By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mandalore76 on 15 May 2018
Edit Thread
areason said:
Mandalore76 said:

It's historical evidence that the motives of people in power who commit genocide are not considered to be reasonable to a rational person.  And yet, you have some kind of hang up about needing a fictional character to possess a "reasonable motive" for his actions in order to be considered credible by your standards.  All you did was dodge the question of what villain has "realistic motives" to you.  

I didn't say that Thanos isn't a credible, simply that he fails at being a good villain in a piece of media that is supposed to provide me with entertainment. 

It's not about his motive being unrealistic, but that it is simply not needed. Darth Vader is a villain who had a need, and in going towards its accomplishment became a villain. 

If there was an actual problem in the universe, then Thanos would be a better villain, as he would come in with his solution. Instead their isn't,  and he's simply acting for a predicament that doesn't exist. 

Entertainment is subjective.  Just because he didn't meet your specific criteria, by no means that he failed at being a "good villain".  Infinity Wars 1.6 billion and counting at the worldwide box office says that he didn't fail at all to the mass audience.  By the way, Darth Vader is a poor example.  Vader is most accepted as a great villain when he is simply introduced in Star Wars as such without motive.  His actual motives for turning to the dark side in the prequels were far less well received.