Fetishizing the Anti-Hero not only an already over used trope, but harmful?

Look at how the Anti-Hero has becomes so popular in television (Breaking Bad, Sons of Anarchy, True Detective, Mad Men etc.). Was it original when the fad started? Is it for sure over used now? But most importantly is the ANTI part of Anti-hero being pronounced enough for audiences? Are audiences and fandoms still glorifying and cheering for the anti-hero? Are people pro Walter White? Or are they reading the text and realizing Walter White is a terrible person and deserves a cruel ending? There seems to be a fetish of anti-heroes on TV and it could be a harmful obsession.

  • An anti hero is essentially a hero without almost any morals to their character. Sadly people just find blue blooded heroes like Superman and Cyclops from the X-Men boring, which is a shame because blue blooded heroes are important to have. They show us that we can do good without having to cross a line. – Aaron Hatch 9 years ago
  • In my opinion, Walter White should not be considered an anti-hero. He is a straight up villain by the end. being the protagonist does make the character a hero. A protagonist can have evil intentions, like Louis Bloom from NIghtcrawler. Too often, people confuse villain protagonists with anti-heroes, and yes, it can be harmful when it comes to viewer accountability. The allure of most anti-heroes, like Gregory House, Spike (Buffy the Vampire Slayer), and Deadpool, are that they are more emotionally accessible to most audiences. Sometimes people identify with an unsavory character more than they'd like to let on. The anti-heroes you are attracted to says a lot about you as a person. – HannahMeholick 9 years ago

Article on this topic

Want to write about TV or other art forms?

Create writer account