I Need A Hero... Or Do I?

As the great Bonnie Tyler once said, "Where have all the good men gone and where are all the Gods? Where's the street-wise Hercules to fight the rising odds?" She really needed a hero you guys. (Excuse me while I Footloose dance for a minute.) This song is currently playing in my head as I contemplate a couple of articles I read this week. The topic of the articles is the rise and demise of the "antihero".  An antihero is a character who seemingly has no redeeming qualities, does and says horrible things to those around them, and yet the viewer keeps rooting for or in some case rooting against them.

The reason for this influx interest about the antihero can be traced to t the recent finales of Dexter and Breaking Bad. I'll be honest with you, I didn't watch these shows. At the time of their start, I didn't have cable and I didn't feel like shelling out money for the seasons. I make no apologies. Both actors, Michael C. Hall as Dexter and Bryan Cranston as Walter White, are phenomenal and I have no problem with them having received awards for these roles. So just know that my expertise on these specific "antiheroes" is coming from a purely observational level. However, I have always been attracted as a viewer to these type of characters.

Why? No, I am not a crazy psychopathic killer or a burgeoning meth queen. It's the portrayal and the layers that these kind of characters have that is so interesting to watch. My main experience with the "antihero" primarily would come from Hugh Laurie's House who just tickled me with his prickliness and rude antics. You loved him too. Two Golden Globes and two Emmy nominations meant that the TV business did too. I first fell in love with him in Season Two when he snarkily responded to his underlings witnessing a fight with the boss, "Don't worry. Mommy and Daddy still love you." My heart was his.

The articles this past week focus on the rise of this charismatic character and his seeming end. Apparently, the antihero has run his course in our pop culture society and we no longer need him or care about his dilemmas. The dramas on network television trying to capture the residual critical and ratings love of the antihero are failing to draw viewers. See: NBC's Ironside which had the lowest rated premiere debut on the network ever this past week. SIDE NOTE: I say "his" mostly because it is always a man playing this role. If a woman were to play the "antihero" she would just be called a frigid rhymes with witch and no one would think anything of it. END SIDE NOTE

So finally let's get to my opinion on the topic of these complicated, unlikeable men. I like them. They intrigue me. As a person, I am always convinced that there is good in someone. Even after they do something horrible. In TV or even the movie world, I relish these characters that embrace their inner evil and don't care about the consequences. They love power and power makes them desirable. They are often hilarious and give amazing speeches. The real world has these people and I clearly don't associate with them. But the more the fictional characters kill or plot, the more I fall under their spell.

There is a subset of the "antihero", more commonly romanticized by being called a "bad boy". The "bad boy" isn't bad by nature, it's the upbringing, situation, people, or traumas that have formed him into that lovable rhymes with chick that every girl wants to just cuddle. These are the best dressed, wittiest men on television. The main examples would be Damon from The Vampire Diaries and Ryan Atwood of the late but always timely The O.C., although there are countless others. These characters have redeeming qualities, like their love of a family member or a good woman, and over time you see the pieces that made them the way they are today come together. Sometimes they change for the better and sometimes people just learn to expose the better sides to their advantage.

There is also the "conflicted" man who longs to do the right thing but circumstance can't allow it. The poster child for this kind of character would have to be Fitz on the sudsy ABC show Scandal. He is clearly the male lead who should get the female lead. Only problem is that he's married. Oh, and he's the President of the United States. No big deal. Clearly this will never work out but man, when he looks at her. SWOOOOOON. And then there are his speeches about his love for this other woman that you can physically see take the emotional toll on his body. Le sigh.

So do we really need to lose these men? And more importantly, do we really need a hero? The answer that we should get is that yes, as long as there is solid character development and a solid story to build upon. Being a rhymes with chick for no reason does not good television make. As viewers, we expect to invest in characters and as investors we expect to be entertained while getting the best story possible.

So maybe there aren't any more 'white knights upon a fiery steed' coming to save us. But maybe that's a good thing.