Characters That Shouldn't Have Origin Stories (video essay)

I do not endorse the opinions of any of the weird little old men I quote in this video.

References & Further Reading/Watching

Intro/Part 1

Their Rick and Morty video was also a major influence on this piece.

Hayley Whipjack watched all the Shrek there is, and is also making a fantastic Once Upon a Time recap series: @haleywhipjack

Director Mike Disa tells the horror story of his brief time as director of the attempted Seven Dwarfs prequel:

Part 2

My favorite source on all things Oz is @ theozvlog on TikTok.

Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West (may be affiliate links)

Part 2B

Gregory Maguire Interviews:

Part 2C

Part 3

All films referenced: (letterboxd list)

TV shows:
Once Upon a Time (ABC) 2011-2018
The House of the Dragon (HBO/Max) 2022-
Game of Thrones (HBO/Max) 2011-2019
Better Call Saul (AMC) 2015-2022
The Adventures of Puss in Boots (Dreamworks/Netflix) 2015-2018

Books: (goodreads links)
THE BALLAD OF SONGBIRDS AND SNAKES, Suzanne Collins, 2020
The Chronicles of Narnia series, C.S. Lewis, 1950-1956
TREMENDOUS TRIFLES (anthology), C.K. Chesterton
WICKED, Gregory Maguire, 1995
Stage Shows:
Wicked, premiered 2003

00:00 Intro
02:45 What Is My Problem
23:06 Wicked
29:13 The Public Domain
39:07 Good & Evil
43:54 Willy Wonka
56:44 Kisses

[erin]

I dont think a backstory for Wonka is interesting. What I do think is interesting is the backstory for the character and candy and Roald Dahl. Wonka isnt the protagonist of the book and Dalh absolutely hated the name change. He also found 1971 Wonka and Charlie to be overly sentimental and sappy, which wasn't their relationship at all. In Boy, Dalhs autobiography of his childhood, he talks about how he eventually ends up at boarding school and hates it. Theres lots of abuse and illogical, irrational adults (which is nearly all the adults in his books until his divorce in the early 80s), but one bright spot is that Cadbury would send the boys experimental chocolate bars to try and rate. And all the boys took the job very seriously. So, in his experience, fantastical candy creations were a thing and adults NEEDED children to make them. Thats why Wonka needs a child and childlike wonder and creativity - bc Cadbury did too. And Charlie doesn't win bc he is the sweetest and most obedient; he wins bc he's the cleverest and the downtrodden, abused boy who appreciates the candy the most. Just like Dalh and the boarding school boys.

Also, the whole Wonka dentist story is stupid, but loosely based on Dalhs candy memories from before boarding school. He and his little friends would walk to school and pass a candy store. Dalhs favourite were licorice bootlaces. His friend's dad was doctor and caught his friend in bed eating one. Not wanting his kid to sneak sweets and eat them after brushing his teeth, told him an elaborate, disgusting tale about how theyre made from rats.

I wouldn't say Wonka is evil, per se, but he is an early Roald Dahl adult. Which is to say he's an adult seen through the lens of a child. He's irrational and angry and complicated and unfair and unpredictable. He's not a Dahl villain bc Dahl villains are directly, physically abusive to children. But he is uncaring and neglectful (like by not intervening when kids get hurt in an environment full of hidden dangers), bc thats how Dahl adults are. They dont swoop in and save kids from their own mistakes. They create chaotic environments where kids are the only sane, rational beings who must be thoughtful and resourceful to stay safe.

[UDontTakeMeSeriously]

I always look at Cruella as if it's completely divorced from the Disney property. Somehow, that makes it infinitely more palpable.

[melissaluddy]

In slight defense for Lewis's "Read the books in any order" stance, iirc, he was responding to a child asking him to settle a debate that they were having with friends. So I think it was less about "order doesn't matter" and more "don't gatekeep and bully your friends for reading the books 'wrong' it literally is not that important"

But who am I to speak? I read Dawntreader first, and I know *that's* wrong.

[skyr]

I think Cruella should have a backstory BUT! It needs to maintain that she's always been an unhinged, bad person to her core all the way up to her being a rich fashion designer. I wrote my own version of Cruella where she has a "anything for the art and my personal pleasure" mentality and doing shit like pulling the wings off of bugs because the iridescence made for good art as a kid, and the version I wrote culminated in her kidnapping the dog of a rival in her fashion design class after being insulted, using the dog's pelt for her masterpiece to win a competition, and making it appear to the judges that her distraught rival is mentally unwell for accusing her of taking her dog, leaving her as the winner of some internship or other high position in the industry. Which would put her where she was at her first appearance - as an already rich and famous designer after having had decades of success, and finding another source of inspiration (someone else's dog)

[pipperminty]

“Why not?! Why don’t you like Dalmatians?!?!”

“BECAUSE DALMATIANS KILLED MY MOM OK?!”

I can’t take Cruella seriously.

[lydia]

I wonder if some of what makes Wicked work is that the original texts, both book and movie, invite moral critique. There's a thick layer of satire in the original book, including a lot of political commentary about financial systems and the gold standard. And it isn't a coincidence that the movie is from the 30s, when there was also a lot of criticism and suspicion about leaders and their economic influences. The Wizard of Oz literally shows you the "ultimate good guy" and then tells you he's lying. It isn't a stretch to just let Wizard of Oz be a political satire/commentary, letting the nice childhood adventure go. And Wicked's rewriting of villain and hero (even in the fluffier musical) is meant to be overtly political. "Where I come from, we tell all sorts of things that aren't true. We call it history." So maybe that's taking the story in a direction the text already allows for.

[thanatoast]

Jenny Nicholson hit the nail on the head on why biopics on creatives don't work. Filmakers just don't understand how to portray the creative process in an interesting way other than seeing references Irl and then copying them.

Personally, I think it applies to fictional creatives too, Cruella just sees the iconic Things she had in the original movie in her life (Evil Laugh, Calling people Imbeciles, etc.) and then copies them wholesale which removes the things those choices said about her personality. Obviously I can't be sure about Wonka, but it really seems like it's going the same way.

[haaanniejo]

also are we just forgetting that it's cannon that cruella coveted the dog's fur pattern bc she wanted to make fur coats out of it???

[LiviBurke]

You hit the nail on the head with your explanation. That’s why I didn’t feel a need for the Cruella movie. It’s ok if some villains are bad just because they are bad and not because they have a big traumatic back story.

[wingnutcondor]

This makes me think about the brilliance of The Series of Unfortunate Events how the first books fit neatly into storybook/Disney narratives about good and evil for children, then grow alongside the reader layering in shades of gray. I think it only works because it's earned! The series wouldn't have any emotional weight if you hopped from book 1 to 13. Once you've been following the same characters for a long time from the same dedicated creator(s) it allows for growth and rewards the reader. These prequels just feel like your abusive ex learning therapy talk out of nowhere. Twin Peaks The Return is another good example of a follow up that works because people were genuinely curious to learn more and David Lynch had more to say as a creator.

[jessicamckay]

When I saw Elphaba in the thumbnail I immediately thought- nope she's different from the other ones. Loved your take. I also love Maguire got the name from the syllables of L. Frank Baum, it was a nice tribute to the author that started it all.

[lydia]

Oh that's where Ariel's mom died!

I rewatched Little Mermaid last year for the first time in decades, now as a parent, expecting that I would identify more with Triton than Ariel and was shocked to see that Triton is basically having a Satanic Panic over humans. It being the 80s, that was a fascinating cultural commentary. So I wrote about it on Facebook. And one of my friends, trying to undermine my argument said that Triton wasn't being unreasonable because of how Ariel's mother died and I was completely baffled, since that is not in the original text. I assumed it was in Little Mermaid 2 (which 10 year old me, burgeoning film snob refused to watch out of principle), but it's even weirder to know it was in an even more distant prequel.

I think that's what people mean when they say the new thing hurts the old thing. Because canon gets messed up. And your memory of the original thing can get rewritten.

[thespiderofhonor]

We don’t want a backstory for Mufasa, because we see Mufasa, even before his untimely death we see him as this like almost like God, like figure, almost like Azlan in the chronicles of Narnia series

[test-kfzv]

Ironically, I think Wicked is the problem - everyone tried to do A Wicked, but missed exactly why and how Wicked works in the first place. Or should I say, both versions of Wicked.

[marymauney]

" It doesn't break the storyline; it breaks the character, which in my book is way more important." I love this line. It hits the nail on the head for a lot of issues of mine across various media. I also really like your point about how "villain" is just a role in a story, and that just as not all villains are evil, all evil characters aren't villains. That's a really great point.

[thespiderofhonor]

Also, I haven’t had a chance to say this somewhere, but Ariel’s beginning is an adaptation of the 12 dancing princesses

[IsaacIsaacIsaacson]

Takeaway from this: I think it should make anyone really angry that the copyright extension act means the 1939 film won't be public domain until 2035 and the entire Oz book series won't be public domain until 2059. That two generations of people will have lived and mostly died before this material is allowed to be used by our culture again.

[lyrcheylap]

I’m rewatching OUAT. And one of my favorite things is they kept showing all of the backstory’s for how the villians weren’t evil and then when they got to Cruella they set it up like she was getting a redemption but the plot twist was that no- she was born evil and she likes it

[hikaboom]

im so glad youtube recommended me your 5 hr deep dive about kirsten cus now im here. really love how insightful and thoughtful you are.it's inspiring me in the way i write my own villains!! thank you for your thoughts !!!

[anwynboo]

So… Wicked is the baby that the movie had in high school, but it’s parent the book raised it and so the musical thinks it’s the movie’s sibling and shared many traits with their grandparent book who raised them?