Yeah, the Horned King wants to conquer the word (or Prydain, anyway). He wants to be, to paraphrase George Orwell, a boot stamping on the face of humanity, forever. That's more ambitious than the usual Disney villain.
Just having a really deep and menacing sounding voice can carry an animated villain far.
Oh, bother.
The funny thing is that the Horned King in the Disney film is a complete wimp when you get right down to it. He's as ineffectual a villain as the film's protagonist Taran is as a hero. Which was likely deliberate on the writers' part.
Disgusted, but not surprised
I think they ought to have had a scene where they established the Horned King as a genuine threat—maybe showed him defeating an army or something. As it is, he's just a spooky skeleton guy with a large gang of thugs who sits brooding in an old castle.
Oh, bother.
Though while it's very different from the book's take on the Horned King, it's actually close to the characterization of the actual Big Bad of the books, Arawn. Arawn's never portrayed as a particularly powerful fighter on his own. He got to where he is by cunning and trickery. Heck, the final "battle" is an anti-climax — Arawn in the form of a snake tries to bite Taran, and Taran quickly chops his head off.
Having read the original books is why I have mixed feelings about the Disney adaptation of The Black Cauldron. It makes major changes in some ways while being surprisingly faithful to the books' themes in other ways. In particular the movie is faithful to Taran's characterization as a bratty kid who wants to be a hero but isn't cut out for it. Though the movie ends with Taran accepting he's not hero material, while the books have Taran going through a ton of Character Development to make him hero material.
Edited by M84 on Mar 24th 2024 at 11:56:27 PM
Disgusted, but not surprised
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Arawn is never really portrayed at all—we never see him until the end, and then not even in his own form.
Even in the books, while Taran does do a good bit of fighting, he never really becomes a warrior-hero like he wanted to be.
Edited by Robbery on Mar 24th 2024 at 9:06:09 AM
I'm watching you!
Whenever people talk about the original books, it makes me think that Disney making it a one-off animated film was a mistake, and should have been perhaps a live-action trilogy. And maybe have a look or tone like Star Wars or The Dark Crystal.
With all the memes about women choosing a bear over a man, Hollywood might wanna get on an 'East of the Sun and West of the Moon' adaptation
Oh, bother.
Fortunately for Taran he also doesn't really want to be a warrior or a hero by the end either. He outgrows his childish hero wannabe fantasies.
The Black Cauldron isn't even the first book of the series. It's the second one.
What little we know about him is secondhand. He's characterized as a trickster instead of a fighter who schemed and conned his way into being an Evil Overlord. The one time he actually speaks, it's in the form of the Big Good trying to trick Taran.
What Arawn and Disney's Horned King have in common is that their actual combat skills fall far short of what you'd expect from a fantasy Evil Overlord.
Edited by M84 on Mar 25th 2024 at 12:11:17 AM
Disgusted, but not surprised
Sometimes, all a badly written villain needs is a very striking and enjoyable performance from the actor playing them for people to forget all about the writing problems.
"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.
I think just the fact that he has a more horrifying design than other Disney villains manages to get the Horned King some fans.
This is going to be so much fun.
Yeah, on paper Hades is a terrible villain due to how stupid he is. But Woods' performance and his overall personality makes him a treat to watch.
Who would you all say is the dumbest Disney Villain?
Oh, bother.
Cruella de Vil.
Disgusted, but not surprised
Define "dumb."
"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.
As in idiotic with low intelligence
In that case, probably the Queen of Hearts since basically everyone is Wonderland is supposed to be dangerously stupid and childish.
"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.
Mr. Clueless
Mr. Winkie. The fact that he moves into Toad Hall blatantly shows that Toad did indeed sell him the deed to it, making it easy yo prove Toad's innocence.
De Romanīs, lingua Latina gloriosa non fuī.
This is going to be so much fun.
The butler from Aristocats.
Are henchmen in the running?
Edgar from Aristocats. If henchmen are running, probably the Big Swamp Simpleton from Princess and the Frog.
Oh, bother.
Yeah, I'm gonna switch to Edgar too. His Evil Plan was so ill thought out and attempted that he genuinely would have been far better off if he had done absolutely nothing instead.
Edited by M84 on Mar 25th 2024 at 5:35:26 PM
Disgusted, but not surprised
What do you think about the tendency to talk as if most Disney movies have the same plot as Sleeping Beauty (a passive princess is rescued by Prince who then marries her).
Sure, most Disney Princess movies involved the Princess marrying a prince at the end, and often he saves her life. However, looking at the various films, this isn't always the case.
In Snow White, the dwarves defeat the villain and the prince only saves her in that he breaks the spell. Snow White is rather passive, being mainly a victim, but the prince is barely a hero.
In Cinderella, Walt's favorite, the main character shows her virtue through hard work. There is no action scene that I recall, and the Prince only saves her by marrying her. The narrative weight though, would be that marrying the Prince is her reward.
In The Little Mermaid, Ariel saves the Prince in the beginning and as Eric is put under some sort of hypnosis, he becomes the passive one. Really every character plays a role in defeating the villain, although Eric does kill her.
In Beauty and the Beast, Belle isn't really in danger till the end, one could argue that she needed saving from the Beast. Belle saves the Beast in more than one way, but it is not clear that he saved her at all.
Are there any Disney movies besides Sleeping Beauty where the heroine doesn't play a role in defeating the bad guy? Disney animated fairy tales tend not to be action films, their protagonists are mostly female and spend large sections of the movie not in peril. In the Renaissance films the goal of the protagonist was to woo their counterpart, not rescue them.
Oh, bother.
Is there anyone in particular saying all Disney Princesses are as passive as Briar Rose / Aurora? Because I sure haven't seen much of that.
Edited by M84 on Mar 25th 2024 at 6:48:49 PM
Disgusted, but not surprised
Asgore Adopts Noelle
Willie the Giant, from Mickey and the Beanstalk, from Fun and Fancy Free (which is a canon theatrical film), is technically the dumbest simply because he is dimwitted and childish. There's also Goob/Bowler Hat Guy from Meet the Robinsons, whose best idea without Doris the Bowler Hat is to throw toilet paper at the Robinson building.
Edited by DingoWalley1 on Mar 25th 2024 at 6:17:39 AM
What the Horned King lacks in personality, he more than makes up for it in how intimidating he is.
Jason has come back to kill for Mommy.