Talk:Te Fiti/@comment-27926499-20161130182703/@comment-27926499-20161211201246

@Cenationfan1 : What you just said is very incorrect. Stromboli and Gaston are not plot-twist villains, by any means. They are quite established as being mean, agressive and possessive right from their very first appearance, so there's no twist whatsoever. Just a plunge into more darkness as the movie goes, especially for Gaston.

And really, you are using Rourke of all guys as an example ? The most boring, generic and predictable of them all ? Seriously, he's like Ratcliffe and Clayton fused into one, he screams "power-hungry upper class White man" from all his pores right from the start. This one was a strawman argument.

" All I'm saying is stop acting like this is a new cliché as Disney has used this plot device alot longer than you think."

Perhaps, you should stop warping how these villains acted like, just to excuse a lame, overused and predictable cliché that has been used for 4 years straight in a row now.

It was fine when WiR did it with King Candy, as he turned out to be a fantastic villain. But then, it just became a lazy afterthought rinse and repeat.

"Why does it work in Moana and in the films I mentioned and not in Frozen, Zootopia and Big Hero 6?"

Maybe because in Beauty and The Beast and Wreck It Ralph, we get to see the natural evolution of their respective villains until they pass the point of no return ? While in Pinocchio, Stromboli is just a plot obstacle than a fully fledged character. Rourke does not really work that well, given how predictable he was.

The point is that in all 3 the Revival Era movies, the plot-twist villains are reduced to lame last-minute shock-value. You don't get to know these guys. They're just supposedly "misunderstood", but they just come off as tacky plot devices, and as unthreatening tryhards who didn't have a real plan but relying on plot convenience.

Except Callagahan, who is just generic. He had a plan, he was proactive, but he was no villain.