Has anyone else noticed that the most recent crop of Disney movies no longer have climatic showdowns with their respected villains?
Sleeping Beauty, Lion King, Little Mermaid and even the Great Mouse Detective would have gigantic clashes and the protagonists would end up fighting back in order to survive.
Outside of a few exceptions (Up, Incredibles and Big Hero 6) such clashes are less important. Sure the two forces do meet face to face but the way the villain is defeated is a lot more sudden and most of the time its not through the protagonist's hands. In that light it seems that the protagonists themselves don't really fight back as much as run and hide as a means to survive.
By in no means that I'm saying modern Disney movies are not as good as they were before. However I do feel that there's a lot less emphasis on the antagonist this time around. They're not looming over the events as a gigantic force of evil and even sometimes they're revealed in the final moments only to be dispatched just as quickly. I do think that this is a byproduct of modern Disney movies placing a greater emphasis on personal growth over having a good/evil conflict.
The only good 2010s one was Turbo. All the others felt like sentient plot devices, especially the last three.
>I do think that this is a byproduct of modern Disney movies placing a greater emphasis on personal growth over having a good/evil conflict.
Answered your own question there. Character growth is more interesting than good/evil conflict, anyway.
It is worth noting that, the three examples you gave (Up, Incredibles, and Big Hero 6), manage to tie the protagonist's personal growth into the fighting conflict, so those movies kind of have their cake and eat it too.
There can be other interesting conflicts than just Man vs. Man.
>>81625095
This.
Gothel was OK, but Turbo was the only one to reach the heights the 90s villains did
>>81625592
The last REEAAAALLLY good Disney Villain was Dr. Facilier, though if you count unofficial, also Lotso Huggin' Bear, Master Xehanort, and Bill Cipher were great.
>>81624912
Because if you have the hero physically clash with the villain, you risk making the story too dark and you put the hero in a position to do "unheroic" things.
Tangled for example would get way too dark if Eugene was forced to fight Gothel. I mean they can barely even show blood where he got stabbed.
>>81625095
>>81625592
What about Dr Facilier the guy even had an amazing song
>>81625095
I'm OK with Zootopia having a weak villain because not every film needs a villain to have a conflict. Zootopia's conflict was essentially a race war, not at the head of some big boss with evil minions.
Inside Out also had no villain and was fantastic, so I'm okay moving in this direction.
>>81626131
Except the heroes did clash against the villains physically and still looked heroic.
Great Mouse Detective did this very well
>>81624912
>Has anyone else noticed that the most recent crop of Disney movies no longer have climatic showdowns with their respected villains?
That only matters if the protagonist is a warrior. Most Disney protagonists are not warriors as of late. I guess that market is taken up by the Huntsman franchise.
>>81624912
Ì'm noticing that hot milf body tho holy shit
>>81626196
Princess and the Frog had some GREAT songs. Down in New Orleans was great too.
>>81626196
He was good, but he barely interacted with the main characters. It was shadow people 90% of the time.
>>81624912
> DEM CURVES
SWEET JESUS
L E W D
E
W
D
>>81625255
Why Can't we have both?
>>81627097
>A shadow man
>Characters only really see are his shadow familiars
>Creeps around the background and manipulates people....like a shadow
That was kinda his point
>>81627097
All i know is, he better be int he next Kingdom Hearts. he could be the new Maleficient. And I'd get to hear more of Keith David's beautiful voice.
>>81625592
like if ur a 90s kid
>>81624912
I assume Disney is taking a more comedic turn than a dramatic one. That's what family films tend to consist of, comedy.
>>81627132
Had to give her a motherly figure.
>>81627375
It may be the point, but it's not interesting. The middle part of the movie felt like filler.
>>81625969
>Master Xehanort
We haven't gotten to the actual final clash with this guy yet. And with his VAs dead? I doubt it.
>>81627097
He was a thin guy who used magic and smooth talking as his weapon. I can see your point about the shadows though and would've liked if he'd have been shown to slowly lose control of his power. The only reason his friends turned on him were because they had doubts about his ability to fufill the deal and not because say he lost to the granny after trying to prove his worth to the shadows. Would've been neat to me seeing a voodoo fight.
>>81626422
He meant heroes actively KILLING their villains. Mouse Detective never did this. It's the Disney cliche of Accidental Death Lol. America for whatever reasons considers a hero being competent and decisive enough to slay a mass murderer for example to "make you just as awful as the villain."
And spare me the "too dark" bullshit. Humans aren't pure. Humans just do what must be done and yes that includes killing those who threaten us. Disney is so obsessed with being inoffensive it shits out these neutered heroes for the most part. Prince Eric was the last one who actively wanted to kill his villain.
>>81627621
I think you're forgetting the Master of Murder.
>>81627677
Dubs don't make Ping any less of a war hero.
>>81627522
the old version. Its not like they wouldnt end using a bishonen version.
>>81624912
>not through the protagonist's hands
That has often been the case. Gaston falls to his death, Scar is eaten by the hyenas, Frollo also falls to his death, the Duke gives the glass slipper to Cinderella and takes her away from her stepmother forever, and the dwarves are the ones whose actions result in the evil queen's death which, again, is from a fall (there's a reason a fall as a result of a villain's final attempt at killing a protagonist who has turned away is considered a Disney death).
I don't think it's a matter of focusing on personal growth but rather Disney moving beyond the mindset of overtly good and evil. Their last four films (Zootopia, BH6, Frozen, Wreck-it-Ralph) had villains who played the good guy, or at least kept their true nature hidden, both from the protagonists and from the audience.
Compare that to Scar, who sings a song early in the movie about killing his brother and uncle, or to Gaston, whose greedy intentions are obvious from the start. Ursula is similarly obvious and Shan Yu is established as the villain within the first couple of minutes. Maleficent declares her hatred at the beginning, as does the evil queen from Snow White and the evil stepmother from Cinderella. Cruella, Prince John, Jafar, Frollo, Ratcliffe: all of these villains were clearly villains from the start and made no changes whatsoever.
I think this has to do with changing attitudes and general trends in movies. Sure, there's always that longing for a good old fashioned good vs evil fight, but plenty of people are tired of obvious villains because they don't see it as realistic or feel it's too cliche. Disney isn't necessarily going for more personal growth but there are going for more sinister villains, the snake in the grass that you don't expect, so that both protagonist and audience can share in the sense of shock and betrayal. Does that make for a better villain than one who is gleefully and obviously evil or at least greedy and uncaring? It depends.
>>81627829
At no point was King Candy the good guy. He was an antagonist from the moment he's introduced.
>>81627873
>or at least kept their true nature hidden
>>81627829
>but plenty of people are tired of obvious villains because they don't see it as realistic
But the Evil Stepmother is the most realistic Disney villain of all time.
>>81627930
>or feel it's too cliche
We haven't gotten a good Disney villain since Turbo. He's a 90s Disney villain in CG form. He hides his true power level in a fruity Mad Hatter body to try and fit into Sugar Rush, and the story exposes that he's absolutely batshit insane when things don't go his way. Heck, he even gets a HUUUGE final form in the same vein as Maleficent and Ursula. Disney villains are remembered for how flamboyant and crazy they are, and King Candy was exactly that.
I'm pretty sick of these characters that hide the fact they're villains, and then don't really do anything spectacular -as- a villain. Hans was boring, Yokai was.. okay, and Bellwether was boring too. Disney villains need to have sass. They're best when they're in your face about how much they love being a villain. Those are the most fun Disney villains.
>>81627473
we need a curvy innocent character. basically rapunzel with that body
i see a lot more young feminine women with curvy bodies. i dont get why they restrict that highly female body type to only mothers and darker characters?
>>81626504
Or the capefilms since Disney owns Marvel.
>>81628086
>i dont get why they restrict that highly female body type to only mothers and darker characters
Because eight-year-old girls are supposed to relate to and want to be these characters.
>>81627873
King Candy was never a good guy. We just had no idea upon first meeting him how corrupt he really was. Same applies to Gaston, Lotso, & Randal Boggs.
>>81628277
But curvy bodies are often healthy bodies.
>>81627621
The anon used the word clash. No killing is needed
>>81627829
The issue is, after four films it stops being a twist and becines a cliche.
For one, I think maintaining the villain in the shadows (at least until the third arc) is a good thing ONLY if it serves the story.
With Zootopia, for example, it made sense to have a "hidden villain", because it was about a mystery.
>>81624912
Were Ursula and Jafar representing the short lived netorare / mindbreak trend in Disney movies?
>>81624912
Modern audiences don't like fighting or conflict anymore. They want safe; they want cute; they wantcomfy. Mean-spirited plotlines are a thing of the past.
>>81628277
when i was 8 i had a curvy waist, wide hips, and D cups. i always wanted to see that on screen
>>81630152
>when i was 8
Sure, anon. Were you eating mcdonalds everyday or were your parents injecting you with estrogen or something?
I know it's not Disney but Shrek literally kills a guy in the third movie.
>>81624912
Well but it depends on what you're expecting from the villain. In a sense, the grey villains are more human, more multi-faceted than the pure evil grandiose cardboards.
Both have their good sides. I liked Hans a lot, for example, because he seemed like a realistic person as opposed to a 150% evil mustachetwirler, but of course it's true that the more ambiguous villains don't make for as flamboyant and formidable antagonists as the traditional embodiments of evil.
Anyhow, I like variety in villains, and I like having some realistic, ambigous villains too. Having said that, 4 in a row is a bit much and it'd be nice to have a proper old school villain for a change, too
>>81624912
>Sleeping Beauty
Ended with the hero completely one shoting the villain via deus ex machina
>>81630152
>post-puberty body at 8
Jesus Christ that's not normal at all. Were you fed hormones growing up, or what?
>>81625552
Like Man vs Self / Man vs Author?
>>81634787
>because he seemed like a realistic person as opposed to a 150% evil mustachetwirler
m8 he gave a hammy "haha I have won there's no way you can stop me!" villain speech.
>>81634936
Yes, unfortunately, but apart from that.
>>81626271
Yeah, I like that kids are trusted to understand more complex ideas and innovative plots now, rather than regurgitating simplistic good/evil narratives all the time.
Shit, SU by itself has more complex female characters than all movies of the 80s combined.
>>81634887
>Were you fed hormones growing up, or what?
If she drank milk, then yes
>>81625095
Got to agree with this. Disney is relying on the old good person is the villain twist way too many times and people have begun to take notice. Its time to go back to the classical Disney villain.
Hans did nothing wrong.
>>81626271
>and was fantastic,
Or, y'know, mediocre
But that had nothing to do with the lack of a villain
>>81635120
>telling others of your murder plans just for giggles instead of keeping that shit to yourself
He did everything wrong.
>>81628086
Silhouette Identification 101
>>81634887
Sarcasm Detection 101.
>>81627829
Except that Simba fights Scar, Beast and Gasto do come to blows. That's the point, the protagonists don't fight back as much
>>81627739
Nobody ever won a war by dying for his country. He did it by making(a lot) the other poor bastard(s) die for their country.
>>81627621
Disney has always been averse to having heroes kill, because they feel like it makes them less heroic.
As much as I like certain Disney villains I'm okay with the whole "obviously evil guy who loves being evil" character type being downplayed a bit. But having 4 twist and/or betrayal villains in a row is also too much. Turbo was actually really good and Bellwether not getting much focus was okay since the ~real villain~ was probably meant to be systemic racism or whatever, but the other two are really forgettable both as villains and characters in general.
I wish Disney would mix it up more or have more villains who don't fit either archetype. Or more films without villains, but that's not really as fun.
>>81639423
>Or more films without villains
Frozen would've worked well for this.
>>81634787
>Having said that, 4 in a row is a bit much and it'd be nice to have a proper old school villain for a change, too
Really hoping the lava witch from Moana is straight up evil.
>>81639613
This.
I would really prefer it if Hans DID think he loved Anna. He kisses her, it doesnt work... So he thinks the only way to save her is killing Elsa.
The last thing he says before bringing the sword down is a tearful, "Please forgive me, your majesty".
>>81627097
poor guy was a victim of his own magic. He spent half his screen time trying to figure out a way to save his own skin from the voodoo creatures.
>>81628035
this. Turbo was a spectacular old school Disney Villain but with modern trappings, and the "conflict" and shit with him was good.
