The Irredeemable: Part 2

Its finally here! The second part of my review on villainy.

I left off with justice and punishment. In stories a villain needs to do what is appropriate to their character. Sometimes a villain does just that. In the Lord of the Rings Gollum is probably the best example of the irredeemable. (This is the books perspective not the movies) Gollum's mind is so far gone he is a pathetic image of what he once was. Possessed with the ring of power, he does what ever it takes to get it back.

Gollum is deceitful, dangerous, and deadly. He killed his best friend for the ring. The ring itself tortured him and destroyed his mind. Even if this is what he became Frodo felt pity on him. Frodo gave justice and forgiveness to Gollum offering redemption and peace, Gollum refused. But with out Gollum, Frodo would not have thrown the ring into Mount Doom.

That is where the ring itself, the soul of Sauron, backfires in its evil. It was meant to destroy people by consuming their very minds. In the end its actions and the actions of justice lead to its destruction. Gollum was possessed by the ring until the very end. He got what he wanted. The ring desired to get back to its master. By slowly corrupting people the method it thought would be the fastest, it destroyed itself.

Villains are not really the problem. The path to self-destruction is what makes them terrifying. Its what makes them sad. Suffering in their own filth, we pity them. The problem is that it doesn't look like filth. Very rarely is a villain depicted like Gollum. Most often a villain is leading other people to their deaths.

In the case of our world you wonder why leaders like Osama Bin Laden are so attractive to  follow. If Osama had practiced what he preached he would have been dead long ago by strapping a bomb onto his chest. He had an excuse, a way out that allowed him to lead others to their death while keeping his own life. While I don't think Osama received "Justice" he got what he preached.

This never makes us better or worse then others. Most often we are villains without knowing. We lead paths of destruction that will destroy us in the end. The heroes admit the mistakes and attempt to make things right. Frodo Baggins himself became a villain and nearly died for it. Villainy is subtle yet destructive it makes sense from a personal standpoint.

While I am not sure that movie villains are appropriate as the Irredeemable in children's movies, the Irredeemable do exist. They chose to destroy and to be destroyed. This does not mean that justice should not be offered. Redemption, forgiveness, and mercy are much more powerful then people perceive.

The villain is almost more important then the hero because it is them that are on the path to destruction. Only the villain choses redemption or to be Irredeemable. The hero is just supposed to offer justice. After all the hero does not need to be fixed if they are a hero they will do what is right.

The Irredeemable: Part 1

I recently watched Kung Fu Panda 2 in theaters and I found myself enjoying the movie for the visual elements but I was disappointed with the story. 

I don't want to ruin it for people so I will just focus on why I was disappointed.

The villain.

Generally you can spot the villain in stories very easily because they are overly cliche, and entirely selfish. Darth Vader from Star Wars is an excellent example of this type. He is an image of unapologetic villainy. Now most people can not relate to this so it is an easy character to hate. He is so evil that I would say most people would give up on the idea that he could be redeemed. If you thought Osama was a bad guy Darth Vader makes him look like a petty thief not even worth tracking down. 

What makes Darth Vader Interesting though is that he was redeemed. He did choose the light. He gave up his own pursuit of power and realized he had lost everything that would have made him happy. 

In Kung Fu Panda 2 and 1 for that matter the villain is quite the opposite. They are villains with some pride to be sure but they are no where near Darth Vaders level of evil. Yet they are completely unable to let go. This seems to be happening in movies more often where the villain is just never going to give up their power. Even when everything tells them "The battle is lost". In the end they always chose the path of destruction. 

They are "The Irredeemable".

I ask the question of if a person who is capable of destroying entire planets without blinking an eye of remorse can be redeemed why is it these petty villains are so beyond repair. Not to mention that these are supposed to be children's films. Personally, I hate the idea that redemption is only for the protagonist or the Hero. Maybe this is a controversial thing to say but I feel villains are never beyond redemption. 

Now does that mean a villain should not face justice for their crimes? No, but justice is not an easy answer to come by. After all what is "justice"?

In the Chronicles of Narnia, Edmond in "The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe" is a villain. A traitor to his own brother and sisters. Yet when he sees what he serves he is ashamed. What is the punishment for his crimes? After all he is a villain. Well, Nothing. He gets away with a heinous crime that led to the capture of Mr. Tumnus and the Revealing of Aslan at the stone table which has probably killed them all, and, well nothing. 

In another book "The Horse and His Boy"(My favorite of the Chronicles of Narnia series) Prince Rabadash attacks the kingdom of Archenland and the justice served by his treacherous attack? He is ultimately let go. Rabadash may not seek redemption but justice felt served more by not taking his life. Now there is more to the circumstances but you get the point. 

In each book justice is forgiveness and mercy. 

By both of these examples justice feels like the least self-satisfying things and dumbest concepts ever. After all there needs to be punishment. After all people need to know that you can not get away with crimes. Yet the punishment for both of those examples is death by all rights. Ultimately both of the criminals got away with the minimum and hardly a few days in jail. 

Why is it that those books feel so much more satisfying then the movie I just watched? What is it about those examples of justice that I feel nothing more needed to happen? What makes it that the Villain got what was coming and truly could not have received any punishment more fitting?

This is getting long so here is a cliff hanger for The Irredeemable: part 2

(note: This is a short overview and there is a whole lot more detail to be had here. If you haven't seen Star Wars, or read the Chronicles of Narnia: 1st I highly recommend them, and 2nd, Where have you been? Go watch and read now!) 

Please feel free to discuss and question my thought process. I am not an authority on this just observing my feelings on the matter and exploring the idea that a villain is more interesting if redeemed.