I think the strangely positive reception of King Candy / Turbo influenced Disney Animation to make more twist villains. I've never understood the appeal of that "turbotastic" idiot, to me he's just an over-the-top clown, in fact he is to WDAS exactly what Velvet & Veneer from Trolls 3 are to Dreamworks.

The appeal is how the twist works King Candy was already a villain him being Turbo makes sense giving King Candy desoree to be in the spot light and fits with the arc words of Going Turbo .

We can't have the same opinions, man.

@Justinthegreat123

Sure it does. It's like, here's this character, they seem like just a normal character or a good guy, then, boom, big reveal that they're the villain. And the audience is like "Whoa, awesome, I didn't see that coming at all. Very well done." And then that "Wow" factor is seen as the twist villain being a "great" villain, but all they really had going for them is the twist to make them unique or special, and the surprise of the reveal is what stays with people. This is why many people feel like it's a cheap tactic to make a twist villain come across as great.

And King Candy/Turbo was a different kind of twist villain. Initially the twist was that he turned out NOT to be evil, until soon after his true motives are revealed, and the biggest twist was that he turned out to be Turbo when, for most of the film, he was known to be the antagonist. I guess the same could be said for Yokai as well though.

I personally like twist villains. Regular villains are fine.

I agree with you Justinthegreat123.

Rourke was fine, they just seemed to overuse it too much Post Wreck-It Ralph.

Twist villains are fine IMO, but they started overusing them.

Magnifico had the potential to be an interesting villain, but after he started using the book, he became a generic power hungry baddie. Chris Pine did great with what he was given though, that's one positive thing I'll say about him.

I don't think most people hate either kind of villain, they just want them to be well executed. Super tropey situations like love triangles or quotes like "I am your father" are popular because they can absolutely work. Conflicting romantic interest or internal conflict battling the fact that your dad is evil and you see yourself turning into him are fascinating, and can be worked into other stories well that aren't the first ones to do them.

For example, King Candy is a twist villain (aka he is revealed as Turbo) and a lot of twist villain haters use him as an example of a well liked Disney twist. When there is a clear purpose that the writers use a twist villain for it's exciting and jaw dropping, when it isn't purposeful the shock factor goes down and people just don't find the character interesting (like Hans from Frozen).

The same goes for the "normal villain," such as what happened with King Magnifico. He was promised to be the return to the fabulously, overdramatically evil villains that are pure evil just because they feel like it (this is an oversimplification, but it's what really draws people to them). There's not usually a sob story behind their actions, and if there is they blow their reactions to their past wayyyy out of proportion to the proper response because they are cruel and twisted. Magnifico was narcissistic sure, but the focus of his character was on EVIL without any flair or the super important part: the tension his actions place on the audience. For a good villain to properly work, we have to like the other characters or at least relate to them somehow. We can't feel lukewarm or bored, or else we won't care about what happens to them.

Asha says he's evil and sorta reacts like what he's doing is going to be terrible, but we don't see that to the extent we need to. The script really held both her and Magnifico back imo

Also sorry for the mini essay lol