Anybody else sick of "sociopathic heroes"?

Post Reply New Topic

I'm talking about characters who are heavily implied to be either sociopaths or narcissists but are still the "heroes". People like Reddington in "The Blacklist", Dexter in "Dexter", pretty much every character in "American Horror Story" or "Game of Thrones", or even James Bond in all the 007 movies (even if he's saving the world from badguys the fact that he can kill with no remorse and plays around with women's hearts without being attached to them is disturbing).

I really despise these kinds of characters because not only do I get the impression that they're leading the audience to believe that being a sociopath or narcissist makes you some kind of superhuman who is smarter and braver than everybody else, but the way they get portrayed in the media using their lack of empathy or guilt to "save the world" is totally absurd. What's even more absurd is when they try to redeem these characters by showing them being emotionally attached to only one character on the show like a child or love interest or sibling or whatever, and at the same time showing complete disregard for the lives or wellbeing of everybody else on the show.

I'm not an expert on psychology and I don't know everything about sociopaths or narcissists but the one thing I do know for a fact is that they feel no real compassion or empathy for ANYBODY. Everyone I know who has ever studied psychology has told me that. So the idea of a "good" psycho who uses his criminal powers to stop crime and is always saving the one person he truly cares about is such crap. I feel like these type of people should be despised, not admired!

Does anybody else get bothered by this misrepresentation of sociopaths and narcissists in the media? Especially ones who are "heroes"?

Nope, they are called anti heroes for a reason.

I guess I just don't like antiheroes anymore.

Why is it that these days we no longer have heroes with a sense of justice and a moral compass? Do people nowadays think that empathy and compassion makes you a sissy or something?

Anti-heroes have gained a significant role in storytelling. Often they are used so that the writer can show that they are capable of writing three-dimensional characters. The ultimate force of good VS pure evil tends to be viewed as cliche'. However, as a result of trying to avoid this trope some writers have ended up creating a new one in the process. A common mistake which is often made is creating a character so irredeemable that it comes across as downright ridiculous to reform them, yet the writers try to do so anyway. This tends to happen when the writing team gets so caught up on focusing on the character's flaws in order to heavily establish that their hero differs from a typical one, that they fail to portray enough positive traits.

Sometimes creators don't want to admit that what they've made is actually closer to a villain than an anti-hero. Instead, they try to convince the audience that the character is going to change, and the other characters act accordingly. This kind of writing is frequently accompanied by a moral about how everyone can be forgiven, no matter what they've done. However, such logic can only be applied to trivial matters, and when bad writing is involved the creators have a tendency to apply it to inappropriate situations. You can't make someone a Nazi/ cult leader and then turn around and say "It's OK, they've changed, you have to forgive them now".

I quite like the show BoJack Horseman because there was an episode where they pointed out that you are not obligated to accept an apology. Sometimes it's easy to forget that, because people tend to learn that accepting an apology is the polite and acceptable thing to do in any given situation. However, context is key and sometimes it's just not enough to say that you're sorry. After all, apologising in itself is a selfish act. We apologise to make ourselves feel better, knowing that the other person doesn't dislike us as much helps us sleep at night. It is less for their benefit than it is for ours.

Also, I approve of the fact that the main characters are not beyond critique. Tod reminds them that it's one thing to say that you're going to improve, and it's another to actually do so.

Now, despite common misconception there is nothing inherently wrong with having a traditional villain and/or hero. You just have to write it properly. Anti-heroes and anti-villains can also work, yet again it's predominately about how you handle each character and if it makes sense in the overall context of the story.

There is also a difference between anti hero and a villain with a conscious which is what you are describing.

I think I confused you with the Venom example.

In the Spider-Man comics and many of his portrayals he is a villain with a conscious. However he also has his own spin off comics in which he is actually trying to help people and save the world as the film will show.

Perhaps the greatest example to explain this is the Punisher since he is the quintessential example. The Punisher, like heroes, isn’t a villain because he’s saving people and always fighting for the side of good; however he also isn’t a hero because his methods are extreme and fanatical - he takes pleasure in killing people, just so happens those people are evil. He is one bad day away from being the villain.

Villains - in it for themselves

Anti-hero - in it for others, but their methods are extreme.

If the above isn’t enough depth to explain it, maybe this -

https://youtu.be/YbYD6AQ6e60

Then, in the MCU,

Loki = sympathetic villain

Ant Man and the Guardians of the Galaxy= anti-heroes

It’s also why hero and anti-hero combos are popular:

Superman and Batman

Spider-Man and Daredevil

Cylops and Wolverine

One plays by the rule book, the other discards all the rules.

I’d guess Jack Ryan would be the Superman to Jame Bond’s Batman, but don’t know a lot about Jack Ryan so I’m not completely sure.

And Harley Quinn is an example of a sympathetic villain too because the only reason she's so crazy and evil is because The Joker manipulated her and exploited her feelings and sympathies for him when she was a psychiatrist at Arkham and he was her patient. She would have never been led down a path of crime if it wasn't for him.