The New Trend In SF: Evil Humans

[Harvey]

Wikus (I mean the guy from District 9) is not the only 'good' human in that film. His wife, and his subordinate (the black man who ends up in prison) are equally sympathetic.

I can't speak much more on Avatar, since I haven't seen it, and Kegg has been following it much more closely than I have.

 

[Hyperspace05]

a good portion of the humans join with the natives to fight back the invasion force

Really?

Yes... I wouldn't call it 'many', but several main characters do. Not all of them are Avatar operators.

But it's obvious that the Sam Worthington character does the Right Thing and switches sides.

He doesn't just do that... <"spoiler" removed>

Your argument is nullified by what I wrote above. There is no clear humans=bad, Navi=good division in the film. Just wait and see.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Your argument is nullified by what I wrote above. There is no clear humans=bad, Navi=good division in the film. Just wait and see.

So there are evil Na'vi, then? That might convince me.

 

[Hyperspace05]

No, I don't think anything will convince you.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ You're probably right. I tend to be extremely linear in my thinking. I view everything as absolutes. And what's more, I like it that way.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Doctor Who/Torchwood have ventured into it to some degree. Such as the Doctor describing humans as monsters after destroying a retreating alien ship. Then later various governments in Torchwood: Children of Earth which are shown to be just as bad if not worse than the aliens.

Moore's BSG probably showed humans as we really are better than most shows. We aren't monsters, but we aren't angels either. We're some weird balance between the two. We make horrific mistakes, but we try to do what we think is best.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I don't care about shows (or films) showing humans "as they really are." If I want to see that, I'll watch the evening news.

 

[Christopher]

Doctor Who/Torchwood have ventured into it to some degree. Such as the Doctor describing humans as monsters after destroying a retreating alien ship. Then later various governments in Torchwood: Children of Earth which are shown to be just as bad if not worse than the aliens.

That was true in the original series to some extent, in storylines like "The Mutants," "The Power of Kroll," and "Kinda" dealing with Britain's post-colonial angst by portraying rapacious human empires overrunning alien noble savages, or ones like "The Silurians" dealing with humanity's inability to live in peace with nonhumans. That was another one where the human authorities destroyed a defeated nonhuman presence, earning the Doctor's disgust. It even goes all the way back to "The Sensorites" in the very first season, which gave us peaceful aliens being victimized by malevolent humans. And it's a recurring theme in Cyberman stories, both old and new, for the Cybermen to have a power-hungry human willingly working as their agent (and ultimately meeting his or her comeuppance at their hands).

 

[Temis the Vorta]

I watched the entire run (of both versions if I remember correctly), what's your point?

My point was that in the new one, there isn't one person on that show with a single redeeming quality. Maybe not necessarily evil, but a bunch of scumbags nonetheless.

The OP said that evil humans seemed to be the trend in Hollywood today. I was using Galactica as an example that I agree with that.

As bad as the humans are, they're not as bad as the Cylons, who have every negative human trait, but at least the humans aren't holier-than-thou hypocrites to boot.

But for every trend, there's a counter-trend. V is Avatar in reverse - right down to an alien analogue to the Sam Worthington character, who dons a "human suit" and fights for the plunky, underdog humans.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

at least the humans aren't holier-than-thou hypocrites to boot.

Unless their name is Karl Agathon.

 

[sidious618]

My point was that in the new one, there isn't one person on that show with a single redeeming quality. Maybe not necessarily evil, but a bunch of scumbags nonetheless.

What?! There were some fantastic characters on that show. They all made mistakes but even the one that started the fuckup, Baltar, came through in the end and evolved into a better person. I found BSG's vision of humanity to be a positive one.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

at least the humans aren't holier-than-thou hypocrites to boot.

Unless their name is Karl Agathon.

Explain.

 

[Gepard]

The Agathons were nice people and were against mass murder. Therefore, they suck. Or something.

 

[Trent Roman]

Yeah, I don't get the Helo-hate. He was the only character who, by the end of the show, you could still respect--and we criticize him for this?

However--Agathons, plural? Athena was just as much of a psychopath as the rest of that lot of degenerates.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Four words: "A Measure Of Salvation"

 

[Bob The Skutter]

^Mr. Laser Beam...
You are a very strange persons. You're wanting examples you have more or less said you will ignore because it won't suit your black and while moralistic view, so what's the point in the discussion if you refuse to see things aren't black or white, good or evil? Then you dislike characters based on the fact they are like real people? And you'd prefer the were 2 dimensional ciphers who are only there to be good or bad as the plot demands?

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Four words: "A Measure Of Salvation"

Yeah, I figured that would be your problem.

If opposing the complete genocide of the Cylons (regardless of the fact that it wouldn't have worked, that's what they believed would happen) is holier-than-thou and hypocritical, sign me up.

It would have been hypocritical if he supported using the virus after what the Cylons did to the Colonies, not the other way around.

Helo was the moral center of the show, and as mentioned, the only one of the main cast whose actions throughout the show could entirely be respected in my opinion (unless I'm forgetting something). He refused to seek vengeance, he reached out and saw the enemy as an equal and worthy of love and respect, and he was always loyal - if not to his leaders than to the principles they should have stood for.

You think Adama didn't seriously punish him because he just forgot? He didn't because he knew that Helo was right to stop them from using the virus and that they were wrong.

 

[Kegg]

As far as the BSG genocide debate goes, the short version of my opinion is Helo did the right thing ethically but not the right thing practically, and I would definitely have done the latter (as savagely immoral as I concede to consider it).

However, whatever one thinks of Helo and the rest of the BSG cast, it's clear they're not written to be the bad guys. The series toys a lot with the moral complexities of the leads, but when it lays the cards on the table it considers even the most screwed up human principals - Starbuck and Tigh - as basically good people.

The only principal human character on the show who could be considered a villain is Baltar, but there are good elements and arguably a redemption of sorts - though whether one feels that's character assassination in reverse is probably a matter of taste, I happened to mostly like it.

Point is, this is a far cry from the corporation boss in District 9, who is wholly and utterly unethical, and how I suspect Stephen Lang's character in Avatar is going to be played. These are uncomplicatedly evil men who sleep well and sort of what one would mean when referring to 'evil humans.' BSG did do a story about characters like that - it was called "Pegasus." If BSG had been a story about evil people, it would have been Admiral Cain's story, not Adama's.

I can't speak much more on Avatar, since I haven't seen it, and Kegg has been following it much more closely than I have.

Mostly just by catching all the trailers as they came out, I'll admit this film wasn't even on my radar until I saw the first trailer. Hyperspace05 seems by far the most well informed to regularly post about it.

Your argument is nullified by what I wrote above. There is no clear humans=bad, Navi=good division in the film. Just wait and see.

So there are evil Na'vi, then? That might convince me.

Ah, but the original question was:

In that case, where has a proper example been provided where none of the human characters have been depicted as good?

Whether or not there are evil Na'vi is beside the point, no? If there are good humans in Avatar, and there are, it doesn't qualify for this.

 

[Greg Cox]

That fearful, war-like humans are a threat to benevolent aliens and mutants is an ancient cliche. See ODD JOHN, IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE, THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL, "The Word for World is Forest," etc.

There's nothing new here. Science fiction has always explored both positive and negative aspects humanity.

And the story about the "civilized" guy who goes native and joins the noble savages against the evil colonial oppressors is even older than that . . . .

 

[The Doctor]

The Agathons were nice people and were against mass murder. Therefore, they suck. Or something.

I didn't like Helo because he was boring, but that's just me. He totally did the right thing (tm) in 'A Measure of Salvation.' The big problem in that episode wasn't that Helo did what he did, but that Apollo didn't follow suit. Now that was out-of-character, IMHO. Of course, that assumes that Apollo had a character and wasn't just a writer's prop to use when they were out of ways to push the story forward in a credible fashion.