TheAptomStrain Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 Who do you think the real antagonists are? Going back and reading has changed my mind on quite a few things. Most of the Zoalords aren't exactly bad guys. Purgstall, Shin, Yentsui, Waferdanos, and Caerleon aren't particularly evil, and are actually quite good. Chronos has actually made the world a better place, the main argument to that is was it really worth pulling off an X-Day? As for who I view as the real bad guys, it would have to be the 3 rogue Zoalords (the 2 left), Guyot, Valcuria (unfortunately), and Agito. I view Shizu and the Libertus (who are loyal to her) as good guys who just happen to be in league with Agito. What does everyone else think? Quote
*Jess♥ Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 shall we also look at the difference between immoral and antagonist? because an antagonist doesn't necessarily have to be immoral, and an immoral character doesn't have to be an antagonist. 3 Quote
unit 0 Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 personally i think chronos are maybe a necessary evil, and that all there actions are dictated by a fear that the creators will return and they want to be in a position of strength, and yup i agree with you on the rogues and the old nip smasher, im partial to the idea that the creators will pop up and it will be a whole new ball game, forcing unlikely alliances between the major players, with the introduction of some new big bad, as i doubt the creators stopped experimenting on bioweapons i bet they just made some over which they have absolute control. so at the mo im saying the rogues, and that chronos have done evil for the reassons i mentioned, but im thinking the creators are the real antagonist even without a physical presence as they are essentially the driving force behind all the happenings in the guyververse. Quote
TheAptomStrain Posted July 19, 2012 Author Posted July 19, 2012 (edited) shall we also look at the difference between immoral and antagonist? because an antagonist doesn't necessarily have to be immoral, and an immoral character doesn't have to be an antagonist. I should have been using the term villain instead of antagonist, because I definitely see your point. Like Code Geass, Lelouch is the villain but he's the protagonist if you get what I'm saying. Edited July 19, 2012 by TheOujaStrain Quote
Jade Tatsu Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 While I think having the creators return would be awesome, I'm sort of against it because while Takaya isn't that old he is prone to taking long breaks and I don't think i could handle waiting. He's also not that young either. I think with saying who's good and who's bad, you have to look at the morals of the day and the personal morals of yourself. Obviously by normal western standards taking over the democratically elected governments is bad, but it's sometimes been argued that a benign dictatorship is possibly the best form of government. Let's be honest here, a lot of our governments are on 3-4 year terms and they pick policies which make them popular now rather than those that might be better suited for the future. Being run by immortals, Cronos can take the long view, infact they have to take that view. Agito has definitely been an antagonist from the moment Sho got the Unit. Before that, he was indifferent to Sho. Cronos is by the very definition of antagonist the antagonists because they are 'against' the main character. So regardless of how good they are, no matter which Zoalord it is, since they are all under orders to bring in at the best, Fukamachi, they are all antagonists. Perhaps the better question would be as suggested, who is the amoral or 'evil' people in the series? 1 Quote
TheAptomStrain Posted July 21, 2012 Author Posted July 21, 2012 While I think having the creators return would be awesome, I'm sort of against it because while Takaya isn't that old he is prone to taking long breaks and I don't think i could handle waiting. He's also not that young either. I think with saying who's good and who's bad, you have to look at the morals of the day and the personal morals of yourself. Obviously by normal western standards taking over the democratically elected governments is bad, but it's sometimes been argued that a benign dictatorship is possibly the best form of government. Let's be honest here, a lot of our governments are on 3-4 year terms and they pick policies which make them popular now rather than those that might be better suited for the future. Being run by immortals, Cronos can take the long view, infact they have to take that view. Agito has definitely been an antagonist from the moment Sho got the Unit. Before that, he was indifferent to Sho. Cronos is by the very definition of antagonist the antagonists because they are 'against' the main character. So regardless of how good they are, no matter which Zoalord it is, since they are all under orders to bring in at the best, Fukamachi, they are all antagonists. Perhaps the better question would be as suggested, who is the amoral or 'evil' people in the series? Clearly didn't read the post of mine above you. Quote
Lindsay Posted July 23, 2012 Posted July 23, 2012 It's very difficult to point to a real antagonist, nor any real villain. That's what works so well for me. Agito is a victim. It doesn't excuse his crimes, it doesn't make his sociopathic personality healthy and normal, but it doesn't mean he is 'born bad'. He's mentally ill. His recent confrontation seemed to be very poorly executed, and lacking in restraint. He's obsessed with gaining the power he lacked, and losing power seems to drive him into a rage. He's been very calculating in the past, and recently he's gone crazy. What exactly do we know about Guyot's background? Or that of the Rogues? Or Valcuria? Are they motivated entirely by greed? If so, then perhaps they can be said to be entirely bad. What about the scientists who knowingly participate in the making of monsters who will kill and subjugate innocents, to save themselves? An argument could be put that they're making an immoral Sophie's Choice. And the Creators... why were they creating weapons? Were they conquerors, or seeking the means to defend themselves? From their perspectives, eradicating life on Earth would have been no different to a lab technician sterilising a smallpox sample. Or a DEFRA official burning a herd infected with BSE. 2 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.