top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 8 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

I don't understand why it's bad to enjoy evil characters. I don't want to just consume Disney forever. I wouldn't say I like Griffith as a person, but he is a very interesting character and crucial to the plot of Berserk. The title makes it sound like there is some alternative version of Berserk where Griffith doesn't exist and it's somehow better. Just because I like these characters doesn't mean I missed any point. I don't think that's the case for most people. These posts are r/iamverysmart material.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 minutes ago

    If you understand that Griffith is not someone anyone should want to emulate, I don't think this meme is about you anyway.

    This meme is about the insecure dudes who are hurt and angry and decide to channel that into some cringe edge-lord 'I want to hurt everyone else and feel nothing but that it is my destiny to be on top' phase.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 41 minutes ago

    Agreed. I love tons of evil characters precisely because they are more interesting or they make the world more interesting. So many have more interesting motivations, more interesting developments, and more interesting dialogue than the hero roles they counter.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 21 minutes ago

    Talking about not getting it. The people in this thread bring up points about liking things for reasons that don't mean you agree with the evil character, and think the are to be looked up to, while simultaneously ignoring that there are massive crowds of people out their that do just that, look up to these people like hero's, believe they are the correct ones, etc. and that this is what the meme was addressing, not someone thinking a character was a good character for story writing purposes.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 32 minutes ago

    What about The Wolf of Wall Street?

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 58 minutes ago

    The best example of this was all the people who liked the boys, but didn't get it was taking the piss out of them.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 3 hours ago (10 children)

    My exwife has a large slytherin tattoo. That house in pottery is just “the bad guys”. There’s not charecter arch or deeper meaning, no complexity in writing.

    They are just the bad guys, who are evil and mean. That’s it. She loves em.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 hours ago* (6 children)

    Consider the alternatives:

    Suicidal, stupid, trouble causing and seeking, bullying "brave" Griffindors.

    Bookworm "smart", swot grinders Ravenclaws.

    Sly and cunning, "ambitious" Slytherins.

    Neither brave, smart or sly, menial workers Hufflepuffs.

    Idk about you, but out of those options to me speaks the most "neither", but if I have to sleep somewhere, I'd wear green.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 hours ago (3 children)

    They weren’t particularly sly cunning or smart. Ambitious I’ll give you.

    The book sets it up like slytherin and gryfindor are basically the same except one is evil.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

    I am quoting the books with cunning and ambitious. It also mentions resourcefulness.

    It's just that the author is not that good with her craft and she made them Evil, shallow house in practice.

    Or maybe it's the other way, and she did that on purpose, so that the early children book has visible low stake antagonist Malfoy, who does not really matter compared to BBEG.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 hour ago (1 child)

    I understand what you mean. They are said to be those traits but that is absolutely not portrayed in the book.

    So if you’re reading the books or watching the movie and thinking “I relate to those guys” all there is to relate to is being “bad”

    They don’t have anything else going for them in the story.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 hour ago

    Yeah the sorting hat sorta tells Harry slitherin folks are destined for big things (not necessarily good, but big) but then there's dumbfucks like crabbe and goyle in there who couldn't accomplish shit.

    Joanne Kowling Rowling didn't exactly stay consistent about things in those books.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 1 point 1 hour ago

    I can get behind a brand of sacrifice tattoo, it says 'I too am a struggler' but I agree a lot of people probably don't get that it's literally a mark that you're a human sacrifice that also pulls you and everything and everyone around you half way to hell

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

    The only one i have a gripe with is the Brand of Sacrifice. Yes, in the Berserk workd, it marks one for sacrifice by the Godhand. But we dont live in the Berserk world. To me, the Brand is a sign of struggle, and a symbol of resisting fate and destiny. It's standing up for yourself, even when the easy thing would be to lay down. It's facing adversity and pain when the world wants to kick you and beat you down. That's what the Brand means to me.

    But fuck Griffith, i want that twink obliterated.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 hours ago (1 child)

    Can anyone fill me in about the top three?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 3 hours ago

    The first two are from berserk, the third is from monster. The first one is a mark for sacrifice, the other two are the perfect psychopath archetype. I (and someone else here) think the mark doesn't fit because it has a great message about strugging and fighting the greater powers of the world.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›