Previous Trope Repair Shop thread: Ambiguous Name
, started by Spyspotter on Aug 13th 2018 at 6:53:19 AM
Debating on whether or not to include this trope on a page I'm putting together.
In the story, there's no overarching villain or evil plan driving the plot. The central conflict involves the protagonist having it brought home (thanks to her meeting a foreign diplomat) just how comparatively little she knows about the rest of the world and learning more about other cultures and their view of her country, and improving herself as a result of what she learns.
There is, however, a single scene with an individual who is a huge jerk, getting nasty to her daughter and off-handedly rude to another individual until our protagonist steps in and gives the jerk a verbal smackdown. They're not a driving force, just a symptom of an underlying problem in their society. Still, would this person's presence disqualify the story from fitting here?
Until next time... Anon e Mouse Jr.
Edited by AnoneMouseJr
The Dream Soldier
I'm for changing it, too. The image has no readily apparent connection to the trope. I guess it's from a movie that doesn't have an antagonist? The thing is, that doesn't mean the image by itself demonstrates the trope. I look at it, and all I see is a guy in a dismal setting looking miserable.
Nach jeder Ebbe kommt die Flut.
If you want to change it, you should bring it up in the Image Pickin forums
Working on cleaning up List of Shows That Need Summary
So The Peanuts movie and The Good Dinosaur was added in The Animated film folder section, but they have Antagonists like The Red Baron and Thunderclap and those Velociraptors.
Jonny beng
Infinite Ideas, Zero Good.
Would likely-not-sentient monsters or creatures but no overall main villain count against this trope? Because I'm wondering if Steven Universe (apparantly Word of God said it won't have villains in the traditional sense?) and Pikmin fit under this trope. Pikmin especially is ambiguous: The second game has the loan sharks and there's the theory that Louie was controlling the final boss, and the third game has whatever the Plasm Wraith is, but at the very least I think the first game might count if the enemy creatures aren't really "antagonists?"
I write stupid crap about naked people. Hide / Show Replies
Pikmin I wouldn't really count since, despite Olimar's involvement, it's really a story about the pikmin and their survival. Of which they don't really seem to have proper sentience. The themes of the series are nature and survival with Olimar and the other pilots being minor a change in the natural order of things. So basically I wouldn't count it since its drama is derived not from a sentient being battling against itself but via the survival of non sentient beings against each other. Course that's just my interpretations of the games. One could easily see it as a story of Olimar's survival and place in the universe.
What about an opposing military force in a war story? While some war stories focus on a specific antigonist in others the enemy is in effect a force of nature. That is instead of the conflict being "man vs man" the conflict is "man vs society" with the society in question being another society besides that which the hero is fighting for.
Hide / Show Replies
No...that's like an opposing sports team or something, except on a much more serious level of course, and the same tropes would apply.
If the opposing military force isn't clearly in the wrong, they're still antagonists in a Villainy-Free Villain and/or Worthy Opponent sense. Even if the protagonists are on the side of the war we can now see as wrong, opposing troops would still be antagonists, although possibly Hero Antagonist types.
Do the Left 4 dead games really count as an example of this trope? I mean, you do have the zombies and the special infected as enemy's/antagonist's, and if these games really count as No antagonist, then I guess most zombie films count as well.
I wonder if works wherein a natural disaster A: can be prevented/redirected and B: the main characters are part of a group actively trying to do so should be considered for this Trope, i.e. Armageddon. (Deep Impact has it both ways: the No Antagonist part deals with the responses to policies and etcetera in the wake of the oncoming disaster, with the people actually "fighting" it being the B- or C-plot.)
I guess what I'm saying is that works where this Trope is in effect take their primary fulfillment from a sense of personal accomplishment, whereas a work where an outside force is actively thwarted (or fought) wouldn't apply.
Ketchum's corollary to Clarke's Third Law: Any sufficiently advanced tactic is indistinguishable from blind luck. Hide / Show Replies
I'm drawing the line at sentience. If there's a protagonist trying to accomplish a goal, and the prevention of that is the result of the actions of one or more sentient being, that's an antagonist. The meteor in Armageddon isn't sentient, probably.
The child is father to the man —Oedipus
Two other Jim Carrey Movies without antaognists. Liar Liar, and Eternal Sunshine of The Spotless Mind. The first one is driven solely by Jim Carreys own Motuh and the second one is driven by Jim carreys ddegrading Psyche.
Does anyone else think Dark Souls 1 deserves a place here? It does have a final boss in Gwyn, but he's not really an antagonist due to being hollowed out and probably no longer sentient beyond "Protect the Flame at all costs." There's also no organized opposition to the player throughout the game. Most bosses are just in your way, and you actively seek out the Lord Soul bearers before Gwyn—before that they're just minding their own business. It seems similar to the Ikenfell situation already on this page (at least superficially. Admittedly, I'm only familiar with Dark Souls.)
Edited by MrUnderhill