There’s something I've been meaning to say but I haven't had the words till now. There is something that deeply upsets me about witnessing stories where villains, who are literal killers, fall in love and somehow become good or act outside of what is expected from them. I love love, love is beautfiul, it is powerful and it can truly change a lot. But to sit, and write a killer suddenly go "actually, this one can stay because I am in love for the first time" is such a weird concept to me. Is this happening because as a sociaty we're trying to convince ourselves that deeply disturbed people can be cured by the power of love? That if they just find the right person, they would stop the masacer? or at least no longer feel the need to kill how they were or at least let their person live? And I am not mad at the love, I do belive anyone can fall deeply in love, but my issue is with how it ends. I want to witness the unthinkable — I want to see is exactly what we expect but hoped won't happen, happening. A gut wrenching truth that stays true to who we have been witnessing, despite the "I can change them" dance. And perhaps people hate this idea because they want to belive that anyone can change if only they meet the right one, or that we can change the monsters in our lives with affection, but trust most likly is that they cannot be changed. And I can understand that to some this is then seen as an illusion. "oh then this was never true love", why can the two not exist? Do we not hurt those we love? Maybe not kill them, but someone elses hurt could feel like a small death to me, and vice versa.
Examples, so that you are not confused as to what I am reffering too;
Killing Eve; I stopped watching when Villanelle was shown shooting Eve. It felt true to her character, even if it hurt. She is a killer, we knew that and so did Eve. Regardless of her love, that was what was always going to happen so why were we given additional seaons of this fanatsy of a declawed Villanelle?
Hannibal; It should have ended with the death of Will, and possibly Hannibal consuming him. Didn't Hannibal say that the consumption of Will would somehow join them in a deeper way?Something so disturbing that only could make sense to a serial killing-cannibal. And I would have watched with wide eyes, and gone to sleep staring at the ceiling.
Interveiw With The Vampire; Louis' death in the hand of a Lestat would have made sense, and despite his dramatics, Lestat would have not committed suicide but instead burried himself in deep regret untill he was too numb to his own feelings that he could return to the world of the living. He would have never forgotten Louis, nor what he did, but he would have moved on beause Lestat is not a good person. He's deeply disturbed and Louis knew this. I don't even aknoclege that beatdown episode because Lestat may be a killer, but he's a drama queen first and formost. Louis' death would have been poetic, beautiful and grusom like a greek tragedy without an audiance.
Bonus - Twilight; I could not end without adding my own favorite, and despite this path never being teased to the audiance the same way the other's were, I would have loved the book simply ending because Edward did as he said he would - drained Bella like a Caprisun on a hot summer day. Because what is love agaisnt animalistic urgase (I understand why it is much hotter that he is simply so retsrained and devoted that he resists her, but I'd pay good money for an AU)
At the end of it all, I think want I want is for sociaty to get over the idea that a good woman, love or any form of kindness can change who some people are. Love can do many things - look at crimes of passion! And to some extend I belive that these villain's love were true, possibly not the way we imagine them - which is less so "I love you too" and more so, "wow, finally someone I can manipulate and obsess over. Someone who I can mold, someone who is alone in the world like me" only to realize that is not true.
So why do we make love into what it isnt? Even when the scene is set for us to be shown the truth, writers and the audiance always make the plot lean towards whatever fits so that we can have that "happy ending".
Honorable mentions;
God should have killed Lucifer, I know the bible and christianity is not technically fiction for all, but the idea that he is forgivin but lets the biggest meanness HE CREATED terrorize everybody is evil. Take him out or let somebody else do it homie.
40 notes
·
View notes
more on why I think isabela's fade betrayal should have been different:
isabela's arc is about moving past selfish materialism and realising that there are more important things in life. love and loyalty are worth it-- and when it comes down to it isabela is incredibly loyal. that's why she returns at the end of act2. that's why she sticks by hawke while kirkwall is crashing and burning around them rather than skipping town and avoiding problems like she always has.
I just think that her fade betrayal was presented in a very superficial way. I don't think she'd betray a 100% friendship Hawke so easily, especially romanced, if some random person offered her a ship. All the other fade betrayals clearly represent profound internal struggles the characters are going through. Aveline's moral beliefs about the law and mages, as well as her guilt over wesley's death, are warring with her trauma bond/loyalty to Hawke. Varric was deeply affected by his brothers' betrayal, it haunts him because he loved his brother despite everything. Merrill has given all of herself, everything precious to her, over to restoring the history and lost glory of the elves. Fenris is consumed by hatred and a desire for revenge. the demons tap into this and really hit them where it hurts. So what about Isabela? Her story is much more than "haha i'm a sexy pirate i like ship lol"
Even adding a few lines from Miss Demon would have solved this. "you'll finally be free from Castillon. Nobody will ever chain you again. You'll be the one in control." SORTED. it's definitely in the subtext of her fade betrayal but I would have made this more explicit.
similarly, I think that in terms of narrative and character development, it's a bit unsatisfying that she accepts castillon's deal so readily in act3. I usually let her do it because my Hawke has a very laissez faire attitude to life and I'm fine with it I guess but imo it's a better outcome for her to kill him. (which iirc she does admit if u make her kill him) like sometimes you have to stand and make a choice to fix your problems instead of always running away. it would have been cool to have her come to this conclusion herself tho
14 notes
·
View notes
trick or treat….. yeah I’m taking my igglybuff out for Halloween bcuz she cried when I said no. shes dressed as a ballerina (pretend you can tell or she’ll get sad again and start using Last Resort) you can just give her some lint or something she doesn’t know what candy is
OHH baby gets a tasty treat!!!! Everyone deserves to taste the wonders of a butterscotch!!
24 notes
·
View notes
i am 100% behind the theory that the guide is behind nadja's "curse" and all of the other shenanigans going on (like them randomly getting invited to the manor where they have to "be a family" and "look out for each other") just so she can get them to like her and/or get to spend time with them
22 notes
·
View notes