Cliches and Originality

File: fc3_scr_a9_02_vaas.jpg (927KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

927KB, 1920x1080px

>>90709938
>What if the hero killed the villain only for another villain to replace him?

This happens in video games and it can be bad.

>>90709973
Another idea would be to just introduce 9-12 recurring villains like El Tigre and Batman did, that way we don't fall in the same trap XIaolin Showdown did by making Jack Spicer then replacing him with Chaise Young then a literal talking bean.

>>90710313
>tfw Xiaolin showdown was the first show I had loved and had to drop forever because I fucking hated that bean so goddamn much

>>90709938
>let's not build up to villain's defeat and replace him with another who will more than likely be a piece of shit
You are fucking cancer.

>M-MUH ORIGINALITY
Overrated. The only thing that really matters is execution.

>>90710819
> Overrated. The only thing that really matters is execution.

This. Cliches and tropes are storytelling conventions that have endured because people LIKE them, and they generally work when used competently. Obviously an idiot can misuse them and fuck them up, but that's the fault of the idiot not the tools.

There are a ton of "original" ideas that only seem original because everyone who knows what they are doing knows better than to do that.

For example:
> What if the hero killed the villain only for another villain to replace him?

Then the first guy wouldn't actually be the villain. This happens all the time in movies. Look at any James Bond film, he usually ends up killing some bad guy before the opening credits. That guy probably could have been the villain if we saw the rest of that story, but we didn't. This movie isn't about him.

Caring about subversions and nothing else, anticlimax be damned, is one of the reasons why homosuck got to be so fucking bad.

>>90709938
>What if the hero killed the villain only for another villain to replace him?
Luke Cage, kinda.

>>90709938
>What if the hero killed the villain only for another villain to replace him?
Death Note is a good example

>>90709973
On that note, Saints Row The Third pissed me off with that so much.
>see this badass crime lord who is responsible for Johnny Gat's death? Not really, but at the time it made him feel pretty damn threatening up until he dies in a goofy cutscene
>your new main villain is a goofy Luchador with anger issues
>maybe that's not so bad. He's not as menacing as the guy before him but maybe it will work out
>the next main villains are a generic military asshole and his female assistant who doesn't have a personality
>by the end of canon ending the luchador escapes, you never fight the military guy and only get to kill his female assistant who isn't even a good boss material.
Fuck, who thought that the final fight (not counting the shitty movie within the game) should be a rehash of the lamest boss fight from SR2 except with a fucking nobody who doesn't have a single memorable personality trait?
Aforementioned Veteran Child was better and he was supposed to be a cowardly wimpy asshole way over his head, not final boss..

>>90711111
And Dexter.
I know about Ray Stevenson's scheduling issues, but the writers who couldn't write his character out of the show in a satisfying manner deserve blame.

>>90711146
nobody thinks that was a good idea though

>>90709938
>Can't kill the main villain right away or the movie ends.
No no the problem is when the tv series wastes 26 episodes on the heroes unable to kill the fucking henchmen, that's where I draw the line.
Otherwise not killing the main big bad until the finale is acceptable, it's his retarded henchmen which should be expendable, but never fucking die which are annoying to have around for the entire series.