Does

“This character has every right to be a villain” = killing innocent people is justified because I had a bad past

>>149498778 (OP)
Nah. Example, Lex Luthor. He's in the right and his past is not tragic

>>149498789
He's in the right for murdering his parents for insurance money and inventing a raygun that gives random people cancer?

>>149498789
>Bald hands typed this post

>>149498822
He's right in that Superman takes away the free will of humanity and that ends justify the means

>>149498778 (OP)
Whiplash- went on a rampage against Stark Enterprises because he lost his family
Malekith- wanted to destroy the universe because he lost his race & his family
Ronan the Accuser- became an intergalactic terrorist because he lost his family
Zemo- tried to start a war because he lost his family
Thanos- murdered half the universe because he lost his race and his family
Adrian Toomes- becomes a criminal because he lost his job and his ability to support his family
Flagsmasher- wants to kill half the planet because the displacement of her friends and adoptive family
Killmonger- wants to kill the Wakandan royal family & conquer the world because he lost his family
Ghost- wanted to kill Hank Pym because she lost her family
Kingpin (Spiderverse)- ruptured the multiverse because he lost his family
Wanda- shredded the multiverse because she lost her family


The problem is that kids who go to school to learn writing and screenwrting are constantly told that antagonists/villains have to have a plausible reason as opposed to just being selfish, insane, or just plain evil. Now everyone has to be sympathetic now as well.

>>149498845
Aren’t all hands bald?

>>149499520
>He's not a werewolf
LMAOOOO

>>149498778 (OP)
The trope of killing innocent people is usually reserved for villains who don't believe people are innocent.

>>149499520
Not if you jerk off more