I love storytelling like that. That’s one of my favorite things about Gryffindor/Slytherin because, to be honest, we’re motivated by the same things… we just have different approaches.
“I thought Dr. Facilier was a really weak villain. As much as I love Ray, through the entire movie all Facilier does is turn a Prince into a frog and step on a bug. Scar killed his own brother to get to power and Frollo was willing to burn an entire group of people because he thought it was right.”
He also turned Naveen into a frog as part of a machination of a larger plan to damn every single person in New Orleans to Hell and become a ridiculously powerful magickal dude, in which case he would have wreaked a hell of a lot more havoc. I think the movie was largely preventative - can you imagine the shit he would have done if he’d had Jafar’s level of power? That’s what he was gunning for.
Also… I always thought him ‘stepping on a bug’ was one of the most evil acts in the whole movie.
Because it’s not a huge, grandiose blast of magical power. It’s a completely mundane, small, human action. That is a human act of awfulness, it’s not dramatic, he doesn’t have to be a superhuman villain to devastate an audience. He’s evil in the sense that every one of us has the capacity.
It was an insignificant act to Facilier. He didn’t know who Ray was. He didn’t know just how much that little firefly loved a star, and just how big that love was. He was just a tiny bug.
Something as insignificant as a firefly to him can be the world to someone else. That’s what makes it evil. To him it was nothing. To the people who loved Ray - everything.
Different angles, guys. Just look at it another way.
Everything Sylver just said. ♥
I always saw his stomping on Ray as an obvious Moral Event Horizon, one of the cruelest and most ruthless in Disney Animated Canon history. It was so cold, so callous, and done with intentional malice. Facilier is up there with Frollo and Scar in terms of villainy.
Do I think his motivation of class/potentially racial discrimination could have been better described or illustrated? Yes. The movie’s pacing and overabundance of characters (something Disney apparently LOVES to do) held down the potential awesomeness of the film, not to mention the music (which has grown on me SO much) or the dubious choices Disney made in creating this story.
We didn’t get the full story, but when do we ever? Scar and Facilier are, what, the only Disney characters in the entire Animated Canon to have killed someone on-screen (discretion shot aside)? Facilier was willing to sell away the souls of all of New Orleans JUST to gain power and wealth.
He is an AMAZING villain. A bit more nuanced in places than the usual villain fare (and then every bit as problematic as Jafar in terms of queer coding and racial stereotypes and whatnot), but there’s nothing weak about him.
You want my idea of a weak Disney villain? No? Well, I’m going to give it to you anyway.
Gothel. Her entire shtick was ‘creepy old woman obsessed with youth’. She sheltered and smothered Rapunzel because of her ~magical hair~ (which, really, I hate that entire subplot. HATE it. It brought nothing new or integral to the story). She made a deal with the two thugs and, at her most evil (her own Moral Event Horizon) she stabbed Flynn/Eugene. And then, not forty or so seconds later, she was falling to her death.
Now compare the motivations of Facilier and Gothel… One is a timely and truthful motivation and the other is a worn out, tired, discredited trope that only perpetuates the idea that aging is bad and giving a whole slew of latchkey kids some kind of monster figure to rage against.
Facilier is by no means a ‘really weak villain’, in my opinion.