What Makes a Hero Feel Real?

I've seen enough fair criticism in the comments to know that I've made a lot of mistakes on this one. Generally when I do a video I divide them up into either 10 to 15 minute videos, or 20 to 25 minute videos, giving around 7 days for the former and 10 days to the latter (the sad reality of youtube that you need to work to a schedule like this in order to make a living off it), and I think my big mistake here was taking a topic that was WAY too broad and trying to cover it in a shorter video, which I really regret, it led to me making a lot of ill thought out blanket statements and not backing them up properly and there's holes in my logic that people have pointed out. So yeah, I hear the criticism, I think its fair, I'm going to keep it in mind for future videos. Thanks everyone for continuing to support the channel, and thank you for the feed back.

Saitama is extremely relatable while also being powerful though.

I have to heartily disagree with "Relatable -> Powerful" scale. A character can be VERY powerful, AND relatable - for example, many of us older men can definitely relate to All Might, and his concerns as shown in BNHA. I'd say "Ordinary -> Powerful" would be a better label.

5:03 I love how Batman is EXACTLY in the middle lol

I’d say Gon’s morality is very questionable...

theres a lot of good points here, but I think the biggest flaw with the argument is that its basically just assuming super tough lawful-good guy = poorly written. As long as a character like that has a strong and well developed sense of where their ideals come from and why they fight as a hero then they dont need to have some sort of intrinsic moral flaw or something that drags them down to earth. They may not be "relatable" but if their motivations are understandable then there's not really a problem.

that´s why i love jojo´s bizarre adventure part 7 so much. You have a selfish protagonist, that grows with his journey becoming more heroic and selfless, and you have a villain with a noble goal

Saitama is a man living in a world where he's become so powerful that all of the supernatural crap going on around him doesn't matter. He's passed a line. Now that he's passed the line the crazy things going on dont matter at all to him and he just has normal human concerns. He's become so strong and unrelatable that he's been kicked back by god to the start where he's relatable again.

Honestly I've seen so many grumpy antiheroes with traumatic pasts, what I like a lot more is taking a virtuous hero and throwing them into an unvirtuous world, and seeing how and if they keep their morals. For me at least, seeing a person struggle with being good when there isn't any real reward and it would be so much easier to be an ass, is much more relatable than another jaded antihero who thinks of optimism and happiness as "immature" and that anyone who still has morals and hope just hasn't seen enough yet. What's more interesting to me is someone who has stared into the abyss and seen the absolute worst, but instead of giving up and drowning under a tide of apathy, strives to be the absolute best and make the world at least a little bit of a better place. It ultimately does come down to preference and not all antiheroes fit into the same mold, I like Butcher from "The Boys" specifically because he's kinda an unorthodox antihero who while fighting against injustice, does it for the wrong reasons, and is proven wrong about his anti-supe prejudice towards the end. In the end, instead of fitting into the same few tropes, variety is good, but I know which variant of protagonist I enjoy the most.

I disagree a little on your criticism that older heroes of myth were perfect in all ways or seen as very virtuous; a good read through most Greek myths, for example, shows flawed humans of near godly power and stature. The good guy trope that exists nowadays is more recent in its invention, for the most part.

To be honest, Brad isn't a good example. He's the protagonist of Lisa, but he clearly isn't a hero. Those two can mix, but one doesn't equal the other. Besides, if anything he's an antihero. Tries to do good, but the means he uses aren't heroic in the slightest. I also don't agree with your definition of hero. What you are defining is a protagonist. A protagonist can be anything from hero, antihero, villain, antivillain or even just a background character that tells the story from his perspective. From there forwards, I can understand your points but not share them. Take a look at the protagonists of Angels of Death, a horror adventure RPG maker game and soon to be anime: Rachel Gardner and Zack. One is a teenage girl that wants to die and the other is a psycopathic serial killer. Trapped inside a building full with traps and people wanting to kill them both, they form a contract: Rachel will help Zack escape and he, once they get out, will fulfill his part of the promise and kill her. No matter how you twist the definition of hero, those two aren't heroes. The story is told through their perspective (sometimes Rachel's, sometimes Zack's), they move the plot with their struggles to escape and they face great challenges, but their goals, personalities and motivations make them unable to be heroes.

Goku shouldn't be that high up on the moral scale

Guts is one of the greatest characters in manga/anime history

Personally I like variety. I don't want every hero to be morally upright, but I definitely don't want everyone to be a sociopath. Although if I had to choose, I would probably go with the morally upright hero. Not just because I like watching people who are good, but because they are so hard to write well, yet amazing and uplifting when done right.

So basically anti hero? But then if the anti hero becomes more mainstream would that be the new cliche?

I believe Saitama is powerful but relatable in that he is dead inside. Imagine getting the job of your dreams but you are still unhappy. Literally see his backstory again. He did what? Go looking for a job. What did he end up doing? Pivoting into hero'ing. He's doing it for fun but he is still on the complacent side. He just wants excitement. And there's nothing to do that because he can't find that one opponent who is powerful enough. Those subterranean things in his dreams were the closest thing he had to happiness.

All Star Superman had one of the best portrayals of pure heroism in any medium. No cynical reimaginings of the boy from Kansas, no great tragedies that broke him, just a genuine, thought-provoking exploration of why Superman acts the way he does, why he continues to do good in a world of evil. It's also one of the few stories where the villain receives a legitimately devastating revelation from the heroes that breaks their ideals, turning them towards heroism.

"There are no absolutes in good and evil." Is that an absolute? EDIT: It's a joke, lads. Please don't crucify me.

In my opinion, Luffy is a very untypical character as well, since he often tends to have egostical reasons to act. He just wants to become the pirate king to be the freest man alive. Another example is, when he willingly lets escape dozens of dangerous prisoners, just to safe his brother. Even prisoners like Buggy or Sir Crocodile, where he even experienced their bad actions. Overall he just looks like an ordinary hero, because most of the villains he faces violate the freedom of people he cares about. Well and he still has some core values he represents: Freedom and Equality

my boy Edward Elric not even mentioned in passing-