Having trauma???

Being sad about her dead dad??? (you know, after losing her mom)

Having survivor's guilt????

Having emotional hang-ups/grief about LOSING HER FAMILY, WATCHING HER HOMETOWN BURN, AND NEARLY GETTING SKEWERED TO DEATH AS A GODDAMN TEENAGER

Like seriously wtf. And these weren't even Clerith people going after her. They just thought that her being rightfully upset/depressed in certain scenarios was "annoying" or somehow taking away from Cloud's trauma or the group's or something. Like god forbid any of these characters have mental health issues that influence how they interact and engage with conflict. Seriously, Tifa is an entirely blameless party in every one of these games and the fact that I've actually seen posts where her being upset about HER FATHER DYING is somehow a detriment to her character...seriously what the actual hell. And then the same people adding on that Brian Lockhart is apparently a dick for being protective and uptight about his daughter (still legally a child at the time btw) after recently losing his wife. Like??? That's completely understandable dad behavior?????? There's literally nothing wrong with it????????

Ugh, thank you. Honestly, I really find the way Hollywood writes modern female characters to be kind of incredibly insulting. It's really depressing that characters have to either be a girlboss who is just magically strong/competent, a huge asshole who browbeats and snarks her way through the plot without a shred of kindness or empathy for the other characters, or just a general mary sue-esque character who doesn't go through an actual arc.

Female characters can be vulnerable. Shy. Terrified. They can be sexy. Or even display softer, more traditionally feminine traits while still serving a role in the story. They can be tough and no-nonsense while still expressing a sense of warmth or protectiveness. They can be thrown around like a ragdoll while STILL getting up to meet the challenge. They can fail. They can make intentionally incompetent decisions. They can be in the wrong. They can be cocky. They can be silly or positive or--gasp--WEAK. Idk but if we really want to start "seeing ourselves" in characters like they're always talking about, the first thing to do is to actually write female characters in a way that actually feels compelling. Which means writing characters with actual flaws and weaknesses to overcome.

Ohhhh god the Ursa thing...

I'm fine with different interpretations. To each his own. But I don't like the recent surge of victim blaming going around for Seph, Genesis, and Angeal. I think it's wholly possible for fictional characters to be both victims worthy of sympathy and victimizers worthy of blame. But it's important for people to pay attention to context in BOTH regards. And everything points back to Shinra. All three characters are exactly what Shinra made them and they all act accordingly. If not for Shinra they either wouldn't exist or would have had healthier, normal lives where their actions wouldn't have even been an issue.

They're all deeply broken, deeply exploited individuals. Individuals with FLAWS, both human and inhuman. And it's fine to lean more towards one way than another in the victim/villain spectrum. But it's also equally important to acknowledge the other side of the coin as well.

More than anything, I'm tired of the mentality that any moral grayness is automatically seen as giving these characters a pass for their actions. No. It doesn't. It contextualizes and adds nuance to their actions, NOT validate. The goal is to understand these characters, follow their arcs and stories, and fill in the missing pieces when the writing falters. That's how you build a story and its mythos. To lump characters into basic categories drains them of their color and potential. It takes away all a fandom could be, rich with lore made by people who love these characters and want to explore them and the world at large. And god, even MORE so when you sit there and put labels on passionate people who are just trying to enjoy and escape. It sets a harmful precedent that shames people for being curious, for opening their feelings, for showing any empathy at all.

Why is it so bad to add to the subtle and delicate writing that surrounds his “fallen angel” arc? I mean, do people want a smirky, one-dimensional villain forever? (Not that he ever was one-dimensional anyway but apparently some think he was).

No villain should just be evil for no reason, and if we want their reasons to be a little mysterious, that is entirely able to be done without stripping them of their emotions or tragedy. Everyone’s favorite villains have carefully crafted downfalls and often there is tragedy and misunderstanding involved.

Seph is an absolutely iconic villain and deserves more of this treatment. He is frankly, overdue for some humanization that isn’t bound to the limits of an older game like Crisis Core that often suffered from a lack of deeper exposition or elaboration. He’s earned it after being a terrifying, mysterious villain for so long.

Just a touch of it doesn’t ruin anything. The writers seem to be treating it with care and delicacy so far, which is good. That’s what we need.

Anyway, sorry for the rant. Twitter is getting on my nerves because people are saying things like “He better just stay crazy and enjoy burning shit for no reason.” and accusing people that disagree of “not actually being a true fan of the character.” (As if Crisis Core didn’t already make him more sympathetic!!)

(I’m also not using his full name so that this doesn’t show up in anyone’s search results if you don’t want to draw any contention. Cheers).

Pure evil villains are boring, unless it's full camp or they're having fun and it's delicious to watch.

I think people aren't paying attention to context. This isn't CURRENT Sephiroth, this is Sephiroth as a child. If he was always evil and always sadistic, it would take away a lot of the message the original game was trying to convey with him--Sephiroth is the product of SHINRA, the product of immoral ethics, war, and greed. Sephiroth was a normal baby given abnormal enhancement, shoved into extremely traumatic rules and expectations, and subsequently loses everything that ever made him human in a mad quest for revenge and control. To say Sephiroth was evil from the moment he was born is a HUGE disservice to his character, and his story as a whole. Sephiroth is a monster. But he is the monster Shinra created.

Now do I think Sephiroth should be redeemed? No, probably not. It's not about his journey back into the light, it's about his descent into darkness. That's what makes his character interesting. For the record, I don't want them to woobie him either. Part of the reason I find those Disney Remakes insufferable is how they take fun villains (Cruella, Maleficent) and try to make them all weepy and sympathetic. THOSE are villains where being pure evil works. It's entertaining. Their evilness is infectious. They're chewing the scenery and it's great. They're nasty little shits and they ENJOY it and they're cartoony enough to where you don't have to take it seriously. Sephiroth is a completely different beast, with an actual message to his story.

I've always found serious pure-evil villains completely uninteresting because there's no layers to them. No pathos. No depth. Part of having a good villain is looking into their eyes and seeing something of yourself in there. YOU could be that. YOU could become that. These are moral lessons for adults as they try to navigate a confusing and unfriendly world. You shouldn't turn into this because, in the end, succumbing to anger and hate ISN'T good. It ISN'T healthy. And these villains, at the end of the day, are extremely unhappy people who bring about their own destruction. You lose that when they're just a smirking sadistic killing machine. It's an empty husk that just exists for the heroes to defeat. I'd like to think that Sephiroth is more than that, and has always been more than that.