|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:02 pm
I role-play Erik, ALOT.... And I have to admit it is hard trying to figure how he would react to such a disaster as we are role-playing now. My role-play parnter tells me I am a wonderful Erik, but it is still very difficult. Yet now that I have FINALLY finished Phantom it seems to be a bit easier.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:05 pm
MindlessSoul I role-play Erik, ALOT.... And I have to admit it is hard trying to figure how he would react to such a disaster as we are role-playing now. My role-play parnter tells me I am a wonderful Erik, but it is still very difficult. Yet now that I have FINALLY finished Phantom it seems to be a bit easier. I know the feeling I am the Erik to a friend's Christine (which she plays wonderfully) and it's hard because he has many personalities and ways to react as opposed to how I would react. So I have to sit and think if he would get angry or react with sarcasm or even just take it with a grain of salt. But ultimately, he can be fun as well. Then again, I love being the baddie and causing trouble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:16 pm
Utakan MindlessSoul I role-play Erik, ALOT.... And I have to admit it is hard trying to figure how he would react to such a disaster as we are role-playing now. My role-play parnter tells me I am a wonderful Erik, but it is still very difficult. Yet now that I have FINALLY finished Phantom it seems to be a bit easier. I know the feeling I am the Erik to a friend's Christine (which she plays wonderfully) and it's hard because he has many personalities and ways to react as opposed to how I would react. So I have to sit and think if he would get angry or react with sarcasm or even just take it with a grain of salt. But ultimately, he can be fun as well. Then again, I love being the baddie and causing trouble. I don't think that Erik should always be a baddie. He's really sweet and innocent at times...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:25 pm
PhantomsAngelofMusic Utakan MindlessSoul I role-play Erik, ALOT.... And I have to admit it is hard trying to figure how he would react to such a disaster as we are role-playing now. My role-play parnter tells me I am a wonderful Erik, but it is still very difficult. Yet now that I have FINALLY finished Phantom it seems to be a bit easier. I know the feeling I am the Erik to a friend's Christine (which she plays wonderfully) and it's hard because he has many personalities and ways to react as opposed to how I would react. So I have to sit and think if he would get angry or react with sarcasm or even just take it with a grain of salt. But ultimately, he can be fun as well. Then again, I love being the baddie and causing trouble. I don't think that Erik should always be a baddie. He's really sweet and innocent at times... He's the antagonist of the story, making him the "baddie". And Erik is hardly innocent. He may not have a lot of human interaction under his belt or knowledge of the social world, but that just makes him pitiful. Sweet? Again, hardly. He's emotional and obsessive. None of that combined makes for a sweet man. He's insane.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:25 pm
Utakan PhantomsAngelofMusic Utakan MindlessSoul I role-play Erik, ALOT.... And I have to admit it is hard trying to figure how he would react to such a disaster as we are role-playing now. My role-play parnter tells me I am a wonderful Erik, but it is still very difficult. Yet now that I have FINALLY finished Phantom it seems to be a bit easier. I know the feeling I am the Erik to a friend's Christine (which she plays wonderfully) and it's hard because he has many personalities and ways to react as opposed to how I would react. So I have to sit and think if he would get angry or react with sarcasm or even just take it with a grain of salt. But ultimately, he can be fun as well. Then again, I love being the baddie and causing trouble. I don't think that Erik should always be a baddie. He's really sweet and innocent at times... He's the antagonist of the story, making him the "baddie". And Erik is hardly innocent. He may not have a lot of human interaction under his belt or knowledge of the social world, but that just makes him pitiful. Sweet? Again, hardly. He's emotional and obsessive. None of that combined makes for a sweet man. He's insane. Notice how I say "at times", there are a few times in the books where he acts "sweet-and-innocent-ish", but not completely sweet and innocent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:48 pm
PhantomsAngelofMusic Utakan PhantomsAngelofMusic Utakan MindlessSoul I role-play Erik, ALOT.... And I have to admit it is hard trying to figure how he would react to such a disaster as we are role-playing now. My role-play parnter tells me I am a wonderful Erik, but it is still very difficult. Yet now that I have FINALLY finished Phantom it seems to be a bit easier. I know the feeling I am the Erik to a friend's Christine (which she plays wonderfully) and it's hard because he has many personalities and ways to react as opposed to how I would react. So I have to sit and think if he would get angry or react with sarcasm or even just take it with a grain of salt. But ultimately, he can be fun as well. Then again, I love being the baddie and causing trouble. I don't think that Erik should always be a baddie. He's really sweet and innocent at times... He's the antagonist of the story, making him the "baddie". And Erik is hardly innocent. He may not have a lot of human interaction under his belt or knowledge of the social world, but that just makes him pitiful. Sweet? Again, hardly. He's emotional and obsessive. None of that combined makes for a sweet man. He's insane. Notice how I say "at times", there are a few times in the books where he acts "sweet-and-innocent-ish", but not completely sweet and innocent Yes but he is still the villain, so to speak. We can pity him, but he is the bad guy. The one we want the protagonist and her lover to get away from in the end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 8:32 pm
Uhm...no, "we" don't want Christine and Raoul to get away from him. That is just the book in the strictest terms of black and white.
Technically Erik's the antagonist, but he is also a sympathetic character. You can see why he is the way he is and that he is acting in the only way he knows how to. Antagonist, yes, but not "villain". The reader still feels something for him and doesn't nessecarilly want him to lose in the end.
And I'm not just talking about phanbrats. Plenty of intelligent people sympathize with him and identify with his character in some sense. So I don't thing it's very accurate to say that we want him to lose and Christine to win in the end. That's kind of a very narrow approach to looking at the book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 9:03 pm
Alexis Of Shadow Uhm...no, "we" don't want Christine and Raoul to get away from him. That is just the book in the strictest terms of black and white. Technically Erik's the antagonist, but he is also a sympathetic character. You can see why he is the way he is and that he is acting in the only way he knows how to. Antagonist, yes, but not "villain". The reader still feels something for him and doesn't nessecarilly want him to lose in the end. And I'm not just talking about phanbrats. Plenty of intelligent people sympathize with him and identify with his character in some sense. So I don't thing it's very accurate to say that we want him to lose and Christine to win in the end. That's kind of a very narrow approach to looking at the book. I agree
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 9:06 pm
Alexis Of Shadow Uhm...no, "we" don't want Christine and Raoul to get away from him. That is just the book in the strictest terms of black and white. Technically Erik's the antagonist, but he is also a sympathetic character. You can see why he is the way he is and that he is acting in the only way he knows how to. Antagonist, yes, but not "villain". The reader still feels something for him and doesn't nessecarilly want him to lose in the end. And I'm not just talking about phanbrats. Plenty of intelligent people sympathize with him and identify with his character in some sense. So I don't thing it's very accurate to say that we want him to lose and Christine to win in the end. That's kind of a very narrow approach to looking at the book. Kay so I worded that wrong. But it's basically the whole point of the book. Mm.. I see I really did word my sentences wrong. We have long established Erik's role in the book. But Erik is technically the villain. We sympathize with him and feel sorry for "poor Erik" but he is the bad guy. He manipulated an innocent woman, kidnapped her, killed people, and almost forced her to marry him. Those actions make him the villain. Oh yes, he's kind, sweet, and he goes out of his way for Christine and so on. But the man is mad and ugly as sin, or at least, is told to be. For all we know his nose just could've been smashed in and he called a living corpse. Exxaguration were known to happen, right? But thanks for correcting me, Alexis. sweatdrop We all have our off days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 12:33 pm
It's okay. I think instead of "villain" though, "antagonist" works better. Since the word "villain" implies somebody who's out and out evil. Though the two words are often used interchangibly, so it's not really a big deal.
Like, for example, Scar from The Lion King was a villain because he was just evil and had no redeeming qualities whatsoever. An antagonist, however, is the technical term for somebody who opposes the main character of a story and gets in the way of what he or she desires. That person is not nessecarily evil, but perhaps misdirected, or even someone whose interest for their own family/nation/protection/whatever interferes with the main characters own loyalty.
But now I'm being all technical (I've taken numerous writing classes and read stuff on writing terminology so it's kind of coming out her in a sort of nitpicky way) so I'll stop explaining myself and let you guys use "villain" for "antagonist" if you'd like. 'Cause everyone does it anyway and it's kind of hard to make everything all formal all the time.
Sorry, I get like this on occasion. I think I drive my family nuts because of it. I'll shut up now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 12:41 pm
No it's quite alright. o.o You have points.
But I just see Erik as more the villainous type, but of course it's just me. Everyone has their interpretations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:23 pm
Well, he isn't a saint. He does have major psychological problems and does very bad things, so I could see how one would see that. But he does have redeeming values, hence the reason I get technical like that.
But I do agree that he is portrayed as being scary and really crazy to the point of major destructive behavior. So I can see how he'd be labeled as the villain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 9:03 pm
Yeah. I suppose it's how you see the glass as, though. Because a pessimistic will tend to find the bad things as an optimist does the others. Same concept when going to evaluate someone's character. It depends on the person you're getting it from whether or not you'll hear more redeeming or damning.
Or something of the sort. As I've said before, I'm no psycho-analyst.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 12:11 pm
Yea I think Erik is the hardest to play because you have to be so accurate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
