silent antagonists VS regular antagonists

 I recently watched Halloween and one of the most scary things about Michael Myers is the fact that he never speaks during the entire film this makes him scary because it means that the viewer never has even an inkling towards what is going on in his horrible mind he could have a masterplan for how to dispatch each victim he may have constant visions of murder but its left up to the viewers imagination making him much scarier. The opposite can be true of a villain each step of the way the viewer knows the villain is ahead of the hero filling them with dread or it could show his vast intelligence or it could even just be used to say we have more guns than you each one can make the villain better but of course there are examples which get it wrong...

1. Friday the 13th part 1 

this isn't the worst example of this with the murderer quietly killing throughout 90% of the film until near the end where she starts to exposit to the last remaining person why she is murdering these people this is done to humanise her and show that she isn't just some random evil guy then she gets her head cut off this then throws all that humanisation out of the window just to say this is still a slasher making the point moot really you had 90% of the film with a silent antagonist then she is humanised which could've been a good thing only for it to all be thrown out the window for a last bit of gore.

2.Psycho

now while he isn't a silent antagonist Norman Bates can be used as a perfect example for what I mean clearly he is a Psychopathic killer as shown rather obviously by the title what always adds to Horror movie villains is the mystery of what is going on inside their heads and how could the hero combat it the more mystery usually means a scarier villain now this can even apply to villains who speak like Norman Bates rather than leave it up to the audience to make up their own minds about what is wrong with Norman studio executives insisted that at the end of the film a psychiatrist of sorts tells the audience what is wrong with Norman taking away that mystery that allure that scariness which is in most of the film.

both films above are still good films great in the case of psycho but in both cases last minute exposition takes away from the antagonists it's hard to google silent antagonists or silent villains as most of the results are enemies from the silent hill games and most examples can usually be attributed to non human villains or just silent ones as by their own nature for whatever reason they cant speak English whether it be aliens in alien or emotionally stunted humans like Michael Myers. I hope my point has been made for silent antagonists so now lets look at the opposite.

1. The Dark Knight

this is a perfect example of a non-silent antagonist as he often kills for fun or to make a point and through his speech and actions the audience can learn that all he wants to do is watch the world burn this is done via both speech and actions but without his actions or his speech it falls apart. 

If, tomorrow, I tell the press that, like, a gang banger will get shot, or a truckload of soldiers will be blown up, nobody panics, because it's all "part of the plan". But when I say that one little old mayor will die, well then everyone loses their minds. Introduce a little anarchy. Upset the established order, and everything becomes chaos. I'm an agent of chaos. Oh, and you know the thing about chaos? It's fair!”

this is what makes the joker a masterful villain he creates chaos what alot of people find scariest the dialogue above perfectly illustrates why the joker is a perfect example.

2. many many James Bond films

one of the most commonly berated things about James Bond films is the fact that right when the villain catches bond they exposit their entire evil plan giving Bond the time to escaper sometimes this is needed because if you have a villain shrouded in mystery and secrecy the audience wont always be scared of them because as far as the audience knows goldfinger just wants to start a pawnshop and dr. no wants to start a recycling business. but most of the time it is jarring and a bit silly but usually only for Bond films it works ands that is because for Bond it is such a regular part of the films no-one bats an eye they may even enjoy it. 

All in All we can probably say regular antagonists are better but you can just go by numbers on that but silent antagonists if done well can be just as good as them e.g. Jaws from jaws or zombies from any zombie film. Sometimes directors try to mix like in Friday the 13th part 1 but it's usually better to keep a consistent character and tone almost as a rule of thumb I think directors shouldn't be too middling with character traits like silent one minute expositing the next or vice versa as it will come out as a bit of a mixed up mess. hopefully more silent antagonists come to exist as Halloween is incredibly good because of it and it makes a difference from  99% of all the other films on the market. I started to have a bit of writers block when i realised one of my intended topics didn't quite pan out so this isn't as developed as some of my other blog posts I hope it's still good I also really really like Halloween the film not the holiday so that is another reason why because I didn't start off with a massive pool to draw upon and the aforementioned google trouble  I hope its still good and watch Halloween if nothing else. :)