An anti-hero of one's own - Tim Adams

This is more of a description of the "dystopian society" story.

This presents a very narrow view of the anti hero, for starters it presents only one scenario for an anti hero to rise in, and then allows only for one very restrictive model for the anti hero when in fact an anti hero is a much more general term than applied here and means simply a protagonist who does not posses the qualities we would usually expect of a hero. Sometimes they may well be downright villainous, for example Artemis Fowl in the Irish young adult novels of the same name.

There are two definitions of the anti hero and I am not sure the video fits either one. The older definition is a hero who doesn't possess the things that make heroes good at being heroes like bravery, skill, luck, wisdom etc. This may or may not cause him to fail in his quest. The newer definition is a hero who doesn't have the aesthetics or motives that make a hero heroic. A hero may be a knight in shining armor then our anti hero will wear black armor. A hero fights to help people. An anti hero fights for money or fame. A hero believes in the power of friendship while the anti hero is a lone wolf.

This video presented an oddly limited view of the antihero, but I did enjoy reading comments and peoples' differing opinions of what makes an antihero. Antiheroes are more varied and complex than this vid would have you believe. (Why the focus on dystopian fiction?) Broadly speaking, antiheroes are protagonists with qualities not typically thought of as "heroic". Maybe they are selfish or greedy, maybe their methods are especially ruthless and manipulative, or maybe their appearance is dark and imposing. Whatever it is, they're not your typical hero (a la Superman) but usually end up saving the day in one way or another, and muster up enough good deeds to be called a hero.

That plot-line he described was the exact plot of the Lego movie.

I think they confused Tragic Hero to Anti-hero.

Once upon a time, I was a soldier. During that time, a boy once came to me and told me he knew what I as doing. He believed soldiers would fight monsters, terrifying creatures that prey upon humanity. I was speechless, not because a little boy would think that soldiers fight monsters, but because of the shock that I was the one that had to take this young boy's illusion and replace it with grim fact. With a heavy heart I told him that there are no monsters, only humans and that soldiers fight to protect people like him from people that would do them harm. I even begged his forgiveness and told him that I too wish that I would fight actual monsters rather than my fellow man.

To put things strait, the anti-hero is a much more edgier version of a real hero.

"The best way to get an answer from the internet is to present an incorrect version of it" Socrates 500 BC.

Light Yagami.

But Gilgamesh, the very first hero of literature wasn't a hero, he was more an anti-hero

Anti-heroes are okay, but my favorite are Villain Protagonists.

I thought an anti-hero was the main character we're rooting for, or don't have to root for, that does things a villain would do. Ex: Walter White, he is the main character, but does villainous actions like murder and breaking the law. Some root for him and some don't.

While I agree with some of this, I do think that this didn't justify what a true Anti-Hero is. An anti-hero is someone who goes against the typical hero formula. They're normally selfish, dark, and pursue violence rather than avoid it. They care little for others, and don't really do something for the good of society. Again, that's not to say that this isn't accurate, but I just feel like they didn't explain fully what an anti-hero is.

To put things even more straight -- an antihero is a realistic hero. And a hero is a romanticized version of a realistic hero.

Funny. I've always been taught (and read from reliable authors) that an anti-hero was simply a protagonist who lacked heroic traits. I didn't realize that he had to be a direct rip-off of the protagonists of 1984 and Fahrenheit 451.

Very interesting… however, I think the outcome of the anti-hero is far too limited then what you suggest here. It seems that while the hero is selfless, powerful and willing to take on challenges to promote positive change for the good of society. In contrast, the anti-hero is selfish, mostly powerless and aware that the system cannot be changed or that society is to apathetic/corrupt and so not worth saving. Therefore, the anti-hero is adopts the role of the rouge. Rather than saving others or society from the tyranny of the system, he focuses on his own gain. He is not a villain because his code will not allow him to harm the innocent but he is not above exploiting circumstances for his own advantage. To quote one of the most famous anti-heroes of all time, “Look your worshipfulness, let’s get one thing straight. I’m not in this for your revolution and I’m not in this for you. I expect to be well paid. I’m in it for the money.”

I don't like this because it only looks at antiheroes through the light of dystopian stories.

I'm surprised by the lack of deadpool mentions in the comments

I am always in awe of the content you create. An undiscovered theme, a telling narrative and amazing graphics! There is so much to that can be conveyed with a story well told.