Enough with people. Now it is time to move on to non-human characters in the National Coolest Comics Character Contest. And I don't mean the cute critters like Marmaduke and Heathcliff, we want to look at the talking animals we love to hate.
All comics can be divided into the ones that include talking animals and the ones that don’t. This really has nothing to do with the quality of the strip, it just sets a different tone. Some of the funniest strips are the ones where at least one of the talking animals is a complete jerk. Animal characters get to do and say things real people could never get away with. Garfield once aspired to this territory, but he descended into a Disney-fied marketing machine never to emerge. The real successes are the edgy but funny takes.
Breed Standards: While the exact personality can vary, a “good” evil character is unrepentantly self-absorbed. Think Danny Devito from Taxi. An evil animal should have several recurring victims and never show any remorse. Any actual resemblance in personality to the base animal type is a bonus.
Faults: Cuteness. Any sense of humanity whatsoever.
| Dogbert Dilbert  | Pro: Dogbert gets the nod over fellow character Catbert The Evil Personnel Director because he is a more rounded jerk. Between his cynical business schemes, his unethical consulting scams, and his general abuse of the titular geek, Dogbert is always on the prowl for some way to cheat or steal. | Con: Sometimes he gets just a little soft and cuddly. Since he spends most of his energy ripping off clueless managers like the Pointy Haired Boss, it could be argued he is doing a public service. |
| Bucky Katt Get Fuzzy  | Pro: Mean, vicious, and completely delusional, Bucky Katt is everything cat-haters see in the feline species. His sense of self-entitlement is completely out of whack with his actual abilities. He is often obnoxious just for practice and the dynamic between him and dim-witted Satchell is everything Garfield and Odie would be if they were actually funny. | Con: Bucky is very dim-witted, which blunts the effect of his more nefarious ideas. |
| Rat Pearls Before Swine  | Pro: Probably the purest evil character in a comic, Rat exists just to torment. He is unrepentantly malicious and will frequently do things just because he can. | Con: A little over the top. You would think Pig, or at least Goat, would have caught on by now what a total a-hole Rat is. |
| Zoogie The Gene Pool  | Pro: Not so much evil as vile and obnoxious, Zoogie is everybody’s worst roommate or frat brother. Gross and obnoxious are his hallmarks and he clearly emulates Bluto from Animal House. His clueless macking on every female character is truly cringe inducing. | Con: Like the Animaniacs, but not in a good way, it’s tough to decipher what sort of animal Zoogie is supposed to be. My guess would be koala, but even that is just a stab in the dark. |
So there they are. Cast your vote and determine which is the funniest and evilest at the same time.
11 comments:
I had to go with Rat. For me, he won this category on Monday 19 March, when he sent his clones to the crocodiles in a box labeled "Feeder Mice".
I find Dogbert is not so much evil as greedy and immoral. What I've always wondered is, what happens to all that money he keeps making? Dogbert ought to be worth millions.
Bucky is, without doubt, one of the greatest comic strip characters of all time. He certainly is evil most of the time, but deep down he has a pretty soft center that keeps him from taking first place. On rare occasions, he is nice to Satchel for no reason (when Satchel lost his watch a few years ago, Bucky went out and found and repaired it), and he has been known to snuggle with Rob and not try to get anything in return.
Zoogie I've never heard of.
A possible write-in is Vachel the vulture from Little Dee. I don't know if Little Dee has newspaper circulation or is just at Comics.com, which could disqualify him. Other than that, he fits all the breed characteristics.
Wait ... no more people? Please tell me I didn't miss the "ambiguously gay duo" category.
jf
So few comments!
I went with Bucky, partly because he's so consistent in his nastiness (whereas Rat has moments of gentleness, and occasionally just cynicism), and partly just because I prefer Get Fuzzy to Pearls Before Swine.
This was a tough one! Rat or Bucky, Rat or Bucky? Hmmmmmm.
Rat it is! For his purer and higher level of overall evil. Bucky is just plain whacked out at times.
Zoogie is just stupid--not Garfield stupid but stupid as in lame.
Dogbert is amoral, Bucky is psycho, Zoogie is, as you said, obnoxious. But Rat...now that's evil.
To me it is all about how you define evil. I have no clue what Zoogie is. Dogbert wants to rule the world. So he works toward that end with both "positive" and "negative" impact, is that evil? Bucky wants to rule 'his' world. He is mostly harmless, but is often rude, obnoxious and insensitive, is that evil? Rat wants what Rat wants. He is obnoxious, uncaring, and often spiteful, is that evil?
Basically, I guess I picture EVIL as that pinky to the lip smile. Dogbert wins that over the rest, tho I could imagine being around him best. The others would all make lousy roomates.
IF you don't mind my asking, how come you didn't include Catbert alongside Dogbert? Catbert's one of the most sadistic characters in the comics today. He loves tormenting employees with his heinous policies.
While the exact personality can vary, a “good” evil character is unrepentantly self-absorbed. Think Danny Devito from Taxi. An evil animal should have several recurring victims and never show any remorse. Any actual resemblance in personality to the base animal type is a bonus.
This can't actually work, I suppose like this.
It can't really have success, I suppose like this.
This cannot have effect in fact, that is what I believe.
Post a Comment