@@doutorquem4279 sympathetic villains are villains that actually think they're doing good intentions but actually are not. Example is the villain from Big Hero 6 (forgot his name but he's a professor of some kind)
Think what made Pixar anti-heroes really stand out from other anti-heroes is that they never start out as bad people. In the case of Anton Ego and Dean Hardscrabble, they're just strict professionals who do not want any room for error in their work. And given their roles? Totally understandable. The 'villainous' aspect is where they take it TOO seriously that it overtakes them.
I don't really see Anto Ego as a hero, antihero, antivillain, or villain. To me he seems like an antagonist that hasn't picked up an additional label. He doesn't really seem to do enough to fit any of the additional categories, but that's just me.
@@nathenewendzel7806 Its been a while since Ive seen the move but Im pretty sure what gives him villain status is that he hated Gusteau and his "everyone can cook" motto, so he promised that he would do everything he could to give it a bad review. He was an elitist snob that was "defeated" by serving him a peasant dish, a humble meal that he couldnt hate because it reminded him of his mothers cooking. If he was just an antagonist the dynamic would be more like "hey heres this famously strict food critic that we want to impress", not "this guy hates our restaurant due to personal reasons and will abuse his prestige as a food critic to give us a bad review that will tank our reputation".
@@tobiasbayer4866 still he is just an antagonist and pretty much this about being famous strict critic who is just doing his job is his actual role, simply having a personal vendeta for someone or hating someones motto is not enough to be a villain, for example in Ace Attorney Miles Edgeworth is doing a questionable things during trials and have personal vendeta against defence attorneys, but he never exacly is a villain more like jerk who is abusing his status a bit.
@@kacperaskawski3461 Miles Edgeworth literally starts out as a villain, its just that the gets redeemed later. Anton Ego also got redeemed. Doesnt mean he wasnt a villain though.
@@tobiasbayer4866 so what were their villanous actions? Anton just do his job even while hating restaurant owner and his motto, while Miles is exacly the same as his methods are legal in Japanese court on which AA is based. Being a villain literaly mean that you have to do something evil or break the law, antagonist simply is enemy of the hero who can be villain, but might also be a simple rival, even antagonist who is not villain can be redeemed.
I like the definition: an anti-villain is an antagonist, without villainous traits or motives.... That instantly takes me to the fox and the hound for a disney example
I'm glad you point out the difference between an antagonist and a villain, in that an antagonist may work against the hero's goals, but not be against them personally.
I love how so much lore and stuff was established for Buzz Lightyear’s universe yet the film chose to throw it out in favor of weird plot twists and “always chaotic evil” aliens.
Ego just had a particular paradigm that needed shifting. And in doing so get's exactly what he asks for. When Ego is asked what he would like when he comes into the restaurant, he asks for perspective. By the end of the night, he indeed has a new perspective. Poetry in motion picture.
I'm glad these characters are recognized as Anti-Villain given that they very much do the opposite of what villains usually do and yet they still feel like an antagonist in the story. Even though they have miserable or unlikable characteristics, I'm glad that most of Pixar's Anti-Villain characters either find happiness or change their outlooks on life compared to its villainous catalog.
Auto hits HARD. Auto did his best - he kept humanity alive. He was the head machine, controlling EVERYTHING, but without "direct strings". Compare it to "omnipresent" AIs that can just, for example, lock door, look at you thought any camera, directly control any robot, etc, and compare how Auto keeps ship alive. He acts like a human - he has to press buttons, give orders directly, and sees only what Bee McCrea could also see. Effectively, Auto could be replaced by Human and not reduce available methods of ship maintenance and control, and yet Auto was here. Always here, keeping ship alive, putting robots built by BnL where they belong. 700 years of maintenance are no joke, and I 100% believe Auto plays significant role to keep it like that.
Yeah, I always hated that Auto was supposed to be a hard villan. I feel like without Auto, the infinite cruse wouldn't have worked so well. And I personally feel like even at the end, the humans won't make things well or completely succeed. It's one tiny little sprout, and these are people who hardly understand anything.
@@MysticMorigan1998The end credits montage at the end of the film shows the progress humans make into repopulating and regrowing the Earth, so they actually succeeded contrary to your last statement.
You know I’d probably consider John silver from treasure planet to be an anti-villain as well. i’m serious yeah sure he he still wanted treasures and to be rich and everything but he still clearly had a fatherly bond with Jim And he truly cared about him to the point where he literally gives up the treasure by the end
Personally, I didn't mind Pixar at first, because I thought they would be the ones making 3D while Disney would make the usual stuff. Too bad those guys changed drastically since the 2010's and it's not good what's happening in the animation industry because of too much of convenience, rush, lazyness and lack of creativity & passion for art.
3D doesn't equate to a lack of creativity or passion. And since 3D was new and focused on realism, I'm unsurprised it became popular. A similar thing is happening with hybrid animation, though due to it being hard on my eyes at times, I hope it doesn't become the next big thing--but I don't think it will, since I think a big reason for it's popularity is the novelty.
@@OpticalSorcerer Well other animation studios are trying to copy the Spider-Verse style, even Disney, and personally, I think some animation studios should just stick to their own style
@@JamesP7 They menntioned they didn't mind Pixar at first because they thought Pixar would be the only one doing 3D while Disney did "the usual stuff" and lamented them changing since the 2010s.
What about Joy from Inside Out? All she wants to do is make Riley, and other emotions, happy because it’s in her nature. She gets to points where she’s telling the other’s what to do on the first day of school and doesn’t accept that a new core memory is sad, causing both her and Sadness to go into long-term memory. When Sadness brings up a sad memory or something (“Riley missed the winning shot. She wanted to quit.”) she feels that she has to say sorry to Joy or Joy tells her to work on it. Joy gets frustrated at Sadness for talking to Bing Bong when his rocket gets thrown away, before he feels better and she wonders how she did that. Joy wouldn’t let Sadness get in the recall tube because the core memories were turning blue, and she fell to the forgotten memories with bing bong. Only after replaying the hockey memory, and remembering Sadness’ words “she missed the winning shot” as Riley was sad while sitting with her parents before her team came to cheer her up, did Joy realize that Riley needs to feel Sadness, and all the other emotions. Joy asks Sadness to stop Riley from running away, she gives her the core memories, and the emotions start making new core memories with multiple emotions
Anti-villains always seemed interesting to me. Anton definitely sticks out to me in terms of Pixar. We need more stories around them, honestly. It's easy enough to love a villain just by them being villains, but an anti-villain, I feel, creates the sense of relatability and sympathy for someone who was allegedly on the wrong side.
Whoa man! I really love what you did here, great video overall. But I feel like you forgot to breathe... I geniuently had to double check if I wasn't listening on 1,25 speed
People complaining about Gabby Gabby being called an anti-villain misunderstand her. Let me ask you this: you cannot speak (essentially her disability, not autism you weirdos in the comments (I have autism, so I can say that)), and you just want someone to love and care about you, but everyone ignores you because you can't speak. No-one wants to help you or do anything for you. This goes on for your whole life. Then you have a small ray of hope, a chance to speak and be noticed, but you have to do some extreme and unethical things for that chance - you might find a dead body, for example, and you could take the necessary parts for a transplant (assuming it's as easy as tearing it off). You know that's wrong, but you never know if you'll have another chance. This could be the only opportunity in your life to be able to speak. Wouldn't you at least be tempted to do it?
But ehh… Woody was alive, not dead. I understand her motives, but the outcome was like saying : you need to fix your disability for people to love and accept you. I hate Gabby not only for her character but for becoming a source of spreading a harmful message towards kids.
@@VillagerCometh Unfortunately, that's how it feels sometimes, that the only way to be accepted is to 'fix' yourself (I attempted suicide last September due to not feeling accepted by people, long story), and notice that even after she did, Harmony still rejected her. That girl she helped? She couldn't care less if it was working or not, I guarantee it, she was lost and scared and the doll provided comfort. Yes she still pulled the string, but that was more out of curiosity than anything else. I bet she wouldn't have ignored Gabby Gabby just because she's broken.
@@coralmaynard4876 Woah, please don't open up something so personal to a total stranger on the internet who you have only interacted with once. Sorry you went through this. You may sometimes feel like the only way to be accepted is fixing yourself but this is just wrong. ...Anyways, it still left a bitter taste in my mouth that these outcomes are left to the audience's assumptions. I do understand it was out of curiosity, but as a movie, this depiction was completely unnecessary. Also quick note I just really don't like Toy Story 4 on a personal level this bias has definitely affected my hostility towards Gabby and probably many other people, but your interpretation on Gabby is also completely valid.
@matthewgiroux9590 yeah. Gabby was straight up a villain. I hate that the film just ignores it and lies and gaslights you into thinking what she did was remotely okay.
This is enjoyable to watch, and somebody like me should write a letter to "Pixar" asking them to change the title "Toy Story 5", to a different name title with "Toy Story" still in the title.😎👍💯
How I see Auto from Wall-e: on surface level, it’s easy to see him as “a robot taking over our lives” but as you describe, he was built by humans with a purpose of preservation. But he’s been on auto-pilot and his job is auto-pilot is “control the ship and keep humans safe”. Earth was supposed to give the A-OK for return but since Auto never got that, he still takes it that Earth is not safe and therefore he will continue his objective… But theres a bigger “auto-pilot”, as the humans themselves have gone on auto pilot. Calling the human race aboard the ship “lazy” presumes they had the choice to be so. Instead, they became complacent and simply accepted this reality. They had no drive, no purpose, no conflict to solve. They were said “hey chill here and wait until we say come back. Until then, enjoy a vacation for a year or a two decades.” People expected a call and it never came. They therefore never questioned their status. This became life and they didn’t have any other basis to compare it to, which is expressed when the Captain is fascinated with logs of Earth as we know it, and how little he knew of culture they were supposed to have. So when complacency is shifted, people begin to see through the veil. One could argue Auto doesn’t even exist - instead the conflict and transition of “auto to manual” is the point at which the human race said “no, we need to change everything because it’s in our power absolutely” and the human race was who transitioned from auto to manual. This concept is symbolized in the simple but dramatically expressed scene of the Captain standing up, and the human race watching this, amazed and inspired to be better almost immediately as the opportunity presents itself. Auto was not the problem - he was a reflection of human nature indirectly showing them the problem they needed to fix. Literally no human decided for thousands of years to literally stand up for themselves. And Auto could have been turned to manual at any point. But never did they do this. They accepted this robot knew best because he did everything for us but nothing has changed still, so this is what we have. Which goes beyond a ship or space or a robot….. Think about it. Why did humans need to leave Earth at all? Because their actions had consequences that resulted in the destruction of what was basically the biosphere? And why wasn’t that stopped or solved but instead avoided and claimed “we’ll come back when it’s fixed”? Heck, it doesn’t even seem like measures were taken to bring awareness to it *while* there was still time but an active threat on the rise.. … So why all this? Because humans became complacent then too… Auto is surface level an antagonist but he’s there to say “You think the issue will solve itself without your involvement, and leaving home didn’t teach you anything. The issue will follow you no matter where you go unless you do something about it.” Machines aren’t the issue of Wall-e, and to say so is a form of projection - because machines don’t exist without humans and equally at par to this, machines do not function without the intention of humans (Keep this in the forefront of your mind when considering the modern politics of Ai as well - there is much more than meets the eye to it and antagonizing it is a form of blindness). Preservation of the planet is another moral that seems blatantly obvious but I would again argue a hot take and say it’s false - because those issues wouldn’t even be an issue to begin with if not saying to turn a blind eye and accept complacency…. At the deepest core, the moral is awareness of complacency. I wouldn’t say human nature is a core moral either because complacency *is* human nature. It’s what we all want, and there’s totally nothing wrong with that…Utopias and “a thing that’ll do something for you so you don’t have to think about it ever again.” It sounds delightful, but ignorance is not always bliss. When trust becomes complacency is when you see something working for a while and you don’t stop to double check if the solution is still benefiting the issue *in the appropriate time*. Sometimes hands off is the best approach. But no matter what the “best approach” is, there are times in the conflict when that has yet to benefit, or no longer benefits it. But you trust it will be okay if you don’t question it so you will “accept things as they are”, or “it is what it is”. This is complacency. It is like a pain killer that can help the small hurts but too much over time will begin to kill your vitals. Or to reference another movie that entirely partakes in all of the above themes… Consider taking the red pill sometime and see what you learn…
Bro thought he could sneak Gaby Gaby and we wouldn't notice💀 Her goons literally tried to rip Woodys voicebox out of his body and she probably would've done it herself if Woody didn't agree to give it to her
He only agreed because the writer made him agree. Look closely it's woke agenda. Gaby Gaby and Bo Beep been friends at the end I am like come on look! She literally almost killed your guy why are you helping her? Hmm.
I would still consider Auto from Wall-e the main villain as well as the anti villain as there is a common trait that auto is the villain of that movie. And yes I get what your saying that in the end the humans themselves are their own villain as auto is just a product of what they made on the axium whilst away from earth. But there are some actions in sometimes of the movie where auto seems to do things personally to our hero or the story to mess with the hero’s origins plan. Great videos man keep it up!
Interestingly if you think about Pixar anti-villain are actually anti-villain done right and sympathetic misunderstood and redeemable villain do justice
Antagonist doesn’t already directly translate to villain. Some of these are obstacles the protagonist(s) face. They are characters who happen to oppose the protagonist at the start of the story
Youre're right - even if the definition exists, the common understanding of "anti-villians" and their story implications aren't well know. Hopefully videos like yours changes that!
Remember gang, antagonists and bad guys are not the same thing. Antagonists are people who oppose the main character (protagonist) and bad guys are flat out morally evil. I absolutely love antagonists that are not inherently bad, and oppose the main characters to "help" them or to help themselves.
This is where I draw the line between antagonist and villain: a villain opposes the hero because they are evil, but an antagonist simply opposes a hero’s goal. An antagonist can have noble qualities, or even be an ally of the hero, they simply don’t want whatever the hero wants and oppose them. Thus to be a villain you need to be evil by the standards of the media. Bruce is the only one on the list I would classify as an anti villain, since he is evil (trying to eat the fish) but actively trying to ignore his villainous nature. But inherent in the definition of villain is the evil, so if there is no evil they cannot be a villain but are instead an antagonist or a nemesis, both of whom are motivated to oppose the hero but for different reasons.
To me, Gaby gaby is a real villain. Not only she has terrifying puppets as '' friends '' but she told them to capture Forky; he didn't attacked or insult her; it was cruel to chase him. The doll also wanted to removed Woody's voice box; who could be his vocal cords if he was a human, that was evil! She could ask him gently instead of making him feel sad for her and chased him with the puppets. I don't remember her saying '' Sorry for how Benson treated you '' or something. That character is not nice!
It has always irritated me that "villain" and "antagonist" are conflated, but I don't agree with those who say that an anti-villain is "not" a villain. An anti-hero is not just a protagonist with bad characteristics, because that's too broad. Some stories have genuinely bad people as the protagonist-for example, shows like _Dexter_ or movies like _Goodfellas._ Dexter and Henry Hill, despite having some minor good traits, are definitely *villainous people.* They have bad motives and do bad things, and they are shown in ways that make it clear they're not to be emulated, even if we (the audience) want to see them succeed somehow in the context of the story. An anti-hero is _genuinely heroic,_ but with traits and motives that are not associated with heroes. Ergo, an anti-villain is not just a virtuous antagonist, but is _genuinely villainous,_ but with traits and motives that are not associated with villains. Protagonist describes whose story it is, and antagonist describes who opposes that story, of course, so it's possible to be an evil protagonist and a virtuous antagonist. Hero and villain, by contrast, are _moral_ signifiers. A hero is someone we look up to, or are supposed to; and a villain is someone we look down on, or are supposed to. Hence why anti-heroes, and anti-villains, are so interesting and uncomfortable and frustrating and satisfying: they challenge our innate, naïve (and, unfortunately, dearly-held) ideas about how the ones we root for = always good, and the ones we root against = always bad. That's my argument anyway.
one thing i like about dean hardscrabble is that she doesn't appear to want to have to expel either mike or sully, she just has to because mike as good a student as he is, likely wouldn't be able to scare anyone. and sully as great a scarer as he is, will end up getting himself or others into trouble that they can't get out of, and is likely pushing her own luck against a potential higher up, by giving mike and sully a chance, making her an antagonist not by will, but by circumstance
0:57 But why show Gabby? Because that thing is a straight up villian she's a selfish person and is ends justify the means to a T threatening to essentially kill, torture or just maim others if it gets her closer to her goal. Just because she's got a sad backstory doesn't justify anything and even then she's not doing it because it's selfless for a toy to make someone happy. No she wants to make herself happy through another. 1:17 You know I'm sure stalin had a good intentions when he set up the gulag work camps. Or if we want a media example Plapatine commiting order 66 so he could create a one galaxy goverment under himself so the galaxy would be safe.
8:28 You just described Hal 9000. Hal 9000 was told to lie, and that the human crew must not know about what was going on and that he could pilot the ship without them. His other directive was that he could not lie, and so the only thing he could do to fufill his mission was to kill the crew, he was told to lie, but he did not know how to lie, so he malfunctioned. And in 2010, the sequel to 2001, hal doesnt kill anyone, and does everything they want him to, even when he is about to die, he does what he is told to. Hal is not evil, he does what he is told to.
I still don't understand why Gabby's voice box didn't spew out Woody voice lines when her string was pulled, since it wasn't her voice box that was damage, but the disk that triggered the lines themselves. Wouldn't the boxes have a bunch different lines recorded for the different toys they would be put into, and the way the disks are designed be it with grooves or whatever is what triggers the set of lines for the specific toy it was being put in? In other words replacing her Gabby Gabby disk with a Sherrif Woody disk should've made her speaker play Sherrif Woody lines.
Toy Story 4 was made by people that admit ON CAMERA in the director’s commentary that the movie makes no sense, and that they hoped to distract the audience from that with pretty visuals. You have a functional brain and noticed a very obvious plot hole.
I have this weird feeling letting the rest of OK into the scare program was a compromise because Dean Hardscrabble changed her mind about Mike after the incident but wasn’t in a position where she willingly could let him or sully back into the school. The way she wishes them luck makes me feel like she wanted to let them back in but her hands were tied because of things out of her control like the publicity surrounding the stunt.
Honestly, Gaby Gabby is still one of my all time favorite Toy Story characters. She may have been antagonistic at first, but you eventually start to sympathize and empathize for her and want her to succeed. And the scene where she finds a lost girl always touches my heart.
Toy Story 4 was an amazing movie, but I just can’t get over how much it ruins the theme of the first 3. Ending off with Bonnie getting the Toys and even woody was one of the best Disney Endings ever.
Different studio technically but where would you put Death (puss in boots) he clearly wants to kill Puss for the sheer pleasure of it. However he allows him to live when he no longer sees the arrogant legend he originally hated. Finally we all need to feel Death’s cold embrace to truly feel alive in the first place.
I’d probably put Mama Imelda from Coco as an anti villain as well as while she was actively against Miguel and his love of music in the first half of the film it was because of all the trauma she went through and eventually changed for the better
Disney created so much anti-villains with tragic backstories that they lost it's track when it comes to mak an actual villain. In the Cruella LA movie the Dalmatians were actually the main villains for trowing Cruella mother off a cliff and that's why she wanted to k*ll them to make a fur. Creating anti villains is a confortable way of writting a story and that's why Wish was such a hot mess in terms of storytelling.
What about the Prospector or Henry Waternoose III? I’m not sure if they count, but both do have sympathetic traits that could be seen as anti-villainous.
Those two fall more in line as twist villains due to their main villainous traits starting off as good or at least sympathetic ones. For Prospecter Pete, it's his desire to feel appreciated or loved to a certain extent due to never being loved by a real child, trapped in a box his whole life. With Waternoose, it's his genuine dedication and love for the company since it's not only his life's work, but also his family's legacy. However, their responses to achieve their goals is what makes them villains, with Pete gaslighting and causing friction before trying to dismember Woody just to be part of a toy museum, and Waternoose willingly helping out Randel in his scheme to forcibly extract screams from children if it means keeping the company afloat to the point he would willingly murder his best employee to keep things quiet.
You know that Anti-Villian doesn't exist, right? This is just villian with Extra Steps. Like, you can have good motivations but still being the villian.
Anti-hero doesn't exist, because it's still a hero, right? It's just a hero with extra steps, right? You can have malicious intent and still be heroic.
People is getting It wrong. Villians are not a complex term as The Hero to the Point where when you subvert something about It, It turns into something New. Anti-Hero are people who you identify with Like some Farmer (In the Classic Stories) or Spider-Man But Villians is only a tern that means "Bad Person". Even If It has some relatability, you can simply call Sympathetic Villian or Sympathetic Antagonist. Anti-Villian IS only a Internet term because of a wrong view in what Anti-Hero actually means.
@@dimaginarylaw No, is not. This is an Internet thing that It started interessing, but when i found out what it actually means to be a Villian, comparing It to the Hero and Anti-Hero, i started to See some craks
@@doutorquem4279 It is just a term for something that often happens with characters and is notable enough for people to point out. It is not much different than any trope name I don't really see what problem you have when the term is referring to a certain concept in storytelling that exists and people recognise the concept with that name. You have the tone that the creator made a error using that word when it in fact conveys the meaning he wants to when discussing a topic he wants
Anton ego is definitely the best of the bunch of anti villains and his monologue at the end of the movie has got to be one of my favorite moments in cinema history as for auto sorry to burst your bubble but I consider him a legit villain
The first anti-villain I remember was Pegasus from Yu-Gi-Oh. At first you think he's this cheating bastard who wants to collect Yugi's Millennium Puzzle for evil purposes...only to learn after his defeat that he simply wanted to bring back his dead wife. Even more shocking is how _young_ he is, meaning that his and his wife's entire futures were taken away from them, and even teenager me couldn't help but want him to see his wife again.
Auto was DEFINITELY a straight-up villain-- as the AI running the ship, the ship with systems built in to check the veracity of organic life retrieved from Earth, he became a villain when he KNEW that the boot contained a living plant and acted deliberately to stop it being brought to the sample analyser.
He did it because he has that objective. The humans programmed him to 'Never return to Earth', making him do anything he can to make sure it stays that way. Notice that these robots don't have a lot of control over their objectives (Eva automatically turning off after finding the plant). He is technically doing good in his eye(s), as he was told ever since he was constructed to never ever let the ship return back to Earth.
Anti-Villains are the necessary dark plot point to the story. The only problem is when their story takes a darker turn. Rather than make them better they're made worse and the replacement of the villain that was present.
@@jackwilkinson4911 no, I don’t think emotional manipulators who try to remove one’s organs (cause that’s basically what a voice box is to a toy) by force deserve to be redeemed.
@@aceash5.065I know some of the measures she took were wrong, but she was desperate. I'm not defending her for her actions, but when you've had a condition like she had for so long, you end up resorting to drastic measures that you would never have thought of doing if life went the other way for you. I haven't done anything evil per say, but I've done and said nasty things in my life. But, I've always come back better, because I've always had those who care about me. That's what she needed right from the start
@@jackwilkinson4911 Saying that “This character had a horrible past therefore all of their actions are justified” does not work. And here’s the kicker. She never says sorry. Nor does she admit she ever did anything wrong in the first place.
Anti-villains were great until Pixar started using them over and over and over again, like how Disney had that weird phase where they were addicted to twist villains. I wish Disney and Pixar would just go back to making classic unapologetically evil villains like the ones from their old movies.
Ego isn't a villain, only an antagonist, The Director of Monster ink Same, been the antagonist isn't like to be a Villain, Anti Villain, are characters with ideology's twisted things that only make sense to them but do more harm than good, Example: Thanos, Magneto, Amon (from Korra), Killermonger a softer example Zuko (from Avatar), Ashi (from Samurai Samurai Jack) and Megamind
Dude, I don't know what it is exactly, but something about the way you talk makes you difficult to understand. You still got your point across, but I had to do a few double-takes.
I love your videos but your excess use of words is very distracting. :( You should go over ur scripts and cut out the fluff you don't need. I am not here to hate but I do wish to help with constructive criticism! :D For example: Original (Time stamp: 5:33) “His figure is something that contradicts those who like food but actually explained by how he loves food having the distinct knowledge and taste for what this world entails, whether it be food or defined wine. He is meant to challenge the notion that anyone can cook or that Gusteau can produce great food with having a man like him that caused the restaurant to fail over the years.” Alternative Anton Ego is someone who has a distinct taste of what the world has to offer, whether it be fine wine or food, and is much more critical than the average person. He was made to challenge the notion that anyone can cook and was the critic that forced Gusteau’s restaurant to lose a star and its spotless reputation over the years. I'm not saying my version is perfect but sometimes your sentences don't connect and you use a lot of cold/ formal words that don't often work. It's alright to be casual about your word choice, especially in a review where you want people to feel a friendly connection with you.
Can people stop confusing Anti-Villains with an overrated Character Archetype in "Antiheroes"? An Anti-Villain does bad things for a good goal. An Antihero does good things for a selfish goal. ITS SIMPLE PEOPLE!!!
Thought i am not a fan of Toy Story 4, i must ask: is Gaby-gaby trully an anti-villain? All she wanted is a new voice-box, she didn't have any bad attentions, so she may be a supporting character.
She still used villainous ways to get through, even if she wasnt malicious about it. I think it fits rather well to be an anti-villain. Who also found redemption and thus ended the movie a good person.
She’s a straight up villain. Completely selfish; kidnapped Forky and held him for ransom, tried to remove Woody’s voice box by force, and only got what she wanted because Woody had no other choice but to give up his voice box for her to release Forky. She never received any penalty for her actions, and is instead rewarding for being evil by being accepted by a child in the end. Villain.
Tbch, these aren't anti-villains so much as just non-villainous antagonists. An antagonist is a character who stands in the way of the protagonist reaching their goals, a villain being an antagonist who's actions are immoral/villainous, but antagonists can also be non-villainous, meaning their actions aren't immoral/villainous but nonetheless directly conflict with the protagonists goals (which is the vein all of these characters fall in, and no, being strongly and unfairly critical of something isn't an inherently villainous trait, sorry Ego), the term anti-villain suggests that the character is still doing something villainous, but, given that anti-heros are characters who's actions are heroic but their character traits aren't characteristic of heroes, an anti-villain would be the inverse of this, a character who's actions are villainous but their major character traits aside from their actions/goals aren't characteristic of villains (i.e characters like Doofenshmirtz from Phineas and Ferb would fit this)
You actually included Gaby Gaby dude? Really? Gaby Gaby isnt one to sympathize with butah. This character was literally for the woke people. "She isnt evil she is just misunderstood" that makes her boring.
I think Gaby Gaby was created for those who are on the autism spectrum, and say that's the case, do you have a problem with that? I'm autistic myself and when I first saw Toy Story 4, I related to Gaby Gaby, because she's not a bad person, she's just misunderstood by those who don't know her, that could easily be the description of an autistic person. Gaby Gaby to me is a good example that Pixar is capable of writing characters with disabilities (especially those with hidden disabilities), and I really want to see more disabled lead characters, not just from Pixar or Disney, but from other studios in general.
@@jackwilkinson4911 Gabby Gabby was going to take Woody's voice by force at one point fam... What does that show? I have a cousin who is autistic and also there are many movies that show case it better. Gabby Gabby was for woke purposes. Same with Bo Peep. You could tell by her shift in character. The way she was written and even how all the characters were literally not themselves. Woody was weak for some reason, Buzz was acting out of character etc all because of wokeness. Go watch Toy Story 3 and you will see.
@@jackwilkinson4911 also to add on again there are many other films like this. Many. This one on the other hand with Gabby gaslighting Woody or wanting to take it by force was just not a good look.
i love anti-villains bc it’s shows the true complex nature of our internal struggles between knowing the right thing to do VS our own selfish inflictions
This is why I love anti-villains. They are a reminder that sometimes, it really is just a misunderstanding and we're all good people.
Thats... Just a sympathetic Villian
@@doutorquem4279No not really. Sympathetic villains will usually be doing evil acts rather than being a relatively neutral antagonistic force.
@@doutorquem4279 sympathetic villains are villains that actually think they're doing good intentions but actually are not. Example is the villain from Big Hero 6 (forgot his name but he's a professor of some kind)
@@xenoemblem7Professor “Calahan”
Yea, sometimes we just have different drives and motivations, which will inevitably rival someone else’s, its just life
If there are anti-villains, then they should join the Anti Villain League.
Heh
heh
Heh
Heh
Heh.
Think what made Pixar anti-heroes really stand out from other anti-heroes is that they never start out as bad people. In the case of Anton Ego and Dean Hardscrabble, they're just strict professionals who do not want any room for error in their work. And given their roles? Totally understandable. The 'villainous' aspect is where they take it TOO seriously that it overtakes them.
I don't really see Anto Ego as a hero, antihero, antivillain, or villain. To me he seems like an antagonist that hasn't picked up an additional label. He doesn't really seem to do enough to fit any of the additional categories, but that's just me.
@@nathenewendzel7806
Its been a while since Ive seen the move but Im pretty sure what gives him villain status is that he hated Gusteau and his "everyone can cook" motto, so he promised that he would do everything he could to give it a bad review.
He was an elitist snob that was "defeated" by serving him a peasant dish, a humble meal that he couldnt hate because it reminded him of his mothers cooking.
If he was just an antagonist the dynamic would be more like "hey heres this famously strict food critic that we want to impress", not "this guy hates our restaurant due to personal reasons and will abuse his prestige as a food critic to give us a bad review that will tank our reputation".
@@tobiasbayer4866 still he is just an antagonist and pretty much this about being famous strict critic who is just doing his job is his actual role, simply having a personal vendeta for someone or hating someones motto is not enough to be a villain, for example in Ace Attorney Miles Edgeworth is doing a questionable things during trials and have personal vendeta against defence attorneys, but he never exacly is a villain more like jerk who is abusing his status a bit.
@@kacperaskawski3461
Miles Edgeworth literally starts out as a villain, its just that the gets redeemed later.
Anton Ego also got redeemed. Doesnt mean he wasnt a villain though.
@@tobiasbayer4866 so what were their villanous actions? Anton just do his job even while hating restaurant owner and his motto, while Miles is exacly the same as his methods are legal in Japanese court on which AA is based. Being a villain literaly mean that you have to do something evil or break the law, antagonist simply is enemy of the hero who can be villain, but might also be a simple rival, even antagonist who is not villain can be redeemed.
I like the definition: an anti-villain is an antagonist, without villainous traits or motives.... That instantly takes me to the fox and the hound for a disney example
Yeah, Amos is the man you're thinking of right? (Is that his name)
@@Awesomeflame16 no idea. I watched it only in dutch growing up
much like an anti hero is someone who does good things for a bad reason, an anti villain is someone who does bad things for a good reason
Let’s be honest, everyone here was like Anton Ego at one point.
Facts.
I wasn't.
@@jsmithy643 blud thinks hes him
@@jsmithy643Blood’s never had strong, semi-unfair criticisms of anything.
@@jackhanson3856 tf is a "blood's"
I'm glad you point out the difference between an antagonist and a villain, in that an antagonist may work against the hero's goals, but not be against them personally.
I love how so much lore and stuff was established for Buzz Lightyear’s universe yet the film chose to throw it out in favor of weird plot twists and “always chaotic evil” aliens.
That's modern Disney for you.
Ego just had a particular paradigm that needed shifting. And in doing so get's exactly what he asks for.
When Ego is asked what he would like when he comes into the restaurant, he asks for perspective. By the end of the night, he indeed has a new perspective. Poetry in motion picture.
I'm glad these characters are recognized as Anti-Villain given that they very much do the opposite of what villains usually do and yet they still feel like an antagonist in the story. Even though they have miserable or unlikable characteristics, I'm glad that most of Pixar's Anti-Villain characters either find happiness or change their outlooks on life compared to its villainous catalog.
Auto hits HARD. Auto did his best - he kept humanity alive. He was the head machine, controlling EVERYTHING, but without "direct strings". Compare it to "omnipresent" AIs that can just, for example, lock door, look at you thought any camera, directly control any robot, etc, and compare how Auto keeps ship alive. He acts like a human - he has to press buttons, give orders directly, and sees only what Bee McCrea could also see.
Effectively, Auto could be replaced by Human and not reduce available methods of ship maintenance and control, and yet Auto was here. Always here, keeping ship alive, putting robots built by BnL where they belong. 700 years of maintenance are no joke, and I 100% believe Auto plays significant role to keep it like that.
Yeah, I always hated that Auto was supposed to be a hard villan. I feel like without Auto, the infinite cruse wouldn't have worked so well. And I personally feel like even at the end, the humans won't make things well or completely succeed. It's one tiny little sprout, and these are people who hardly understand anything.
@@MysticMorigan1998The end credits montage at the end of the film shows the progress humans make into repopulating and regrowing the Earth, so they actually succeeded contrary to your last statement.
You know I’d probably consider John silver from treasure planet to be an anti-villain as well. i’m serious yeah sure he he still wanted treasures and to be rich and everything but he still clearly had a fatherly bond with Jim And he truly cared about him to the point where he literally gives up the treasure by the end
Personally, I didn't mind Pixar at first, because I thought they would be the ones making 3D while Disney would make the usual stuff. Too bad those guys changed drastically since the 2010's and it's not good what's happening in the animation industry because of too much of convenience, rush, lazyness and lack of creativity & passion for art.
3D doesn't equate to a lack of creativity or passion. And since 3D was new and focused on realism, I'm unsurprised it became popular. A similar thing is happening with hybrid animation, though due to it being hard on my eyes at times, I hope it doesn't become the next big thing--but I don't think it will, since I think a big reason for it's popularity is the novelty.
@@OpticalSorcerer Well other animation studios are trying to copy the Spider-Verse style, even Disney, and personally, I think some animation studios should just stick to their own style
@@OpticalSorcerer They never said 3D was the reason that they lacked creativity. or passion.
@@lexramstudios1386 Yeah, I don't think hybrid is the way to go, since it can be difficult on the eyes and feels best only for certain films.
@@JamesP7 They menntioned they didn't mind Pixar at first because they thought Pixar would be the only one doing 3D while Disney did "the usual stuff" and lamented them changing since the 2010s.
What about Joy from Inside Out? All she wants to do is make Riley, and other emotions, happy because it’s in her nature. She gets to points where she’s telling the other’s what to do on the first day of school and doesn’t accept that a new core memory is sad, causing both her and Sadness to go into long-term memory. When Sadness brings up a sad memory or something (“Riley missed the winning shot. She wanted to quit.”) she feels that she has to say sorry to Joy or Joy tells her to work on it. Joy gets frustrated at Sadness for talking to Bing Bong when his rocket gets thrown away, before he feels better and she wonders how she did that. Joy wouldn’t let Sadness get in the recall tube because the core memories were turning blue, and she fell to the forgotten memories with bing bong. Only after replaying the hockey memory, and remembering Sadness’ words “she missed the winning shot” as Riley was sad while sitting with her parents before her team came to cheer her up, did Joy realize that Riley needs to feel Sadness, and all the other emotions. Joy asks Sadness to stop Riley from running away, she gives her the core memories, and the emotions start making new core memories with multiple emotions
That’s a pretty interesting take actually
Anti-villains always seemed interesting to me. Anton definitely sticks out to me in terms of Pixar. We need more stories around them, honestly. It's easy enough to love a villain just by them being villains, but an anti-villain, I feel, creates the sense of relatability and sympathy for someone who was allegedly on the wrong side.
Ego is on top of the list.
And that snail 🐌 from Monster Inc
I’d say Roz more resembles a slug than a snail.
@@hunterolaughlin Always under me huh
Whoa man! I really love what you did here, great video overall.
But I feel like you forgot to breathe... I geniuently had to double check if I wasn't listening on 1,25 speed
People complaining about Gabby Gabby being called an anti-villain misunderstand her. Let me ask you this: you cannot speak (essentially her disability, not autism you weirdos in the comments (I have autism, so I can say that)), and you just want someone to love and care about you, but everyone ignores you because you can't speak. No-one wants to help you or do anything for you. This goes on for your whole life. Then you have a small ray of hope, a chance to speak and be noticed, but you have to do some extreme and unethical things for that chance - you might find a dead body, for example, and you could take the necessary parts for a transplant (assuming it's as easy as tearing it off). You know that's wrong, but you never know if you'll have another chance. This could be the only opportunity in your life to be able to speak. Wouldn't you at least be tempted to do it?
But ehh… Woody was alive, not dead. I understand her motives, but the outcome was like saying : you need to fix your disability for people to love and accept you. I hate Gabby not only for her character but for becoming a source of spreading a harmful message towards kids.
@@VillagerCometh Unfortunately, that's how it feels sometimes, that the only way to be accepted is to 'fix' yourself (I attempted suicide last September due to not feeling accepted by people, long story), and notice that even after she did, Harmony still rejected her. That girl she helped? She couldn't care less if it was working or not, I guarantee it, she was lost and scared and the doll provided comfort. Yes she still pulled the string, but that was more out of curiosity than anything else. I bet she wouldn't have ignored Gabby Gabby just because she's broken.
@@coralmaynard4876 Woah, please don't open up something so personal to a total stranger on the internet who you have only interacted with once. Sorry you went through this. You may sometimes feel like the only way to be accepted is fixing yourself but this is just wrong.
...Anyways, it still left a bitter taste in my mouth that these outcomes are left to the audience's assumptions. I do understand it was out of curiosity, but as a movie, this depiction was completely unnecessary. Also quick note I just really don't like Toy Story 4 on a personal level this bias has definitely affected my hostility towards Gabby and probably many other people, but your interpretation on Gabby is also completely valid.
@@VillagerComethdoesn't help that she's also a manipulator and a villain on the same caliber as lotso!
@matthewgiroux9590 yeah. Gabby was straight up a villain. I hate that the film just ignores it and lies and gaslights you into thinking what she did was remotely okay.
I’m early for once. Loved this video
This is enjoyable to watch, and somebody like me should write a letter to "Pixar" asking them to change the title "Toy Story 5", to a different name title with "Toy Story" still in the title.😎👍💯
this is a great way to explain the difference between an antagonist and a villain
Man, so many of these comments are VIOLENTLY missing the point for the sake of sounding smart (they're failing.) Excellent video!
Definitely hope Disney starts making anti-villains. Bellweather, Yokai, Namaari, and Magnifico were good places to start.
They are NOT anti-villains. Better examples of anti-villains are Amos Slade, John Silver, Captain Gantu, and Fagin.
@@Yellowguy0619 I think they meant that those characters aren't anti-villains, but could've been
@@curepinkie1637 Yep! Thanks.
@@Yellowguy0619 I'm saying they could've been.
Ohhh!@@curepinkie1637
How I see Auto from Wall-e: on surface level, it’s easy to see him as “a robot taking over our lives” but as you describe, he was built by humans with a purpose of preservation. But he’s been on auto-pilot and his job is auto-pilot is “control the ship and keep humans safe”. Earth was supposed to give the A-OK for return but since Auto never got that, he still takes it that Earth is not safe and therefore he will continue his objective… But theres a bigger “auto-pilot”, as the humans themselves have gone on auto pilot. Calling the human race aboard the ship “lazy” presumes they had the choice to be so. Instead, they became complacent and simply accepted this reality. They had no drive, no purpose, no conflict to solve. They were said “hey chill here and wait until we say come back. Until then, enjoy a vacation for a year or a two decades.” People expected a call and it never came. They therefore never questioned their status. This became life and they didn’t have any other basis to compare it to, which is expressed when the Captain is fascinated with logs of Earth as we know it, and how little he knew of culture they were supposed to have. So when complacency is shifted, people begin to see through the veil.
One could argue Auto doesn’t even exist - instead the conflict and transition of “auto to manual” is the point at which the human race said “no, we need to change everything because it’s in our power absolutely” and the human race was who transitioned from auto to manual. This concept is symbolized in the simple but dramatically expressed scene of the Captain standing up, and the human race watching this, amazed and inspired to be better almost immediately as the opportunity presents itself. Auto was not the problem - he was a reflection of human nature indirectly showing them the problem they needed to fix. Literally no human decided for thousands of years to literally stand up for themselves. And Auto could have been turned to manual at any point. But never did they do this. They accepted this robot knew best because he did everything for us but nothing has changed still, so this is what we have. Which goes beyond a ship or space or a robot….. Think about it. Why did humans need to leave Earth at all? Because their actions had consequences that resulted in the destruction of what was basically the biosphere? And why wasn’t that stopped or solved but instead avoided and claimed “we’ll come back when it’s fixed”? Heck, it doesn’t even seem like measures were taken to bring awareness to it *while* there was still time but an active threat on the rise.. … So why all this? Because humans became complacent then too… Auto is surface level an antagonist but he’s there to say “You think the issue will solve itself without your involvement, and leaving home didn’t teach you anything. The issue will follow you no matter where you go unless you do something about it.”
Machines aren’t the issue of Wall-e, and to say so is a form of projection - because machines don’t exist without humans and equally at par to this, machines do not function without the intention of humans (Keep this in the forefront of your mind when considering the modern politics of Ai as well - there is much more than meets the eye to it and antagonizing it is a form of blindness). Preservation of the planet is another moral that seems blatantly obvious but I would again argue a hot take and say it’s false - because those issues wouldn’t even be an issue to begin with if not saying to turn a blind eye and accept complacency….
At the deepest core, the moral is awareness of complacency. I wouldn’t say human nature is a core moral either because complacency *is* human nature. It’s what we all want, and there’s totally nothing wrong with that…Utopias and “a thing that’ll do something for you so you don’t have to think about it ever again.” It sounds delightful, but ignorance is not always bliss. When trust becomes complacency is when you see something working for a while and you don’t stop to double check if the solution is still benefiting the issue *in the appropriate time*. Sometimes hands off is the best approach. But no matter what the “best approach” is, there are times in the conflict when that has yet to benefit, or no longer benefits it. But you trust it will be okay if you don’t question it so you will “accept things as they are”, or “it is what it is”. This is complacency. It is like a pain killer that can help the small hurts but too much over time will begin to kill your vitals.
Or to reference another movie that entirely partakes in all of the above themes… Consider taking the red pill sometime and see what you learn…
Bro thought he could sneak Gaby Gaby and we wouldn't notice💀
Her goons literally tried to rip Woodys voicebox out of his body and she probably would've done it herself if Woody didn't agree to give it to her
He only agreed because the writer made him agree. Look closely it's woke agenda. Gaby Gaby and Bo Beep been friends at the end I am like come on look! She literally almost killed your guy why are you helping her? Hmm.
He did mention that. And he also explained how she still fit his definition of anti-villain. I'm confused at this comment.
He was successfully gaslit by the film into thinking she WASN’T a villain. So sad.
@@pikachufrankie right. Hmmm.
I would still consider Auto from Wall-e the main villain as well as the anti villain as there is a common trait that auto is the villain of that movie. And yes I get what your saying that in the end the humans themselves are their own villain as auto is just a product of what they made on the axium whilst away from earth. But there are some actions in sometimes of the movie where auto seems to do things personally to our hero or the story to mess with the hero’s origins plan. Great videos man keep it up!
Interestingly if you think about Pixar anti-villain are actually anti-villain done right and sympathetic misunderstood and redeemable villain do justice
Antagonist doesn’t already directly translate to villain. Some of these are obstacles the protagonist(s) face. They are characters who happen to oppose the protagonist at the start of the story
bro really added the ceramic doll to ego and the headmistress
Gaby Gaby is a villain
Youre're right - even if the definition exists, the common understanding of "anti-villians" and their story implications aren't well know. Hopefully videos like yours changes that!
My favorite character the Antagonist the adversary
Bro discovered the difference between antagonist and a villain(well done video)
Remember gang, antagonists and bad guys are not the same thing. Antagonists are people who oppose the main character (protagonist) and bad guys are flat out morally evil. I absolutely love antagonists that are not inherently bad, and oppose the main characters to "help" them or to help themselves.
This is where I draw the line between antagonist and villain: a villain opposes the hero because they are evil, but an antagonist simply opposes a hero’s goal. An antagonist can have noble qualities, or even be an ally of the hero, they simply don’t want whatever the hero wants and oppose them. Thus to be a villain you need to be evil by the standards of the media. Bruce is the only one on the list I would classify as an anti villain, since he is evil (trying to eat the fish) but actively trying to ignore his villainous nature. But inherent in the definition of villain is the evil, so if there is no evil they cannot be a villain but are instead an antagonist or a nemesis, both of whom are motivated to oppose the hero but for different reasons.
Even as a kid i never really seen Ego as a "villain", in fact i always shed that light to Skinner
To me, Gaby gaby is a real villain. Not only she has terrifying puppets as '' friends '' but she told them to capture Forky; he didn't attacked or insult her; it was cruel to chase him. The doll also wanted to removed Woody's voice box; who could be his vocal cords if he was a human, that was evil! She could ask him gently instead of making him feel sad for her and chased him with the puppets. I don't remember her saying '' Sorry for how Benson treated you '' or something. That character is not nice!
Can you please do a video about the rest of Sony Animation films following the release of Spiderman Beyond the Spider-Verse?
It has always irritated me that "villain" and "antagonist" are conflated, but I don't agree with those who say that an anti-villain is "not" a villain. An anti-hero is not just a protagonist with bad characteristics, because that's too broad. Some stories have genuinely bad people as the protagonist-for example, shows like _Dexter_ or movies like _Goodfellas._ Dexter and Henry Hill, despite having some minor good traits, are definitely *villainous people.* They have bad motives and do bad things, and they are shown in ways that make it clear they're not to be emulated, even if we (the audience) want to see them succeed somehow in the context of the story.
An anti-hero is _genuinely heroic,_ but with traits and motives that are not associated with heroes. Ergo, an anti-villain is not just a virtuous antagonist, but is _genuinely villainous,_ but with traits and motives that are not associated with villains.
Protagonist describes whose story it is, and antagonist describes who opposes that story, of course, so it's possible to be an evil protagonist and a virtuous antagonist. Hero and villain, by contrast, are _moral_ signifiers. A hero is someone we look up to, or are supposed to; and a villain is someone we look down on, or are supposed to. Hence why anti-heroes, and anti-villains, are so interesting and uncomfortable and frustrating and satisfying: they challenge our innate, naïve (and, unfortunately, dearly-held) ideas about how the ones we root for = always good, and the ones we root against = always bad.
That's my argument anyway.
No one's a villian anymore, they're just "misunderstood " a.k.a. "boring" 💤
Gaby Gaby is perfect for this.
@@josiah3820she’s still a villain. She did terrible things and got rewarded for it
one thing i like about dean hardscrabble is that she doesn't appear to want to have to expel either mike or sully, she just has to because mike as good a student as he is, likely wouldn't be able to scare anyone. and sully as great a scarer as he is, will end up getting himself or others into trouble that they can't get out of, and is likely pushing her own luck against a potential higher up, by giving mike and sully a chance, making her an antagonist not by will, but by circumstance
My favourite anti-villain has always been Amos from The Fox and The Hound.
0:57 But why show Gabby? Because that thing is a straight up villian she's a selfish person and is ends justify the means to a T threatening to essentially kill, torture or just maim others if it gets her closer to her goal. Just because she's got a sad backstory doesn't justify anything and even then she's not doing it because it's selfless for a toy to make someone happy. No she wants to make herself happy through another.
1:17 You know I'm sure stalin had a good intentions when he set up the gulag work camps.
Or if we want a media example Plapatine commiting order 66 so he could create a one galaxy goverment under himself so the galaxy would be safe.
I can't believe you said "He is a clear bad guy, but also not a Bad Guy" and didn't use that clip from Wreck-It Ralph
Its kinda sad that, in media, people who are strict and just trying to do their job can be considered antagonists and must be stopped
I think toy story 4 sucked
🏊♂️
Personally i disagree but all options are valid and yours is no exception have a good day son
@@Rhuaridhheats you too man
8:28 You just described Hal 9000. Hal 9000 was told to lie, and that the human crew must not know about what was going on and that he could pilot the ship without them. His other directive was that he could not lie, and so the only thing he could do to fufill his mission was to kill the crew, he was told to lie, but he did not know how to lie, so he malfunctioned. And in 2010, the sequel to 2001, hal doesnt kill anyone, and does everything they want him to, even when he is about to die, he does what he is told to. Hal is not evil, he does what he is told to.
Going from Lotso to Gabby Gabby may be the biggest villain downgrade in animation history (aside from Syndrome-Screenslaver).
I quite like the Screenslaver as he’s a menacing concept and executed really well. The only weakness is that Syndrome is a very hard villain to top.
I still don't understand why Gabby's voice box didn't spew out Woody voice lines when her string was pulled, since it wasn't her voice box that was damage, but the disk that triggered the lines themselves. Wouldn't the boxes have a bunch different lines recorded for the different toys they would be put into, and the way the disks are designed be it with grooves or whatever is what triggers the set of lines for the specific toy it was being put in? In other words replacing her Gabby Gabby disk with a Sherrif Woody disk should've made her speaker play Sherrif Woody lines.
Toy Story 4 was made by people that admit ON CAMERA in the director’s commentary that the movie makes no sense, and that they hoped to distract the audience from that with pretty visuals. You have a functional brain and noticed a very obvious plot hole.
@@pikachufrankie
Fr if the box was broken and not the disk, then plothole solved. But the writers forgot how toys work I guess.
I have this weird feeling letting the rest of OK into the scare program was a compromise because Dean Hardscrabble changed her mind about Mike after the incident but wasn’t in a position where she willingly could let him or sully back into the school. The way she wishes them luck makes me feel like she wanted to let them back in but her hands were tied because of things out of her control like the publicity surrounding the stunt.
Surprised you didn’t mention terry from Soul
Honestly, Gaby Gabby is still one of my all time favorite Toy Story characters. She may have been antagonistic at first, but you eventually start to sympathize and empathize for her and want her to succeed.
And the scene where she finds a lost girl always touches my heart.
Toy Story 4 was an amazing movie, but I just can’t get over how much it ruins the theme of the first 3. Ending off with Bonnie getting the Toys and even woody was one of the best Disney Endings ever.
She's the best part of 4.
Wish Zurg was not Buzz.
Different studio technically but where would you put Death (puss in boots) he clearly wants to kill Puss for the sheer pleasure of it. However he allows him to live when he no longer sees the arrogant legend he originally hated. Finally we all need to feel Death’s cold embrace to truly feel alive in the first place.
I’d probably put Mama Imelda from Coco as an anti villain as well as while she was actively against Miguel and his love of music in the first half of the film it was because of all the trauma she went through and eventually changed for the better
Disney created so much anti-villains with tragic backstories that they lost it's track when it comes to mak an actual villain. In the Cruella LA movie the Dalmatians were actually the main villains for trowing Cruella mother off a cliff and that's why she wanted to k*ll them to make a fur. Creating anti villains is a confortable way of writting a story and that's why Wish was such a hot mess in terms of storytelling.
whats about Hopper from A bugs life? Atleast he just trys to help his race to survive.
Idk mate. I don't think forcing and blackmailing mutilation on a character for personal fuffilment can be counted as well intentioned.
What about the Prospector or Henry Waternoose III? I’m not sure if they count, but both do have sympathetic traits that could be seen as anti-villainous.
Those two fall more in line as twist villains due to their main villainous traits starting off as good or at least sympathetic ones.
For Prospecter Pete, it's his desire to feel appreciated or loved to a certain extent due to never being loved by a real child, trapped in a box his whole life.
With Waternoose, it's his genuine dedication and love for the company since it's not only his life's work, but also his family's legacy.
However, their responses to achieve their goals is what makes them villains, with Pete gaslighting and causing friction before trying to dismember Woody just to be part of a toy museum, and Waternoose willingly helping out Randel in his scheme to forcibly extract screams from children if it means keeping the company afloat to the point he would willingly murder his best employee to keep things quiet.
You know that Anti-Villian doesn't exist, right? This is just villian with Extra Steps.
Like, you can have good motivations but still being the villian.
It's a pretty established term at this point. Plus subsets exist so even if they are villains they can still have labels that describe them further
Anti-hero doesn't exist, because it's still a hero, right?
It's just a hero with extra steps, right?
You can have malicious intent and still be heroic.
People is getting It wrong. Villians are not a complex term as The Hero to the Point where when you subvert something about It, It turns into something New.
Anti-Hero are people who you identify with Like some Farmer (In the Classic Stories) or Spider-Man
But Villians is only a tern that means "Bad Person". Even If It has some relatability, you can simply call Sympathetic Villian or Sympathetic Antagonist. Anti-Villian IS only a Internet term because of a wrong view in what Anti-Hero actually means.
@@dimaginarylaw No, is not. This is an Internet thing that It started interessing, but when i found out what it actually means to be a Villian, comparing It to the Hero and Anti-Hero, i started to See some craks
@@doutorquem4279 It is just a term for something that often happens with characters and is notable enough for people to point out. It is not much different than any trope name
I don't really see what problem you have when the term is referring to a certain concept in storytelling that exists and people recognise the concept with that name. You have the tone that the creator made a error using that word when it in fact conveys the meaning he wants to when discussing a topic he wants
Anton ego is definitely the best of the bunch of anti villains and his monologue at the end of the movie has got to be one of my favorite moments in cinema history as for auto sorry to burst your bubble but I consider him a legit villain
The first anti-villain I remember was Pegasus from Yu-Gi-Oh. At first you think he's this cheating bastard who wants to collect Yugi's Millennium Puzzle for evil purposes...only to learn after his defeat that he simply wanted to bring back his dead wife. Even more shocking is how _young_ he is, meaning that his and his wife's entire futures were taken away from them, and even teenager me couldn't help but want him to see his wife again.
Cool motive, still an unrepentant villain. His motives were selfish and he was willing to hurt and kill others to get them.
"The path to hell is paved with good intentions"
Auto was DEFINITELY a straight-up villain-- as the AI running the ship, the ship with systems built in to check the veracity of organic life retrieved from Earth, he became a villain when he KNEW that the boot contained a living plant and acted deliberately to stop it being brought to the sample analyser.
He did it because he has that objective. The humans programmed him to 'Never return to Earth', making him do anything he can to make sure it stays that way. Notice that these robots don't have a lot of control over their objectives (Eva automatically turning off after finding the plant). He is technically doing good in his eye(s), as he was told ever since he was constructed to never ever let the ship return back to Earth.
Ah, the mistake that antagonist = villain.
anti villain fans when anti villains kill a villain
Does anyone else think it's strangely funny that the "main villain" of Finding Nemo is literally just an 8-year old girl?
Can't blame Auto the computervjust wants to live.
5:56 I spot a glitch in the matrix
Where?
Not everyone Antagonistic towards the main character is a 'bad guy'
Are these all really antivillains or are they just mere antagonists.
Anti-Villains are the necessary dark plot point to the story.
The only problem is when their story takes a darker turn. Rather than make them better they're made worse and the replacement of the villain that was present.
well erm, actually, remy the rat according to mattpatt is the REAL villian soooo
Honestly, the anyi villain of ratatouille was more a force of nature rather than an anti villain
I wouldn’t call Gabby Gabby an anti-villain. She’s a normal villain who didn’t deserve the redemption she got.
Right, because apparently you think that those with disabilities don't deserve a chance to be happy
@@jackwilkinson4911 no, I don’t think emotional manipulators who try to remove one’s organs (cause that’s basically what a voice box is to a toy) by force deserve to be redeemed.
@@aceash5.065I know some of the measures she took were wrong, but she was desperate. I'm not defending her for her actions, but when you've had a condition like she had for so long, you end up resorting to drastic measures that you would never have thought of doing if life went the other way for you. I haven't done anything evil per say, but I've done and said nasty things in my life. But, I've always come back better, because I've always had those who care about me. That's what she needed right from the start
@@jackwilkinson4911 Saying that “This character had a horrible past therefore all of their actions are justified” does not work.
And here’s the kicker. She never says sorry. Nor does she admit she ever did anything wrong in the first place.
@@aceash5.065An autistic person forgets to say sorry and fails to admit that they were wrong. Just saying
Nice argument, but one small issue: *There's no "anti-villian" thing*
Anti-villains were great until Pixar started using them over and over and over again, like how Disney had that weird phase where they were addicted to twist villains. I wish Disney and Pixar would just go back to making classic unapologetically evil villains like the ones from their old movies.
Auto is my enemy! 😤😠😡
Ego isn't a villain, only an antagonist, The Director of Monster ink Same, been the antagonist isn't like to be a Villain, Anti Villain, are characters with ideology's twisted things that only make sense to them but do more harm than good,
Example:
Thanos, Magneto, Amon (from Korra), Killermonger
a softer example
Zuko (from Avatar), Ashi (from Samurai Samurai Jack) and Megamind
#DisneyDiva ❤
Dude, I don't know what it is exactly, but something about the way you talk makes you difficult to understand. You still got your point across, but I had to do a few double-takes.
Anti means don’t like villains
I love your videos but your excess use of words is very distracting. :( You should go over ur scripts and cut out the fluff you don't need. I am not here to hate but I do wish to help with constructive criticism! :D
For example: Original (Time stamp: 5:33)
“His figure is something that contradicts those who like food but actually explained by how he loves food having the distinct knowledge and taste for what this world entails, whether it be food or defined wine. He is meant to challenge the notion that anyone can cook or that Gusteau can produce great food with having a man like him that caused the restaurant to fail over the years.”
Alternative
Anton Ego is someone who has a distinct taste of what the world has to offer, whether it be fine wine or food, and is much more critical than the average person. He was made to challenge the notion that anyone can cook and was the critic that forced Gusteau’s restaurant to lose a star and its spotless reputation over the years.
I'm not saying my version is perfect but sometimes your sentences don't connect and you use a lot of cold/ formal words that don't often work. It's alright to be casual about your word choice, especially in a review where you want people to feel a friendly connection with you.
your looking forthe word antaginist an antagnist deosn't nead to be a bad person or a villain all they nead is to apose the main chacter
Why are you using “Anti-Villain” when antagonist will do. They oppose the protagonist, but aren’t villainous.
Anton ego isn’t really a villain to me he never really does anything bad besides saying that linguinis quote of anyone can cook is wrong
DW fanboys be like: "These are awful movies, villains here didn't even want to kill anybody"
Nah, Darla is a straight up villain
She's just a kid lol
Honestly toy story 2's villain is not really redeemable and it's just another way that movie sucks
Can people stop confusing Anti-Villains with an overrated Character Archetype in "Antiheroes"?
An Anti-Villain does bad things for a good goal.
An Antihero does good things for a selfish goal.
ITS SIMPLE PEOPLE!!!
I feel like that should be reversed.
Thought i am not a fan of Toy Story 4, i must ask: is Gaby-gaby trully an anti-villain?
All she wanted is a new voice-box, she didn't have any bad attentions, so she may be a supporting character.
She still used villainous ways to get through, even if she wasnt malicious about it. I think it fits rather well to be an anti-villain. Who also found redemption and thus ended the movie a good person.
She’s a straight up villain. Completely selfish; kidnapped Forky and held him for ransom, tried to remove Woody’s voice box by force, and only got what she wanted because Woody had no other choice but to give up his voice box for her to release Forky. She never received any penalty for her actions, and is instead rewarding for being evil by being accepted by a child in the end. Villain.
The only real villains I can think of from Pixar are Mr Waternoose and the Elon car from cars 2, the rest are just kinda shitty people
I hate Toy Story 4
Tbch, these aren't anti-villains so much as just non-villainous antagonists. An antagonist is a character who stands in the way of the protagonist reaching their goals, a villain being an antagonist who's actions are immoral/villainous, but antagonists can also be non-villainous, meaning their actions aren't immoral/villainous but nonetheless directly conflict with the protagonists goals (which is the vein all of these characters fall in, and no, being strongly and unfairly critical of something isn't an inherently villainous trait, sorry Ego), the term anti-villain suggests that the character is still doing something villainous, but, given that anti-heros are characters who's actions are heroic but their character traits aren't characteristic of heroes, an anti-villain would be the inverse of this, a character who's actions are villainous but their major character traits aside from their actions/goals aren't characteristic of villains (i.e characters like Doofenshmirtz from Phineas and Ferb would fit this)
I think the term you're looking for is Antagonist. Someone who isn't evil per se, but conflicts with the protagonist's wishes, goals, and beliefs.
You actually included Gaby Gaby dude? Really? Gaby Gaby isnt one to sympathize with butah. This character was literally for the woke people. "She isnt evil she is just misunderstood" that makes her boring.
I think Gaby Gaby was created for those who are on the autism spectrum, and say that's the case, do you have a problem with that? I'm autistic myself and when I first saw Toy Story 4, I related to Gaby Gaby, because she's not a bad person, she's just misunderstood by those who don't know her, that could easily be the description of an autistic person. Gaby Gaby to me is a good example that Pixar is capable of writing characters with disabilities (especially those with hidden disabilities), and I really want to see more disabled lead characters, not just from Pixar or Disney, but from other studios in general.
@@jackwilkinson4911 Gabby Gabby was going to take Woody's voice by force at one point fam... What does that show? I have a cousin who is autistic and also there are many movies that show case it better. Gabby Gabby was for woke purposes. Same with Bo Peep. You could tell by her shift in character. The way she was written and even how all the characters were literally not themselves. Woody was weak for some reason, Buzz was acting out of character etc all because of wokeness. Go watch Toy Story 3 and you will see.
@@jackwilkinson4911 also to add on again there are many other films like this. Many. This one on the other hand with Gabby gaslighting Woody or wanting to take it by force was just not a good look.
@@josiah3820You complain about woke but do you even know what it means?
@@jackwilkinson4911 I do. But Hollywood doesn't and you know it.
i love anti-villains bc it’s shows the true complex nature of our internal struggles between knowing the right thing to do VS our own selfish inflictions