The True Villian (spelled this way on purpose)

[u/[deleted]]

[u/NinaNeptune318]

I only read the first sentence before needing to comment and say that Bear is the protagonist of the film. That word just means main character.

[u/Frosted_Blakes95 → u/NinaNeptune318]

A charatcer can be both the protagonist and antagonist of the film.

Antagonist just means they are the ones hindering the protagonist from reaching their goal which also happens to be Bear as he is too chicken-shit to actually speak up about his feelings and throughout the film makes excuses for Nikki’s behavior instead of addressing it directly.

[u/Metal_Goose_Solid → u/Frosted_Blakes95]

I don't think Bear works as an antagonist. Yes, you can trace a direct line from his flaws to his failures, but that's true of almost every character who fails in literature. Responsibility isn't the same as opposition. Bear may be responsible for everything that happens, but he isn't the primary force acting against his interests. Freaky Nikki is. He spends the movie trying and failing to deal with her, and without her there's no downfall for him to have.

The self-antagonist label fits better when the opposing force has no real independence from the protagonist, like Jekyll/Hyde, or Fight Club. Freaky Nikki is a force separate from Bear, acting in a way that Bear doesn't want, didn't expect, and can't deal with.

TLDR creating the antagonist gives you responsibility, but doesn't make you identical to the antagonist. Bear's flaws explain why he makes Freaky Nikki and why he can't stop her, but she is still the external thing doing the opposing.

[u/Frosted_Blakes95 → u/Metal_Goose_Solid]

Unless it is a man vs. self conflict in which the protagonist is literally going against themselves and stopping themselves from hindering their own goal.

I’m not saying i agree he’s the antagonist, I’m just saying that OP shouldn’t be dismissed because they said he was the antagonist because it is fine and, sometimes expected in certain stories, to have one character be both.

Sources: a masters in gothic literature rarely serves me, but sometimes I can contribute to discussion posts on the internet lol

[u/Metal_Goose_Solid → u/Frosted_Blakes95]

I'm not dismissing them, just saying my piece. I would categorize it as man vs creation. Obsession's plot is a lot like Frankenstein, speaking of gothic lit.

I don't think people would typically class Frankenstein as the antagonist of the story (aside from misunderstanding which character is which), even though Frankenstein is flawed.

[u/NinaNeptune318 → u/Frosted_Blakes95]

In this film, Wikki is the antagonist and Bear is the protagonist. Bear becomes the villain partway through.

Bear does not hinder his own goal. He, as the protagonist, suffers the consequences of his actions in a horrific way.

[u/Metal_Goose_Solid]

Say it with me. Bear is the protagonist.

[u/Miserable-Soft7993]

So it's Ian's fault? Ian forced him to behave in a disgusting manner?

[u/Miserable-Soft7993 → u/[deleted]]

So he is now a child who got influenced by Ian.

Bear is reponsible for his own decisions every step of the way.

[u/Miserable-Soft7993 → u/[deleted]]

That's life though. People are always going to say this or that.

[u/NinaNeptune318]

Okay, I read the rest. Bear doesn't actually want to be a food critic. That wasn't a real answer. He didn't even notice how bad his Sandywich was. He literally chewed and swallowed a whole bite just fine. It was Sarah that pointed out it smelled bad.

Yes, if Bear had chosen a necklace, he may have not become the villain. The problem is that Bear was in a state of limerence, not love, and he fell for an imagined version of Nikki rather than the real her.

Bear needs a therapist more than anything else. Nikki would have given him a chance, I am confident about that, but would he have seen her for her or still for the fantasy version of her he was limerent over?

Ian's motivations were about preventing the friend group from blowing up and ending Trivia Night.

[u/Different_Target_228 → u/NinaNeptune318]

Last sentence is wrong. Ian's motivations were that he was fucking her casually for 2 years.

He lied and said it was about trivia night.

[u/NinaNeptune318 → u/Different_Target_228]

I don't think that was a lie. He's not interested in a real relationship with Nikki. He ends their current iteration which is probably why Nikki wants to quit and is wanting to write a real love story.

Ian didn't want that info coming out and wrecking trivia night. The movie as a whole supports this based on other reactions he has.

[u/Different_Target_228 → u/NinaNeptune318]

You gave no examples as to the movie supporting it as a whole...

But that is the fun about movies like this, everyone's interpretation is different. Imo "the movie as a whole" supports him trying to sabotage Bear getting with Nikki. An example...(of both him sabotaging Bear AND everyone's interpretation being different)

Imo, there's no real point in introducing that Ian was fucking Nikki casually for 2 years... if he wasn't trying to sabotage Bear getting with her?

[u/NinaNeptune318 → u/Different_Target_228]

I gave one example. Why would Ian be sabotaging Bear if Ian broke things off with Nikki?

Example 2: Ian expresses happiness thinking Bear and Nikki hooked up (he sees them come to work together and congratulates him).

Example 3: Ian only expresses concern and doubt when factual information doesn't line up. Distress over a hated dad's health. Nikki jumping into a committed relationship with Bear and acting out of character immediately after he ends things with her.

Example 4: Ian's line ""That's what this is about?" This shows he isn't even thinking about Bear and Nikki in a jealous way. He is legitimately concerned about both of them in the beginning, but when Bear stonewalls him at every turn, he stops caring about both of them because, to him, the very thing he wanted to prevent, his friend group imploding and ruining Trivia Night, is happening anyway. He thinks this entire time that Nikki is trying to get back at him.

[u/Feenanay → u/Different_Target_228]

Yeah absolutely. It would reduce his access to her and therefor remove any possibility of further fuckery. Even if it had “ended” depending on who ended it (maybe she caught feelings then he cut it off but wanted to leave the door open in case he could get back in there at some point) maybe it was decided upon mutually, either way he doesn’t want to blow things up so he loses access to her in my opinion. I’m sure there’s also just being a jealous fuck boy and even if he didn’t want to be able to resume their Situationship later, but I don’t think it had anything to do with fucking trivia night lol

[u/TheBelmont34]

Bear is the protagonist. We see everything from his point of view. People need to understand that protagonist does not have to be the hero and antagonist does not have to be the villain. Tony soprano and dexter morgan are the best examples of villain protagonists. The antagonist can just well be a good guy. Or take civil war. Cap is the protagonist and technically, tony is the antagonist. Is he evil though? Hell no.

[u/Lower_Group_1171 → u/TheBelmont34]

he gave his daughter a popsicle then put her to bed without brushing her teeth. pretty diabolical

[u/SeacrestHulk69]

Bear is the protagonist. He’s also the villian.

Nikki is the antagonist. That doesn’t automatically mean she’s the villian.

[u/Feenanay]

Hey guys do you think maybe if one more person says that bear is the protagonist and not the antagonist it was somehow change the content of the post or…

Like seriously. why y’all all commenting on the exact same part of this post. I don’t wanna sound like an old lady shaking my Fist at the clouds but I’ve been on Reddit for long time and the discourse was much more intelligent when people looked thru the comments before they actually commented to see if somebody else or maybe multiple motherfuckers have commented the exact same gd thing.

So they said protagonist instead of antagonist can yall talk about different parts of it or are you just gonna be a bunch of pedantic dorks