First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next  Last
Post Reply Would you watch an anime where evil wins and good loses?
8072 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Ireland
Offline
Posted 11/2/15 , edited 11/30/15
I would watch it especially if it was an interesting, engaging plot that made you think etc. I mean, in the real world good doesn't always win unfortunately so putting this realistic aspect into the world of anime would be intersesting. After all, there are a lot of horror movies for example that end with evil winning. It's just entertainment, people can be so serious sometimes,and It doesn't mean you're some evil freak if you'd like to watch something like that lol. There is enough boring tropes in anime, so something different would be welcomed imo.

17735 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
55 / M /
Offline
Posted 11/2/15

ComboChrist wrote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but OP only posted something vague and didn't define evil preciously.

The perspective-thing sums it up just perfect.


No; you're right. The closest answer I got was a 'might makes right' answer. I am agreeing with you and Bobland and Hrafna. Nobody is born completely evil. Nobody is 100% evil not even Hitler, but he comes damn close. Heck even evil doers don't consider themself evil. So it does depend on where you sit that colours your perspective. Now I am NOT saying Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot are good guys. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
xxJing 
37183 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Duckburg
Offline
Posted 11/2/15 , edited 11/30/15
Of course I would. It makes for an interesting story.

Bokurano I suppose you could say is an anime like that. The main characters don't technically lose, but the true bad guy ends up the winner.
---

The reason why stories where 'evil' wins tend to be interesting though, is because evil typically has to work for the victory for it to be satisfying. In stories where good wins, the main characters win by simple virtue of being the good guys, plot armor. On the other hand, take part 1 of Death Note. Light had to scheme and contrive to make everything fall into place for himself.

Older stories and books typically had a bitter-sweet side to them, where the mechanics of the story portrayed the morals that were intended. Newer stories on the other hand tend to focus simply on morals, where if you go along with the popular opinion of what good is, then you are entitled to victory.

Posted 11/2/15

Gafennec wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


Yes, because the world would be far more interesting if the Third Reich was still around.

I kid. I actually read the Turner Diaries. Flat out repugnant. Though to be fair they were on the "good" side.


I'm glad you're kidding. My father was a US Army Infantryman during WWII and helped liberate a concentration camp.It affected him for the ret of his life. I have no sympathy for or desire to understand Neo-Nazis and the KKK. I tried to read Mein Kampf to see if I could get a grasp on Der Supreme Nutjob but got disgusted and threw the book away after one chapter. But I study history (esp. military history) and have a criminal justice concentration in my MPA. So I know all to well the evil humans do to each other. I have no desire to see it win in fiction.


Depends. There's actually quite a few retro fiction giving the Nazis an advantage, which is why I commented. Some of these cases end up with the Nazis winning WW2, but later lose at another war.
17735 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
55 / M /
Offline
Posted 11/2/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


Depends. There's actually quite a few retro fiction giving the Nazis an advantage, which is why I commented. Some of these cases end up with the Nazis winning WW2, but later lose at another war.


The Nazis could NEVER have won World War II. One influential book to read is http://www.amazon.com/Wages-Destruction-Making-Breaking-Economy/dp/0143113208 by Adam Tooze. The only way possible would have had the Nazis from acting like, well, Nazis. Look at the industrial capabilities of the Allies verses Nazi economy. Equally true was the fact that Imperial Japan could not win the win either. The only way they (and the Confederacy) could have won the war was for the morale of the enemy countries to completely collapse. All they could realistically hope for was to make the war so painful in terms of manpower loses the enemy states would accept a compromise solution, but when the idea was to let them keep what they stole then there was no room for compromise.
23206 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Long Island
Offline
Posted 11/2/15 , edited 11/30/15
I enjoy anime/shows where the "good guys" aren't always victorious, I find it more interesting and realistic. What I find even more interesting is when the characters are sort of ambiguous and none of them are pure good or pure evil.
Posted 11/2/15

Gafennec wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


Depends. There's actually quite a few retro fiction giving the Nazis an advantage, which is why I commented. Some of these cases end up with the Nazis winning WW2, but later lose at another war.


The Nazis could NEVER
have won World War II. One influential book to read is http://www.amazon.com/Wages-Destruction-Making-Breaking-Economy/dp/0143113208 by Adam Tooze. The only way possible would have had the Nazis from acting like, well, Nazis. Look at the industrial capabilities of the Allies verses Nazi economy. Equally true was the fact that Imperial Japan could not win the win either. The only way they (and the Confederacy) could have won the war was for the morale of the enemy countries to completely collapse. All they could realistically hope for was to make the war so painful in terms of manpower loses the enemy states would accept a compromise solution, but when the idea was to let them keep what they stole then there was no room for compromise.

But Nazi vampires! Rarely does retro history/historical setting makes sense.
17735 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
55 / M /
Offline
Posted 11/2/15 , edited 11/2/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


But Nazi vampires! Rarely does retro history/historical setting makes sense.


Don't forget the Space Nazis.
42405 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / New Jersey, USA
Offline
Posted 11/2/15

Gafennec wrote:


qualeshia3 wrote:


Gafennec wrote:
Might makes right eh? Okay, I don't understand why anybody would like a world like that. But I am an idiot what do I know? I'm out of here.


You're not an idiot.


Nah, I am an idiot. I was getting to worked up over this thread. So I call myself an idiot so I don't take myself too seriously. :)


Oh okay.
Posted 11/2/15
what is evil for one can be good for another . one may feel that a violent anime character such as itachi is good for slaughtering his kinsmen . for going against his own kinsman even if it was to side with the konaha village . The ones watching naruto may feel that he is a dark hero of some kind how ever to his own kinsman he is nothing more then a traitor and no amount of morality can over ride that feeling . also maybe itachi just liked to slaughter people because he did not show up to help konoha village when orcahimaru attacked it. Maybe he just liked to slaughter and felt that the uchiha were the strongest clan and the only ones who could have challenged him. would that make him evil maybe to others but maybe he didnt consider himself evil maybe he didnt even consider himself good he just existed .
The Wise Wizard
100929 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
56 / M / U.S.A. (mid-south)
Offline
Posted 11/2/15

Gafennec wrote:

The Nazis could NEVER have won World War II. One influential book to read is http://www.amazon.com/Wages-Destruction-Making-Breaking-Economy/dp/0143113208 by Adam Tooze.

(For some reason the doubled bold and italic tags were breaking the quote, so I removed the italics tags).


I don't think it would have been impossible, but it would have been quite improbable. Consider if the following had happened:

1. The US didn't enter WW II, or only took action against Japan.
2. The UK loses the Battle of Britain air war.
3. Japan also moves against the Soviet Union.

Regarding #1, remember that the US also declaring war against Nazi Germany was made easy by the fact they declared war against us first. (Hitler was reportedly hoping that would prompt Japan to declare war against the Soviet Union in return, which of course didn't happen). While me might have still done so, I have to wonder if we would have done so as soon, or if their defeat would have remained our first priority.

Regarding #2, the UK losing the Battle of Britain could have meant their surrender or at least invasion before the US entered the war. With no base in Europe and no ally, the would have had a much tougher time. I expect the war in Europe would also have ended with the use of nuclear weapons, and possibly even more of Europe would have ended up in Soviet hands.

Regarding #3, if Japan had moved against the Soviet Union from the west when Germany had them against the ropes, they might have actually prevailed. Despite the United States not "losing", you could certainly have called this Germany "winning". Provided the US proceeded with their atomic bomb program, the outcome would have likely been a long "cold war" between the Axis powers and the US.

81337 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Inside Lorreen's...
Offline
Posted 11/2/15
Secretly.


We all root for the villain.
17735 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
55 / M /
Offline
Posted 11/2/15 , edited 11/2/15

TheAncientOne wrote:


Gafennec wrote:

The Nazis could NEVER have won World War II. One influential book to read is http://www.amazon.com/Wages-Destruction-Making-Breaking-Economy/dp/0143113208 by Adam Tooze.

(For some reason the doubled bold and italic tags were breaking the quote, so I removed the italics tags).


I don't think it would have been impossible, but it would have been quite improbable. Consider if the following had happened:

1. The US didn't enter WW II, or only took action against Japan.
2. The UK loses the Battle of Britain air war.
3. Japan also moves against the Soviet Union.

Regarding #1, remember that the US also declaring war against Nazi Germany was made easy by the fact they declared war against us first. (Hitler was reportedly hoping that would prompt Japan to declare war against the Soviet Union in return, which of course didn't happen). While me might have still done so, I have to wonder if we would have done so as soon, or if their defeat would have remained our first priority.

Regarding #2, the UK losing the Battle of Britain could have meant their surrender or at least invasion before the US entered the war. With no base in Europe and no ally, the would have had a much tougher time. I expect the war in Europe would also have ended with the use of nuclear weapons, and possibly even more of Europe would have ended up in Soviet hands.

Regarding #3, if Japan had moved against the Soviet Union from the west when Germany had them against the ropes, they might have actually prevailed. Despite the United States not "losing", you could certainly have called this Germany "winning". Provided the US proceeded with their atomic bomb program, the outcome would have likely been a long "cold war" between the Axis powers and the US.



On #1. You're right Hitler made it easier for us, by declaring war on the US. But two things. A) he held the US in contempt and bought the propaganda about the US being soft and decadent. B ) Hitler thought the Japanese might have reciprocated with the Soviet Uniion which they did not. (See #3 below)

On #2: Winning the BoB was just ONE step needed to launch Sea Lowe. The Royal Navy would have to have been decidedly beaten up to and including all the RN submarines to mae Sea Lowe work. The Germans anti-submarines forces were severely curtailed after the Norway invasion. Also there is evidence that the BoB and Sea Lowe were bluffs to get the UK to surrender while Hitler turned the bulk of the Army east. Also don't forget Chruchill was prepared to move the government to Canada and to keep the war going if he had to.

On #3. While the IJA did have eye for a northern thrust; it was never seriously considered for two major reasons. 1) No access to oil in the northern push. Japan and the IJN were dying on the vine from a lack of oil. 2) After Khalkhin Gol the Japanese were were very reluctant to take on the Soviets. Remember after Stalin learned the Japanese were going south he transferred a lot of the Siberian divisions westward to deal with the German invasion. Those divisions did not stop the Germans, but were used to roll the Germans back from Moscow. 2) Now the bulk of the IJA was in China and not going anywhere. The Kwantung Army was not going anywhere since they were the buffer between Japan and the Soviet Union. Once the push South and West was decided on the IJA more or less ran out of people they could move to reinforce and resupply those units engaged. That was why Singapore/Malaya and the Philippines were a far closer run thing than many people realize. Look at the subsequent Japanese attacks after the initial onslaught. All the ground forces were placed in (relatively speaking) penny packets since there was a dearth of ground troops to go away. The Japanese did make several redoubts that would have been hard to take, but they overlooked the fact those redoubt could be bypassed and cut off from supplies. (Rebaul anybody?)

A couple of quotes by Yamamoto Isoroku are very enlightening.


Should hostilities once break out between Japan and the United States, it is not enough that we take Guam and the Philippines, nor even Hawaii and San Francisco. To make victory certain, we would have to march into Washington and dictate the terms of peace in the White House. I wonder if our politicians, among whom armchair arguments about war are being glibly bandied about in the name of state politics, have confidence as to the final outcome and are prepared to make the necessary sacrifices.





In the first six to twelve months of a war with the United States and Great Britain I will run wild and win victory upon victory. But then, if the war continues after that, I have no expectation of success.

And it was 6 month that the IJN lost the majority of the Kido Butai (Strike Force) at the Battle of Midway.
3349 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / Ente Isla
Offline
Posted 11/2/15 , edited 11/30/15
Sure. I prefer stories centered around grey-and-grey morality, but it'd be an interesting change to the "good guy vs. bad guy" formula we see in so many shows.
17735 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
55 / M /
Offline
Posted 11/2/15

Stonewolfe wrote:

Secretly.


We all root for the villain.


Depends on the villain and why they do it. Did you secretly root for Jeffrey Dahlmer? In the early Star Wars movie I did root for the Empire because I KNEW they were going to lose, but I wanted them to earn the hate. But also the Empire never saw itself as evil or villains.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.