dark ages by converting the egg farm into the chicken pie business. Nonetheless, the fact that she acts like Hitler towards the chickens, and we see her actions through the eyes of the chicken characters makes her a pretty terrifying villain. 
In fact – here’s a little confession I have to make. I know just how many people despise Hans from Frozen – the prince charming who turns out to be someone who plans to kill Elsa to cement his position as a hero, and lied his way into the good books of everyone around him, including Anna. But despite all that – I actually find him to be a VERY effective villain in just how unexpected the change was from supportive prince to backstabbing slimeball. The same goes for Lord Barkis from Corpse Bride – a villain that is hated by the mainstream for their actions, but I actually have to give the villains some serious credit for how clever their actions are. Hans has a seriously high amount of charisma, intelligence and charm to him (and to be honest… he’s one of the reasons I want to grow sideburns 
) and he uses this to take advantage of the socially awkward Anna, who had been locked away from human contact all her life, pretending that he loves her. A reason why I like the way Barkis and Hans were written as villains is because, for one, it actually sounds like some examples from history of REAL cases of men manipulating women just to get power or riches, like Barkis did with the dowry, and Hans lying about Anna marrying him so he can pass off as the King of Arendelle – and I have to also give them credit for being cunning enough to plan such an elaborate scheme. And also, the reveal of Hans villainy is pretty powerful – not only does it make it all the more TERRIFYING when he starts trying to freeze Anna (seriously, this may make it on my Scariest Disney Moments meme), but the way a villain is able to keep his evil nature a secret for so long – like the way Turbo kept his true form a secret for so long, makes the villain all the more powerful – shows how manipulative and cruel they can be.
Or, if you don’t want to make a scary villain, if they don’t have the best motivations, I still think they can work if they’re funny, or if they at least look like they’re having fun doing what they’re doing – or if they’re at least competent. An example of this is the Duke of Weselton from Frozen - I will admit, at first, the way he just FLAT OUT SAYS that he wants to take advantage of Arendelle’s seemed a bit stupid, but luckily, this guy, like Alan Tudyk’s other Disney villain Turbo, gets a TON of laughs out of me... 
Even the line where he states his intentions is funny to me – ‘Ah, Arendelle. My most mysterious trade partner. Open those gates so I may unlock your secrets and exploit your riches! Did I say that out loud...?’ First of all, considering his personality, it seems fitting that people pronounce his kingdom as WEASELTOWN... And throughout the film, despite his obvious weasel-like status and the way he plans to send his bodyguards to KILL Elsa, the fact he manages to get quite a laugh out of me gives him some more memorable scenes for me. 
In fact, probably the BEST example of this kind of villain for me is Monokuma from Danganronpa – Monokuma is one of my favourite villains in media (if you haven’t gathered that already by the fact I own a PLUSHIE of him 
) – he’s a villain who simply wants to spread despair and cause the apocalypse just because he enjoys it. If you look at a villain with THAT as their motivation, chances are the villain would be universally panned right away. But at the same time, the villain is one of the most COMPETANT villains and one of the FUNNIEST that I’ve ever seen – throughout the Danganronpa series, the jokes this villain pulls and how much he enjoys making everyone’s lives a misery makes the villain more than enjoyable for me. He’s a bit like the Gremlins in that regard – a villain who wants to spread pain and misery JUST BECAUSE THEY CAN, but the humour from these villains and the fact that they get so much enjoyment out of their actions can redeem them for me. Speaking of which – I can think of many horror movie villains that go on mass murder sprees and kill numerous victims just because they can, without any real motivation. The Thing, Nosferatu, and no doubt many more horror monsters feel the need to kill innocent people just for the heck of it, but that doesn’t make them any less threatening or memorable.
So, how are one-dimensional villains made UNENJOYABLE for me? Well… one dimensional bullies aka. Jerk Jocks and Alpha Bitches come to mind. 
What seperates one dimensional bullies from the good one dimensional villains I mentioned earlier? Well – one dimensional bullies just aren’t interesting at all, and unlike villains like the Gremlins and Monokuma, they aren’t funny or threatening at all, they’re just there to be tools – the Bizkit Twins, Diamond Tiara, Johnny Worthington III, Arrow, Myrtle Edmunds, Wolfgang, the evil version of Sunset Shimmer, pretty much all of the school bullies from any film based on what Stephen King has written…. All these ‘villains’ are just the SAME character – they only exist to insult the main characters for absolutely no reason whatsoever, and use the exact same methods to berate the main character for no real reason. Unlike villains like Monokuma, these villains aren’t even funny or entertaining – their antagonistic actions are just boring, infuriating and annoying. Actually, that’s probably the main gripe I have with the generic bully villains – they’re just so ANNOYING in their generic….ness. It’s a shame that are so few examples of bullies that have REASONS for picking on everyone – Babs Seed had been bullied by everyone around her, so she sadly felt the only reason to stop the abuse was to be abusive back, a sad reflection of real life – the same goes for Wiggles McSunbask from Littlest Pet Shop. If you’re not going to make someone who picks on everyone else funny, at least give a good REASON why they’re so horrible to everyone around them. 
In fact, if there are ANY examples of main villains in media that are just the school bully but are actually really interesting characters, feel free to name any in the comments.
Another example of this are villains who try to be intimidating, but end up being pretentious, or the villains that are just there to be strawmen – the villains who are there JUST to be proven wrong or don’t even have a reason to be there to begin with, or their goals make absolutely no sense at all… Once again, villains that are so incompetent that they’re actually FUNNY – like the Diamond Dogs from Friendship is Magic, Jesse, James and Meowth from Team Rocket, Edgar from The Aristocats, Abis Mal from the Aladdin series and Dr Robotnik from AoStH don’t count – by this point, I mean the villains are boring and don’t entertain me in the slightest. You know, villains like Ruber, Metalbeak, Drago Bludvist, Basil (Elf That Rescued Christmas), Black Wolf and White Wolf, Racoon (The Nut Job), Holli Would, The Timber Wolves from Friendship is Magic, Gnorga, Morgana, Sarousche, Big Boss from Rio 2, Aloysius O’Hare from The Lorax remake, Kazar from The Wild – these villains are just so bland, and even worse, even though they aren’t one dimensional bullies, I personally hate how they aren’t funny in the slightest, have REALLY questionable or bland motivations, and are not memorable in the slightest. They’re just all the WRONG turns you can take with a villain character – no proper backstory or motivation, they rip off much better villains (for example, they didn’t even TRY to make Morgana a different villain from Ursula – she’s just a watered down skinny version of Ursula….), no funny moments, their defeats are a joke and make no logical sense (looking at you, Timberwolves), they’re unthreatening – or they try so hard to be threatening that it makes them pretentious and boring (I never found Metalbeak or Drago Bludvist intimidating in any way – if you make a scary villain, there’s more to it than just holding them under dramatic dark lighting….), and in worse cases like Raccoon from The Nut Job and Kazar from The Wild, there’s no real reason for them to be villains in the first place, and it feels like they were slapped onto the story at the last minute JUST for there to be an antagonist – or they’re horribly disjointed from the main plot and don’t appear in enough scenes to justify their existence... I compare these villains often to Alex DeLarge from A Clockwork Orange – he’s one of the worst human beings that you could imagine, but the fact that he gets so much ENJOYMENT out of what he does makes him such a powerful character, and the way he has such a lust for life helps me to actually SYMPATHISE with him in the later parts of the film. Once again, he doesn’t have much of a motivation for what he does, but because of how much enjoyment he gets out of his crimes and because he has such a lust for life, it makes him a much more enjoyable villain character – which makes it easier to sympathise with him when he starts getting his mind broken.
Another way one dimensional villains can fail is if they’re TOO evil – I know that may sound a bit weird coming from me, but villains like Princess Kushana from Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind, Jigo from Princess Mononoke, Dahlia Hawthorne from Phoenix Wright: Trials and Tribulations, Kristoph Gavin from Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney and Bill Hawks from Professor Layton and the Lost Future fail because of some actions that they carry out. Remembering The Coachman, that may seem a bit weird – he turns boys into donkeys and doesn’t get any punishment for it – but The Coachman wasn’t ANNOYING or infuriating in any way. The actions of the four villains I just mentioned INFURIATE me to a manner. At risk of sounding like I’m pulling explanations out of thin air – I’m not entirely sure what it is about them, but something about the ATTITUDES of these villains is what annoys me – they seem very blind to the true nature of what they’re doing (some of the villains I give leeway to at least have a grasp of the implications of what they’re doing) and either blindly shift the blame of what they’ve done onto someone else (Kristoph Gavin says that allowing common citizens to play an active part in court proceedings is infantile and laughs off the decision they come to when he’s found guilty, Bill Hawks discards the truth that he became Prime Minister at the cost of numerous people’s lives, caused Clive’s descent into despair and practically caused half of London to be destroyed, and Dahlia Hawthorne blindly smack talks everyone else for her own failings – like her choice words for Terry Fawles and Valerie Hawthorne when her $2,000,000 diamond stealing didn’t go to fruition) or don’t seem to learn anything about what they’ve done and don’t really get comeuppance for their crimes (Jigo shrugging off the fact he practically KILLED the gods of the forest and Kushana causing heavens knows how much havoc and just leaving for home without paying any price). The Coachman may have been a diabolical villain, but the fact that he doesn’t smack talk anyone, blame anyone else for what he’s done or have a rude attitude makes him more tolerable than the other villains I mentioned. A lot of the Phoenix Wright villains, while being the worst kinds of human beings possible, at least get enjoyment out of me due to how they carry out their schemes – if something happens that sucks out the enjoyment out of a villain (another example is Commander Zhao from Avatar: The Last Airbender – if he wasn’t so annoying and stuck up, I might actually be able to appreciate the guy more), then it makes the villain much less powerful for me. 
So, this may have seemed like a lot to talk about, but here’s a final rundown on how I feel one-dimensional villains can work. If you’re not going to give a villain a huge amount of motivation or backstory, making them intimidating, smart, funny, or at least not working an unforgivable attitude into their character can be something that can help make them more entertaining than a run of the mill villain who ties women to the railroad tracks and throws puppies over cliffs just because. And if you’re going to write in a school bully as a recurring villain – at least give a good reason for their antagonistic attitude.
But hey, that’s just my personal take on it. If you have any thoughts on my thoughts about how to make a seemingly generic villain more interesting or memorable, feel free to comment below.
See you soon!
