Or Pharrell!

I haven’t seen that Cinderella yet, so thanks for the tip!

re: Maleficent: Well, darn. Your observations match other things I’ve heard, which is why I haven’t rushed to see it. I’d rather watch a flawed, exciting film than a bland one.

You know the recent Cinderella we get a little redemption for Lady Tremaine with her explaining her dream was taken from her. She is still evil but we get a little more into her heart and why she is the way she is. Cate Blanchett is amazing in the role, which helps add that depth. I think they were trying to do redemption in Maleficent but it was an entirely different character and not really a villain at all, just kind of bland.

>it felt like something had got lost in editing

It did to me, too, which is why I went hunting for more info after I saw the movie. I was curious about why Scarlet engaged me so much while her overall story also left me frustrated and wanting. Ms. Bullock having had so much input answered some of my questions and provided better context for some of the film’s creative choices.

re: Elsa and Macha: those characters are examples of us getting the “villainess” redemption arcs where we can! I remember feeling a little thrill as Elsa’s arc unfolded precisely because of that feature.

Thanks for returning and discussing this!

Off to check it out now!

I wrote a piece kind of on this topic of female villains a while back. Would love your take on it if you get a chance http://smilingldsgirl.com/2013/09/22/feminism-and-fairy-tales/

That’s really interesting to hear about Sandra Bullock’s process (I love her). It makes sense because it felt like something had got lost in editing.

You make good points about female villains with redemption arc. I would like to see more of that also and have liked that in OUAT. I guess you kind of get that with Elsa in Frozen but she’s never really the villain but she does freeze everything. I loved in Song of the Sea how the character Macha is very villainous but she’s doing it out of love for her son. She gets some redemption because her motives are pure.
You’re a good writer. Great job!

Thanks for taking the time to read and comment!

You won’t get an argument from me about the problematic/flawed elements of Scarlet’s character—and I’m a huge fan! The criticisms about her I’ve read point to this being an example of a lost opportunity for Illumination to have crafted a better villain.

In fact, director Pierre Coffin discussed the evolution of her character in a Flickering Myth interview (http://www.flickeringmyth.com/2015/06/interview-directors-pierre-coffin-and-kyle-balda-talk-minions.html) and indicated one of their earlier missteps was having made Scarlet too one-dimensional. It took Sandra Bullock’s insight and guidance to even bring her as far as they did:

““She was great. She had this experience with The Prince of Egypt, which was pretty bad for her apparently, because she was brought in just to say words without an explanation of what was her character thinking or whatever. So we wanted to include her as much as possible within the process, and that was really helpful because, as we were saying earlier, we have this first version but in three years you can screw up like… how many times did we screw up? [They laugh.] We don’t even count anymore. But one of the screw ups was, we said “let’s have her be evil! The Minions are after someone evil to serve.” And so she played it that way, but she had great doubts about it, about her being evil throughout, because that’s not really interesting to play. And so she talked with Brian and with us and we all established together that in her introduction she needed to be super sweet, and her snapping point is actually when she’s telling this very sweet story to put them to bed but it turns into a nightmare all of a sudden, like “whoa, where did that come from?” And that’s why we went for the stop-motion, very kid-like stuff, to create that contrast between how sweet she is throughout and how dangerous she is in reality. That’s the turning point, and that was all her [Bullock]””

I think the lack of more memorable aspects of Scarlet’s character are mostly to do with the cash cow nature of MINIONS. Given the chance to be fleshed out in a movie of her own, Scarlet could very well prove to be more interesting to more people.

So my post is as much about Scarlet Overkill’s potential as her current worth.

I’m also proposing we get more anti-heroines, not just female villains. Folks who only want more male villains (both with and without redemption arcs) certainly have their fill, so the status quo is actually in their favor. What I’ve not seen as frequently are female villains who get the privilege of a redemption story as often as their male counterparts (coincidentally, that’s a significant reason I’ve enjoyed Regina’s character from Once Upon a Time so much, because she received a redemption arc. I truly wasn’t expecting that.).

Ideally, everyone gets more of the kinds of characters they want. Illumination will have released four films featuring Gru in some capacity by 2017, which is great for his fans and I’m happy for them. However, it won’t stop me from proposing that there’s room in the marketplace (i.e., theaters, tv, direct-to-dvd, etc.) for an equal number of (redeemed) Scarlet Overkills.

My advocating for such a character in greater numbers doesn’t mean I’m
proposing that one type of character dominates over all others. That’d be
boring and not in the best interest of (in this case) animation fans, especially since we’re not a monolith and our tastes vary. Ultimately, it’s about addressing an imbalance. 🙂

> like the best James Bond villain

Very apt description! She is indeed that capable. Her many talents are a big part of the appeal for me. I’ve had decades of James Bond films. Characters like Scarlet Overkill? Not so much.

Would love to see more films and TV shows address that imbalance and especially in animation because that medium allows for fantastical visuals.