Why Do Most Cartoon Villains Today Have Such Simplistic Names?

One thing I seem to notice about today's cartoons is that most of their villains seem to have incredibly simplistic names. Such as the Lich, the Beast, Toffee, etc. Remember back in the day villains had names that were unique and original? Like Megatron, Azula, and so on? Not that there's anything wrong with the cartoon villains of today, (in fact, they're some of my absolute favorites) I just find it odd that instead of coming up with their own names, they use rather generic ones. Next thing you know, there will be a cartoon villain literally named "The Evil One" and he'll be hailed as the greatest villain ever.

So why do you think many modern cartoonists pick such simple names for their villains?

edited 15th May '16 12:14:33 AM by superboy313

I'm citing lazy writing.

Why does it matter?

The names themselves aren't exactly more unique or creative, there's just more thought put behind them...to make them fitting.

There's not wrong with calling your villain what they are...except for that Toffee example.

edited 15th May '16 12:43:02 AM by randomness4

I do agree that Toffee is a pretty silly name for such a threatening villain. Then again, it's pretty much an example of Tom the Dark Lord.

Because finding truly unique and yet fitting names for characters in general is really hard. The Lich if you don't know actually is a fitting and sinister name for the villain in question...

I'd assume it's a variation of Nothing Is Scarier. What is more intimidating, Glaxxor the Destructinator or The Beast?

The Beast...?

That other name sounds like Space villain fare.

edited 15th May '16 1:04:49 AM by randomness4

I like how you lump two characters created twenty years apart together in a common era of "back in the day".

Sorry. Had to rush it because someone wanted to use my desktop.

In context, could a name like "The Evil One" be a threatening name for a villain?

Sure it could, once the villain establishes itself.

The name alone should only garner a neutral reaction otherwise.

edited 15th May '16 1:16:05 AM by randomness4

"The Evil One" is a very fitting name for a Devil-esque character if you ask me. Bonus points if said villain is a Complete Monster.

It would also be clever if it was just a title that other characters commonly refer to it as, because its real name is said to bring misfortune upon those who say it out loud.

One of those "He who shall not be named" type deals.

I don't recall many shows doing something like that.

That'd be cool, something cool.

Mind you the Devil character from the original Powerpuff Girls was named Him. Despite how...plain it was the name still kind of fit him and he was a really intimidating if not scary character. The Beast and The Lich are also really scary. The Lich's name makes sense when you consider his appearance, his abilities, and what type of villain he is. The Beast is much of the same considering his appearance and what he does...

Trying to come up with purely unique names for characters can be ridiculously hard. That's why some of the best villains have simple names.

edited 15th May '16 2:12:15 AM by Ecrivan

Sometimes the perfect name for a villain is simple. Sometimes the perfect name for a villain is "complicated." Sometimes, like in Azula's case, it's also a consequence of the setting.

It's not like one is inherently better than the other, and its more than possible for a writer to put a lot of thought into a character's name and come up with something relatively simple. It depends on the character.

edited 15th May '16 2:15:38 AM by KnownUnknown

Didn't He-Man or whatever have a villain called "Evil-lyn?"

I'm sensing some serious Nostalgia Filter here.

edited 15th May '16 3:49:58 AM by PhysicalStamina

Maybe, but the OP is right in one thing: names like "Megatron" are easier to remember over the passing years than generic ones like "The Beast."

I feel like the Beast was a reference to Lord of the Flies where the "beastie" that the kids feared was used by Jack to manipulate them to his side, which is similar to how in OTGW the Beast was feared and manipulated the Woodsman to do his bidding when in reality he could have been defeated by simply blowing out the lantern.

It did have a villain called Evil-Lyn, yes. Although you might have been forgiven for thinking it was just Evelyn. :V

edited 15th May '16 7:38:08 AM by PresidentStalkeyes

I feel like there's no way to decisively answer the question being asked here, because the premise of the question is wrong. "Most" cartoon villains today don't have names that are any more simplistic than the norm. You named just three examples (one of which sounds like it's being played for humour), and measured them against characters from two completely different eras — Azula in particular is much closer to the modern era of animation than she is to the era that spawned Transformers. I mean, the franchise she's part of contunued until two years ago, and went on to include antagonists named Unalaq, Zaheer and Kuvira.

On a more on-topic note, I think the reason antagonist names may seem 'simplistic' nowadays (Not That There's Anything Wrong with That), is simply because flamboyant, really out-there villains (and especially Obviously Evil Card-Carrying Villain types) aren't in fashion as much as they used to be.

The trend is going more towards either subtle, 'realistic' villains (which are more likely to have similarly realistic names, like... Dave), or force-of-nature Eldritch Abomination types, which aren't likely to have names that people can comprehend, so they just go with a handy shorthand. Or they deliberately choose an unfitting name for comedic effect, such as the aforementioned Toffee. That's how I see it, anyway. I might be wrong, though.

edited 15th May '16 7:59:44 AM by PresidentStalkeyes

I just assume that if they had overly-long names or very awkward sounding names it just wouldn't have the same effect.

Agreed. Part of the blame for why villains nowadays don't have bombastic names like Reverend Newton, Professor Rue Lerr, Ti Na Timebomb, or Rapepapede (okay those are just villain names I came up with for my series, merely putting that there to see what you guys think) is the whole change in taste of villains.

Back then villains were indeed one dimensional with their defining personality being how villainous they are.

Nowadays most villains have more complex motives and increase intimidating factors that names such as those could diminish the seriousness of their character. Please note the word "could", that doesn't mean it will as there are indeed villains nowadays who have over the top names but still consider a serious threat like Lord Dominator from Wander Over Yonder.

The same reason why "Deathstroke the Terminator" is pretty silly, but "Deathstroke" or even "Slade" isn't.

Now that I think about it Deathstroke the Terminator sounds like a name for a really over the top edgy OC.

Are we really considering Avatar: The Last Airbender "back in the day" now, when the last television entry in that franchise thus far only came out like a year and a half ago?