Ain't No Place For No Hero

I recently re-watched The Wicker Man, and no not the Nick Cage movie; the good one from 1973, and noticed something that I hadn't before: there is no hero in this movie. There is a protagonist, the sergeant, and an antagonist, basically everyone on Summerisle, but no one that I would consider the hero of the story. This is because all of the major players receive at least some characterization, and because they all have flaws as well as a good side. You are forced to empathize with both sides. Heroes are supposed to be paragons that show us the best human qualities, but the problem with heroes is that they kind of cease to be humans after a while and end up being two dimensional.

Sergeant Howie has been tasked with finding a girl that has been kidnapped and his drive to do so is impressive at times; but he is also xenophobic, aggressive, and self righteous. He spends a large chunk of the movie breaking into people's homes and actively violating their privacy, strong-arming the population in the process. Also he spends quite a lot of time lecturing the islanders about how they are "corrupting the youth" by not teaching them about Jesus, and how their pagan beliefs are evil. The islanders motivation is that they just want to make sure that their island prospers again, which they believe will only happen with a sacrifice of sufficient quality. They are also under attack by an outsider, and as such, treat him coldly in a lot of cases, which Howie views as a kind of insubordination and as responds with hostility. Both sides of this conflict have problems as well as virtues.

The beauty of this kind of narrative setup is that it forces you to analyze the situation and realize that the world presented is not black and white (and hopefully viewers can get the fucking message). My favorite kinds of bad guys in movies are ones that you sympathize with. This empathetic response humanizes the villain and makes for a functional counterpoint to the hero, not just a monolithic evil to be overcome. Movies that tend to hit you on multiple emotional levels tend to make you think, and that is a great thing that people like me tend to look for in a story. 

Ozymandias from Watchmen is a great example of this kind of "villain". He is trying to eliminate the problems associated with nationalism by forcing humanity to have to work together against a larger foe. His point of view is understandable, even if you disagree with his methods. Another good version of this type of character is Gerard Butler's character in the movie Law Abiding Citizen. He's a justifiably broken man who's goals reflect his brokenness. All his character is trying to do is show how the justice system doesn't always work, by exploiting its flaws after committing crimes. 

Making the good guy also have flaws that are understandable also makes him easier to empathize with, and as such also make him a more believable character. As I stated above, Heroes are representative of ideals and making them flawed twists their moral certitude in interesting and beautiful ways. This makes it harder to call them real "heroes". Superman is a hero, Batman is not. Supes is supposed to represent hope and justice and everything that is shiny, but he also holds a moral position that is incorruptible. This makes him harder to empathize with, but easier to idolize. Batman on the other hand beats the living hell out of people and uses psychological and physical torture to accomplish his goals. You might not agree with how he does it, but you can understand why. 

Humans are naturally pack animals, and because of this they will react to a deep, human, empathetic character more strongly than with a shallow, one dimensional character. More rounded/empathetic characters make for better, more believable characters and stories, and I wish we would see more of them.