Antagonist or Protagonist?

[We Are Legion]

When frequenting any type of fictional entertainment, whether it be movies or television, there's usually that one character that makes you keep coming back. In some instances, it's the good guy like Dexter, Captain Picard, or Batman and other times it can be the bad guy like Walter White, Darth Vader, or any character Jack Nicholson plays.

Now of course, a strong protagonist and strong antagonist are both preferable to most fans and your ideal movie or television show would no doubt have both. But let's say you can only have one and the rest of your cast would be composed of B-level actors... which do you think is more important to build your franchise around? An influential, inspiring, role-model protagonist? Or a filthy, loathsome, unredeemably unlikable villain?

For me, I think it would be better for the strongest actor to be the villain because I think it would be harder for most viewers to lose interest in the show, particularly if they constantly perceive him/her as a problem they want to see fixed. A revolving door of protagonists can work as long as the villain makes viewers dislike them enough.

Agree/Disagree? What is your preference? Provide examples of characters that pulled you into a movie/series if applicable.

 

[Chris]

Humans are dicks, and a lot naturally cheer for the bad guy. Whether that's because they know in the back of their mind that the bad won't win, and they want to cheer for him on the off chance he does, or because they just like evil shit. I like it when the a bad guy is the main character of a movie or TV show (can't really call them an antagonist even if they're evil because an antagonist is just an opposition to the protagonist, who is the main character of a story, not necessarily "good"). Usually the antagonist is better fleshed out too than a one-dimensional good guy protagonist, especially in kids TV shows.

 

[CaptainxBumout]

We live in the era where people are tired of seeing the good guy. This applies just as much to wrestling as well. That's why a lot of shows and movies have flawed characters as the protagonist like Dexter, Walter White or Batman. Their overall intentions are good but they're just very flawed. We've seen a rise in these anti-heroes as the main protagonist of movies and TV shows and I'd much rather see that than the quinessential good guy.

 

[Ryan]

I think it's tougher to be the antagonist because you have to make people hate you especially if you play the antagonist in a drama. Although I only religiously watch a few TV shows, Dexter is one of them and this past season, Ray Stevenson did a stellar job as Isaac Sirko. I hated him to begin with as I was supposed to since he was the antagonist of the season, but he started to bring some depth to the character with the back story and I was sad to see him go. I think that was probably tough because he went from being the guy you wanted killed to the guy you wanted to stay. That last scene with him was really one of the season's highlights.

So I guess it's toughest to go from the guy you love to hate to the guy that you love all in four episodes.

 

[Weez]

That Moment when you realize Dexter is Tweener

:Austin: :Austin: :Austin: :Austin: :Austin:



Seriously though, as much as I think it's important for there to be balance between the protagonist and antagonist, I would have to cite history as the Protagonist being more important.

Pretty much any show you watch, the protagonist remains the same while a new opposition rolls in every season. Dexter is the perfect example of such.

I can't think of a show outside of Dr. Who that rotates in and out the main character (at least from what I've been told, haven't personally watched the show. Full disclosure lol). If the protagonist isn't a strong enough actor for the audience to buy in, the show is doomed. The antagonist is much the same way, but if the audience realizes that after this season, that guy will be replaced, they're more likely to give it a chance imo.

 

[We Are Legion]

I think it's tougher to be the antagonist because you have to make people hate you especially if you play the antagonist in a drama. Although I only religiously watch a few TV shows, Dexter is one of them and this past season, Ray Stevenson did a stellar job as Isaac Sirko. I hated him to begin with as I was supposed to since he was the antagonist of the season, but he started to bring some depth to the character with the back story and I was sad to see him go. I think that was probably tough because he went from being the guy you wanted killed to the guy you wanted to stay. That last scene with him was really one of the season's highlights.

So I guess it's toughest to go from the guy you love to hate to the guy that you love all in four episodes.

I can agree with that, it certainly easier to "turn heel" quickly as opposed to "turning face".

I liked how in Sons of Anarchy they kept going back and forth with Clay. Of all the male actors in thar show, Clay is definitely the best. Katie Segal is definitely the best actor on the show overall though and even she is starting to cross into being more of a villain.

 

[~Fallen Angel~]

Hmmmm that is a good question. In today's society, the protagonist isn't the stereotypical hero anymore; rather he is an anti-hero. We've seen this in Batman, Dexter and Sons of Anarchy. Although, I do enjoy the badass protagonist, I tend to be more amazed by the antagonist. Characters such as Trinity in Dexter, Clay in SOA, etc tend to impress me more than the protagonist. However, there is the rare occasion where the protagonist turns into the antagonist and you do not know how to feel about the character because you have invested so much into them. Breaking Bad's Walt is a perfect example. Walt started off as a man that just wanted to assist his family; however he did so in an illegal way. Throughout the process, he killed people to protect his family and himself. Now, he is the antagonist of the show and we can't hate him because we started off loving this character and he does such a great job at being bad.

 

[NotReallyaGoodUN]

I'm with Weez on this. I'm reminded of the poem "The Tyger" by William Blake. In the poem Blake is awestruck by the symmetry between the fear inducing "tiger" and the innocent "lamb" and he is bewildered that they were both created by the same hand of god. When we think of the traditional protagonist we are almost always reminded of a strong silent type, fights injustice, is generally a good man with redemptive qualities etc. The same is not the case for the villain/antagonist. Of course, as you said, best case scenario is when both are accessible to the writers.

However, if I had to CHOOSE between a frightening/loathsome villain and a mediocre hero, I would definitely choose the villain. As stated, I agree that it's infinitely more difficult to be a convincing bad guy. The good guy has the advantage of feeding off of the villain's "energy" and making the audience like him, while the inversion of the same scenario just isn't/almost never is as effective. Regardless of whether the villain/antagonist is an individual or group of individuals, or even a psychological entity (i.e like in Alan Wake) if I had to invest in one...definitely the antagonist.

People are tired of trite/redundant concepts like "good" and "evil". This is why we've seen the rapid advent of the anti-hero in the media. Good and evil are fabricated concepts invented by boring people to enslave their perceived superiors. I think we've gone beyond the division of characters into "good" and "evil" and reached a point were there are not two but three divisions, i.e, moral, amoral and immoral. Or in simple terminology, boring, popular and hated. (along with an almost reluctant admiration, in the case of really good villains.)

 

[We Are Legion]

Hmmmm that is a good question. In today's society, the protagonist isn't the stereotypical hero anymore; rather he is an anti-hero. We've seen this in Batman, Dexter and Sons of Anarchy. Although, I do enjoy the badass protagonist, I tend to be more amazed by the antagonist. Characters such as Trinity in Dexter, Clay in SOA, etc tend to impress me more than the protagonist. However, there is the rare occasion where the protagonist turns into the antagonist and you do not know how to feel about the character because you have invested so much into them. Breaking Bad's Walt is a perfect example. Walt started off as a man that just wanted to assist his family; however he did so in an illegal way. Throughout the process, he killed people to protect his family and himself. Now, he is the antagonist of the show and we can't hate him because we started off loving this character and he does such a great job at being bad.

I think it had more to do with the creators wanting to move their strongest character to the lead villain role. I'm not sure if Walt even really falls under the term "antagonist" considering he doesn't really oppose anyone, and even as a villain, he's only opposed be equally-wrong people as him.

Breaking Bad is really a weird show to pull examples from because a fan's allegiance can shift dramatically over the course of the series. Especially with people like Mike. Until Gus came along, there really wasn't a consistent villain, and even with him you could draw numerous parallels between him and who was considered to be the main "good guy" at the time... Walt.

 

[~Fallen Angel~]

Their intention was always to turn Walt into a villain. They just took their time with it and gradually changed his character.

Jessie is the only protagonist on the show at this point and he is great at it. I would say Hank as well but Jesse has a bigger role.

I understand why Gus is viewed as a villain but at the same time, he is a drug lord and that's how most of them act. He has shown emotions though.

 

[AF.]

Protagonist. It's hard to get people to like you whereas it's a lot easier to make people hate you. That's why I've always thought heels had it easy in wrestling.