So I don’t know if you know of Doug Walker, but recently released his Disneycember review of The Owl House.
While he praised a majority of the show, he criticized the main villain, Belos, of how he was written.
Many of the comments tried to defend the writing of the villain.
Doug Walker..
Now that's a name I haven't heard in a long time.
Yes, I am very familiar with Doug Walker; I loved his stuff along with Channel Awesome years ago and then the allegations came out and fortunately, the other contributors on that channel moved onto bigger and better things. Meanwhile, Doug just stayed the same, so I don't watch his stuff anymore.
Any way, I think it's funny people are scrambling to defend Belos' writing because, despite my own personal opinions on Doug as a critic, I actually agree with him.
For a show that is ostensibly about subverting tropes and not judging a book by its cover, by showing how people can choose to change or not, etc. Belos is a throwback to an earlier era where the Big Bad had basic motivations and characterizations. And for a show like toh, that actually ends up hurting the narrative.
I have categorized the comments I found defending the writing and here are my responses to them:
Belos does have a deeper layer, you just have to look for it.
While a show can certainly foreshadow and provide little hints about a major character, eventually all of that setup will have to pay off somehow. There has to be a reveal both to reward the viewers that have been paying attention and to inform more casual viewers who may not have. Fans analyzing every little frame to extrapolate a major character's backstory only for that backstory to really not matter in the end despite it being set up for a season is just bad writing. full stop. [A viewer should also not have to look on social media for crucial information on a major character.]
It's also not clever that the show left so much room for interpretation on Belos; it just means that they didn't make a commitment to what was being set up and reduced his character to glib one-liners whenever we learn something interesting about him (Masha's "little bro was jealous of big bro" line and Papa Titan's whole spiel).
2. Belos would have been written better if the show had more time.
The Toh crew knew about the cancellation during production of Eda's Requiem and wrote all of 2B with it in mind. So they knew they were working on a time crunch but still introduced elements like the Collector when they should have spent the time wrapping up their story. The cancellation is not an excuse for sloppy writing.
3. Belos as a villain works more on a meta level.
So the argument here is that Belos is the antithesis to the BI; it's accepting and diverse while he is hateful and only accepts things that conform to his worldview. The characters in the story change and grow, while Belos does not. The problem here is that a villain can't only work on a meta level, it has to work on a narrative one as well.
If the BI is place that accepts weirdos then how did someone like Belos come to power? Oh, he lied his way to the top and created problems that never existed? That just makes your populace look dumb and easily manipulated. The BI being so accepting also undermines the threat credibility of the Emperor's Coven because why should we worry about them if they have no real influence over how the BI residents think or behave aside from when the plot needs them to?
Also, I strongly disagree with anyone who says that toh has a "people are complicated and choose to do good and bad" theme when all of the good characters can blame their bad actions on being manipulated or on circumstances outside of their control OR the narrative ignores/downplays anything bad they did (cough cough Amity and Lilith). Meanwhile, the villains are just shallow with basic motives and this is supposed to be a deep message about how Some People Are Just Bad.
If you're going to contrast why your good characters are capable of growth then you need to show why your villain does not. What is stopping them? How do they react if given a legitimate reason to change (that isn't a cheap jab at Steven Universe)? What is their justification for their actions?
Whatever the answer is, the narrative has to support it and not undermine it with a stupid joke.
4. Belos is so refreshing when every villain character is redeemed.
Watch more shows. If you think that every cartoon villain post-Steven Universe is being redeemed then you're incorrect. Redemption of a show or movie's Big Bad is still in the minority while the redemption of the main villain's lackey is a dime-a-dozen.
Ultimately, I think the problem with toh is that so many of its fans take its thematic statements at face value without ever really stopping to think about the execution of those themes and if they really work or not.
Belos just happens to embody this little trick that toh does: it claims to have bold and timely statements and important themes, but the structure and execution of the plot, character development, and world-building undermines any attempt at a consistent or coherent message.
122 notes
·
View notes
it is with a heavy heart that, due to circumstances beyond my control, an evil version of me in a black shirt will be making posts from now on. hopefully i can escape from his nefarious lightning.gif cage, possibly by posting about something i've vowed never to post about. wish me luck
20 notes
·
View notes
Anyone saying to viewers or fans confused or dissatisfied by Bo-Katan's character in S3 "to understand Bo in The Mandalorian you need to go watch Rebels!" is, I think, missing the bigger issue.
Maybe Rebels addresses her arc really well and builds on TCW characterization? That's great! But the writers of Mando are not addressing it. They even appear to be currently, actively ignoring and/or retconning large portions of TCW and Rebels.
For "cinematic universes" (*gag*) like this, it's important to either adequately recap relevant existing canon, or clearly restart from square one. That way, even a casual viewer can understand the characters and and their motivations relative to the show they're watching now.
It is not a reasonable expectation to have every viewer need to have seen 4 seasons of an animated show to adequately understand a character who's been dropped into the 2nd season of a completely separate live action one.
Some decent groundwork was laid in season 2. We can't, nor should we, have all information about a character revealed to us immediately, that would just be a sloppy infodump.
Bo-Katan is the leader of a faction of Mandalorians who want to retake Mandalore. Cool. She's got a grudge against Gideon who, as we found out via Din in season 1, is responsible for the Great Purge of Mandalore, a complete bombing that made an already inhospitable landscape completely unlivable. So on and so forth.
However, at the end of season 3—a season where Bo-Katan is heavily featured—we still have received no clear explanation or recap of her backstory outside of her surrender to Gideon. There have been many opportunities for different characters to know and address that she had a leadership role in a literal terrorist group, Death Watch. It's very relevant, but it's never addressed. Even if we're going with it being previously resolved, it's a very significant and relevant part of her backstory and Bo-Katan doesn't even have private moments of reflection that might explain that to us, the audience.
She preaches about the failures of a divided Mandalore, despite having explicitly and repeatedly contributed to that division in very recent history. There's no self-awareness. from her or the writers.
If Favloni & co. want to retcon previous material—it's annoying, but they're technically allowed to do that.
However, they are not clearly committing to previous canon, nor are they doing the work to clearly establish new canon.
Regardless of the why for any of this, the fence-sitting makes for a mediocre product that tries to do both. The end result is a messy and inconsistent characterization and half-baked backstory that feels incomplete and leaves me asking the show I'm currently watching, "wait, did I miss something?"
Some additional gripes/support for my opinion that the creative team isn't committing to a clear plan for her characterization:
Bo specifically states that the planet and city didn't always look like this. But—
Completely omits that she's a key reason why it was wrecked twice over. Seized once by Maul, which I don't fault them for not acknowledging in live action because casual viewers would be confused (though technically the Solo movie did it so like, pick a lane), then later bombed into oblivion by the Empire.
She mentions her father, and that he's dead. Completely omits that she had a sister who's also dead, and who technically also died defending Mandalore (Satine's cultural genocide against her own people, which also oddly resulted in a population of seemingly all-white pacifists, is a rant for another post). There is room for a compelling and clear in-universe explanation for this! Like maybe she's in denial or tortured about it, and that's why it's not brought up. But we the audience still need to know that.
However, it looks like they've just written Satine out. Maybe it would too clearly place Bo-Katan as a Bad Guy which is inconvenient for them because they don't want to take the time to address it, despite this season spending a lot of screentime with her.
They're even ignoring her characterization previously established within this same show with her showing explicit disgust for Din's faction in season 2, then somehow being fine with joining them in season 3.
32 notes
·
View notes