Why do writers want Man At Arms to be evil?

[Fendi]

There's a reason why Val, Jack, Emiliano put him as villain protagonist! it has a good back story that lead into their corruption!

On MotuC, it just another cheap attempt of Shock Value, Jumping the Shark, and Jumping the Couch! they have no idea and no canon continuity, they just feel like writing whenever they like and tend to try a "dramatic" ways just to ****** on us!

[Urosinho]

For me it is as simple as this: I won't buy that snake figure and the problem is solved.

[Fendi]

For me it is as simple as this: I won't buy that snake figure and the problem is solved.

Pretty much the best idea! But in the end, HE IS EXIST!

[Teacher of Madness]

Can't he-man just stick to the basics and have fun adventures? This isn't Shakespeare

As much as I appreciate that 200X and the new bios have created a sort of living story-filled world, I really do agree with this sentiment. When I think about my figures this is certainly how I imagine them, much like I did when I was 5.

[Berserker79]

The idea behind it, is not bad...It gives the Snakemen faction a technical twist, would like to see some things SMAA creates for King Hiss, like Blast Attack...

[Toymaker]

There's a reason why Val, Jack, Emiliano put him as villain protagonist! it has a good back story that lead into their corruption!

On MotuC, it just another cheap attempt of Shock Value, Jumping the Shark, and Jumping the Couch! they have no idea and no canon continuity, they just feel like writing whenever they like and tend to try a "dramatic" ways just to ****** on us!

What are you basing this on?

There is a backstory planned for MYP, we just didn't get to see it.

Or is this a case of hating the figure/Scott so using an argument that suits this agenda?

[mightybuck]

if any of the good guys were to become a villain, MAA is the best candidate. he's one of eternia's most capable soldiers, a tactician, and an inventor. he not only has intimate knowledge of the royal palace's inner workings, but also that of castle grayskull. and of course he's one of the few people that knows who he-man really is. worst of all, he's a guy that everyone likes. none of the heroic warriors would want to fight him, because he's always been friends with everyone and the heroes will want to save him.

since MAA is central to the heroes and so well-liked, turning him into a villain is tough. his characterization all these years has cemented his good natured personality. he isn't corrupt. you're pretty much forced to make him a slave to some kind of mind control. it's been done before of course, but it does have it's advantages. you can have heroes so shaken up that they can't deal with the situation. or you can have some whose determination is strengthened by this tragedy and work even harder towards realizing their goals. whatever way the individual characters react, they are changing and adapting to the situation and that's what is most important. seeing the characters grow throughout the story.

[phantom1592]

There's a reason why Val, Jack, Emiliano put him as villain protagonist! it has a good back story that lead into their corruption!

On MotuC, it just another cheap attempt of Shock Value, Jumping the Shark, and Jumping the Couch! they have no idea and no canon continuity, they just feel like writing whenever they like and tend to try a "dramatic" ways just to ****** on us!

Good heavens... so when one person says MAA goes evil, it's a well thought out plan.... when someone else uses the same story they had planned it's 'Shock value and jumping the shark'...



Honestly, one thing that I DO find intereting about this story.... is that it pushes Clamp CHamp up to the front line. Going from one of the only 'minorities' in the line with a lame weapon and reused parts/armor.... to the new Man-at-arms is QUITE the promotion.

I'm a LOT more interested in that character now!


Also, IF Adam's identity is ever revealed... I KIND of like this method a bit better then the others... The whole 'Everytime he-man is needed, I can slip away... but THIS time I'll do it in front of skeletor...' thing is pretty much stupid. The thing with this property is there are a lot of 'retold' stories... and THIS situation was no more 'drastic' than the last 3 times he was in the same situation...

Man-at-arms telling... That's just sinister!

[mjw41]

Think about it,

Jack Olesker said if they went back to Eternia, Man At Arms will have taken over.

Emiliano Santalucia inhis fancomic homecoming also made Man at Arms a villain after he-man returned from space(it's possible he took his cue from Jack before we new about it)

Val Staples and Emiliano Santalucia made him a villain in the MVC volume 2 comics series (albeit it was an alternate universe MAA)

Dean Stefan/Ian Richter were planning on making him a villain in the MYP series

Scot Neitlich has made him a villain that gets killed in MOTUC (he took it from MYP but clearly it's an idea that he liked)

What is it about MAA that all these folks want him to do a heel run?

For me he was always the most loyal guy, sure it is a trope to have that insanely loyal character turn, but its so common that I think it would be better to be more of a nobody. Mekanek, Buzz Off, Sy-Klone, even Gwildor or Orko.

EDIT Emiliano had MAA killed before he-man's return, he didn't turn evil, I think I confused Teela 'hooking up' with King Hiss with turning MAA.

Hey It's a Dirty Job, but someone has to do it

[Dr Kain]

I have never understood the obsession with making MAA a bad guy either.

I think it shows a lack of talent, imagination, and is basically done for shock value.

"Oh my gosh! One of the most important and beloved characters is now a bad guy! Isn't it an emotional punch to the gut! Oh noes! The tragedy of it all!"

Lame.

The only saving grace with Snake MAA is that it's against his will at least.

Look, no offense, but I hope you aren't a writer because you have no idea what makes for a good story. Turning MAA into a Snake-Man and killing him later on advances the other characters. It opens up a new world for stories and ideas. Again, look at Beast Wars. Look at what killing Dinobot did for the story.

BTW, I'm not sure why I keep referencing BW in this thing, but it just seems to mimic the story elements of He-Man right now.

[krosfyah]

Look, no offense, but I hope you aren't a writer because you have no idea what makes for a good story. Turning MAA into a Snake-Man and killing him later on advances the other characters. It opens up a new world for stories and ideas. Again, look at Beast Wars. Look at what killing Dinobot did for the story.

BTW, I'm not sure why I keep referencing BW in this thing, but it just seems to mimic the story elements of He-Man right now.

I'm not REALLY arguing for or against it, just wondering why it's always Duncan. Sometimes though there is a thin line between brilliant writing and shark jumping. MAA as a snake man was initially an attempt to make more toys, a storyline reason for the snakemen to have vehicles and tech. Character deaths CAN be effective without being cheap, but then they can EASILY be cheap too. for me MAA is a little on the nose, everyone assumes CC was prepped to take his place for some reason, I don't know how it came to that assumption and now it's MOTUC bio canon.

[TechTrek]

the same reason why they (DC) had batman take on the justice league in a book.

cause everyone thinks bats and MAA are so cool that they could take on everyone.


its really lame in my opinion.

[Thrawn29]

Look, no offense, but I hope you aren't a writer because you have no idea what makes for a good story.

None taken, and no offense to you, but you have no business telling me what is a good story either. I'm a fan and I like what I like.

Obi-Wan Kenobi, Han Solo, and Lando were never turned into bad guys. Plenty of good stories there.

Marvel's Civil War Story was mess and turning a lot of the heroes into villains was out of character.

Turning MAA into a Snake-Man and killing him later on advances the other characters. It opens up a new world for stories and ideas.

Again, look at Beast Wars. Look at what killing Dinobot did for the story. [/QUOTE]

Don't watch Beastwars, can't comment.

MAA isn't a minor character though, he is the father figure of the franchise, and turning him evil is vastly out of character, and is a huge cliche.

The snake thing is certainly the best way to go about that route in my opinion, but you kill characters, you also kill story potential. You'd have to have competent writers and a concentrated effort to follow up on his death to benefit from it, and you really aren't going to get that from anything but a movie.

I see no reason to kill MAA in a child's toyline or cartoon. This isn't the property for it. A movie? Maybe.

[Shecky]

The idea behind it, is not bad...It gives the Snakemen faction a technical twist, would like to see some things SMAA creates for King Hiss, like Blast Attack...

You know, it should have been fairly obvious to me given Snake MAA's bio, but that would certainly be an interesting little twist if he "created" Blast-Attak.

Regards,
Victor P.

[Matthew L. Martin]

I'm not REALLY arguing for or against it, just wondering why it's always Duncan.

Orko's too innocent, Teela has her own story arc, turning the Sorceress evil throws the balance of power off too radically, and no one else is important enough to have the impact.

Personally, the only MotU character I thought had serious potential for corruption of his own free will is Master Sebrian. Snakeman-at-Arms has a lot of potential, since it adds layers of conflict and a horrific twist, and doesn't damage Duncan's integrity so much, since it's a forced conversion rather than his own choice. Having him die a villain, though, as implied in the bios . . . that rubs me the wrong way, and doesn't help Clamp Champ's character much either if the latter kills Duncan while there was still a chance for him to be saved. If it turns out that Man-at-Arms is freed from the spell and makes some heroic sacrifice in the Second Ultimate Battleground, I'll find it more palatable.

[Benedict Judas Hel]

Obi-Wan Kenobi, Han Solo, and Lando were never turned into bad guys.

That's because they were already bad guys to begin with.

Han Solo: a smuggler and a nerfherder. He was only into helping the Rebellion for the money (and wanting to score with the Princess). It was only at the end of ANH that he had a change of heart to a good guy.

Lando: a fellow smuggler and scoundrel. He betrayed his friend Han to Darth Vader (no honor among thieves) and then stole Han's clothes, ride and sidekick at the end of ESB!

Obi-Wan Kenobi: Trained a young Vader despite reservations of the Jedi Council thus enabling Vader to use the Dark Side of the Force to slaughter fellow Jedis and younglings and bringing about the end of the Republic. He also refused to finish off Vader when he had the chance.

They sound like bad guys to me already...

[Penny Dreadful]

There's no way Duncan would ever willingly turn evil. It would simply never happen. The very idea is so flagrantly out of character for him that I'm baffled and even a bit annoyed by it.

While I don't care for the idea of an evil Snake MAA in MYP or MOTUC, he is clearly "evil" against his will in those stories. He surely would have fought this drastic moral change on some level. In the MVC comic, it is the alternate "Faker realm" MAA who is evil. Regular MAA is never evil in the comic.

I'm pretty sure it's only the proposed season 2 of NA where they would have had him willingly become evil, so I'm glad that premise never came to pass.

[Dr Kain]

I'm not REALLY arguing for or against it, just wondering why it's always Duncan. Sometimes though there is a thin line between brilliant writing and shark jumping. MAA as a snake man was initially an attempt to make more toys, a storyline reason for the snakemen to have vehicles and tech. Character deaths CAN be effective without being cheap, but then they can EASILY be cheap too. for me MAA is a little on the nose, everyone assumes CC was prepped to take his place for some reason, I don't know how it came to that assumption and now it's MOTUC bio canon.

Actually, if you read the Palace Guards bio, it makes sense that MAA is out of the way.

None taken, and no offense to you, but you have no business telling me what is a good story either. I'm a fan and I like what I like.

None taken, but I am a writer, and I see a ton of infinite possibilities. Maybe the stories the bios would tell if they were done in comic or animation form would be better, because I bet it shows that they had taken MAA as far as they could, and killing him off would be the next step.

Let's look at it this way. Killing Optimus Prime back in the 80s was the best thing to happen to Transformers. It opened the door for a new leader to take his place, and we got to see Rodimus go from a young hot headed crack shot to a leader who had self doubts to a leader that understood his role and purpose and gained that confidence (granted, it was then taken away in the next episode, but it was still far more development in those 27 episodes than Optimus has in his 65).

Obi-Wan Kenobi, Han Solo, and Lando were never turned into bad guys. Plenty of good stories there.

Obi-Wan died. However, Anakin turned evil. Han Solo and Lando did not need to turn into bad guys, they were already technically gray area characters.

Marvel's Civil War Story was mess and turning a lot of the heroes into villains was out of character.

Marvel is just a mess period. The moment they let Quesada into office was their falling point.

Don't watch Beastwars, can't comment.

MAA isn't a minor character though, he is the father figure of the franchise, and turning him evil is vastly out of character, and is a huge cliche.

Dinobot was not a minor character, he was one of the major characters. In fact, the thing about BW was having such a small cast was that everyone had a big role to play.

I see no reason to kill MAA in a child's toyline or cartoon. This isn't the property for it. A movie? Maybe.

Is this the 80s still? Are we still children? And why can't characters die in children's cartoons and toylines? Life and death should not be limited to just adult themes. Life and death is something that is experienced in real life and it should be experienced in fantasy as well. That is why I will not let my kids watching 99% of the cartoons on the air these days, they sugarcoat everything and no on ever dies, they just get sent to another realm or some stupid bs like that. That is why Gargoyles and Batman TAS are the two greatest animated series ever made, as they were not afraid to show cause and effect, life and death, good and evil, etc.

[Darkspecter]

Most people misunderstand the proposed Season Two of New Adventures. Man-At-Arms would be the main villain, but he wasn't "evil." He was blinded by what he thought was the right thing. The only example I can think of is the movie Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. General Hein's entire family was killed by the phantoms and he wanted them destroyed. He was so blinded in this mission, that he ignored Dr. Cid and Aki Ross that the planet could be healed with the elements they needed. He just wanted to blast them to hell. In the process of doing so, he ended up destroying the last element they needed to save the world and he caused his entire crew (including himself) to die. That's not the ending of the movie (don't want to fully spoil it), but that's MAA in Season Two. He is General Hein. Not evil, but his one-sightedness, is causing chaos.

[Paul Justice]

sorry, though MAA is the closest thing to Batman, he is no where at Batman's level. as Batman could take on any member of the Justice League and win. That can not be said for MAA. But it should. If Duncan had the same care that Batman has had over the years, he would be an awesome force, and his turn would have been way more impactful then what it was. Duncan's turn was shocking and sad, but not devastating.

Like Hulk Hogan turning bad, he was unstoppable as a "face", you thought he would be more so as a "heel".

Batman turning bad would be the end of DC, so they did the next best thing in "Tower of Babel" and the "Doom" Dvd.

MAA should be that genius, tactician, master fighter/weapons master, detective, pilot, escape artist, fluent in every Eternian language. Degrees in chemistry, bio-engineering, advanced science, biology etc.

But for some reason it feels like it's too late.

[Heeeere's Olesker!]

Think about it,

Jack Olesker said if they went back to Eternia, Man At Arms will have taken over.

Emiliano Santalucia inhis fancomic homecoming also made Man at Arms a villain after he-man returned from space(it's possible he took his cue from Jack before we new about it)

Val Staples and Emiliano Santalucia made him a villain in the MVC volume 2 comics series (albeit it was an alternate universe MAA)

Dean Stefan/Ian Richter were planning on making him a villain in the MYP series

Scot Neitlich has made him a villain that gets killed in MOTUC (he took it from MYP but clearly it's an idea that he liked)

What is it about MAA that all these folks want him to do a heel run?

For me he was always the most loyal guy, sure it is a trope to have that insanely loyal character turn, but its so common that I think it would be better to be more of a nobody. Mekanek, Buzz Off, Sy-Klone, even Gwildor or Orko.

EDIT Emiliano had MAA killed before he-man's return, he didn't turn evil, I think I confused Teela 'hooking up' with King Hiss with turning MAA.

I don't know what the other gentlemen feel, but let me clarify and underscore that when I said MAA took over it -- i.e., fell from grace -- it was only because there was a catastrophic threat that left him no choice. Thus, his coup was a well-intended one. Misguided though he might have been, in my proposal he was never 'evil'. Granted I did say that a subconscious part of his motivation may have been from being in He-man's shadows for so long, but that's a very human (Eternian) character flaw and has little to do with true evil, imo.

Also remember that I said when He-man returned to Ernia and MAA realized he had been duped by the dark forces, that Duncan almost-too-late realized the error of his ways and joined with He-man to overcome the new threat.

The concept of a heroic figure that falls from grace only to find redemption and rise again is an archetypal concept in epics and sagas, Lancelot du Lac, Darth Vader and -- most brilliant of all -- Alec Guinness' portrayal of Colonel Nicholson in BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI (that portrayal of a heroic figure's fall from grace and return to grace being a substantive reason for the film winning seven Oscars) are but three examples that come to mind. Like Alec Guinness' Colonel Nicholson working with his Japanese captors to built that bridge, MAA did what he did with the best intentions of Eternia at heart. So I painted him as anything but a villain. Rather, he is a tragic figure. Part of that tragedy is tied to his subconscious feeling of having been in He-man's shadows and wanting to be his own man, but I felt that would merely reveal deeper layers that viewers would find interesting, if not relatable -- e.g. are we not all within the shadow of our parents when we are children, within our bosses' shadows later in life, etc? Do we not all -- perhaps subconsciously like MAA did -- wish for our moment in the sun?

As for why I choose to have him go this route? Well, something there is within us that finds fascinating the concept of the pure of heart having a fall. Yet there is something even more compelling, imo, to see the fallen figure rise again. "All Heaven rejoices for a lost lamb returned to the fold."

It was this train of thought that led me to propose MAA's well-intended fall from and eventual return to grace.

[The All American]

Can't he-man just stick to the basics and have fun adventures? This isn't Shakespeare

This is my favorite post, ever.

[krosfyah]

Let's look at it this way. Killing Optimus Prime back in the 80s was the best thing to happen to Transformers. It opened the door for a new leader to take his place, and we got to see Rodimus go from a young hot headed crack shot to a leader who had self doubts to a leader that understood his role and purpose and gained that confidence (granted, it was then taken away in the next episode, but it was still far more development in those 27 episodes than Optimus has in his 65). .

maybe but it buried the line in north america for a good few years. until beast wars 2nd attempt actually (in a sense the 2nd attempt as i conside croc megatron and bats pirme the first try that failed)

Thanks for the clarification Jack, you're exempt because you had the idea first either way! but why DID you choose Duncan over anyone else?

[Eternian Poet]

There's a reason why Val, Jack, Emiliano put him as villain protagonist!

Yes, I thought "alternative reality MAA" made for a compelling story - it was well done.

HOWEVER - like most entertainment, MOTU suffers from VERY black & white understanding of Good (TM) & Evil (TM). Rarely does entertainment really explore the shades of grey found in real-life - especially entertainment based on kids toys.

There really isn't much room for subtlety.

[Heeeere's Olesker!]

Can't he-man just stick to the basics and have fun adventures? This isn't Shakespeare

I agree with you that it isn't Shakespeare, but remember that reality is that MOTU was aimed at children. When one is writing for children there is an inherent responsibility that comes with writing for young and impressionable minds. I'm certainly not saying everything needs to be a lesson or educational nor that we should preach to children or forget the importance of "fun adventures". But a young audience does take thoughts and impressions and concepts from television series. That is even more true today than it was back in the 80s and 90s. We have them for a precious half-hour and in that half hour I've always tried to inject an added value, beyond entertainment, into my work.

most of those I've known who write for children's television also try to make it more than "just a cartoon" and "fun adventures" (not that there's anything wrong with fun adventures). In addition to being entertaining we try to put a few slices of pro-social behavior and life lessons into that which we write. We don't always succeed -- and I get that at times it can come off as a bit heavy-handed. But most writers for children's entertainment that I have worked with take that responsibility seriously and try to do the best for their young audience.

EDIT: Kro, it just seemed to me that MAA was the lgoical one to ascend to the throne. He had the strength, the conviction of spirit and the driving love for Eternia. That he was well-intended and so close to He-man, imo, makes his misstep all the more tragic...yet all the more redeeming when he sees the light.

Eternian Poet: Well said. Exploring those shades of grey was precisely where I'd hoped to go with the MAA concept.