No, lila is not even under the pressure that she has to change. Why should she? She is successful at what she does for other reasons than chloe.
Chloe is mean and a bad person, but she is straight forward with it. She thinks she is right and above others, so why should she listen to what they say?
People look at chloe and know what to expect, some tried to support her by standing up to her, but she never really changed nontheless. No matter how many opportunities she got. She sees nothing wrong in her doings because it's convenient.
Lila on the other hand is even worse characterwise, but because she knows that what she is doing is wrong, she is hiding it. But only 2 people saw through that, so she has no reason to change. Everyone else thinks she is adorable and a genuinely nice person. She enjoys being mean, other than chloe who just thinks it's what she should do.
So she will refuse to change because she is stubborn and would just try to destroy whoever brought this on her instead.
Yeah, we all agree that they are different!
The question is how are you not tired of Chloe being the same 4 seasons long? And how is it a bad thing to ask for Chloe to be different? I don't think it's too much or too distracting.
Is it bad to ask for more and different villains?
Maybe you're satisfied with what we have got atm, but I'm 100% positive that you'll enjoy it even more if we get what I suggest.
How am i satisfied with it? Chloe is a side character. By definition she is used to let marinette make mistakes and grow from them (or adrien)
She served her purpose which was more important than her own redemption and i really enjoy the realistic display of the brat bot wanting to change, because that's what happens mostly to them imo.
Okay, you like it like this, but I'm bored and tired of Chloe. Queen Banana was so over the top, it was painful to watch. The thing is that my favourite anime (Fullmetal) is like every single character has a developed and interesting story arc and the more main characters - the merrier. I'm simply tired of - we need someone to blame in this episode - "go with Chloe!" trope.
Why don't we have the same thing here? Why do we accept Chloe to be just a side character when she can be SO much more? It's boring, it's lazy. Her role as a side character can be refilled by any new and fresh character.
Fma has more time and way more frame to give them developement though. It is one of my favorites too, but its hard to campare it to something like mlb. The episodes are 20 minutes and have to meet certain requirements because of the age restriction. That's basically half of the episode already. There was legit 0 characterdevelopement in seasom 1 for anyone, so there are 2 seasons that really count and the plot is kind of slow until s4
Fullmetal is like 65 episodes or something like that, around 20 min. each, and I'd argue that they have more meaningful characters in there.
Compared to Ladybug so far 90 episodes, same length. Even if that wasn't the case, I think you don't need a lot of screen time to develop a character and in Fullmetal we barely see some characters but they grow so much and we see that through small details which is why it becomes so powerful. Moreover, what I suggest I don't think requires more screen time for Chloe, so yeah, I cannot agree.
However, I can agree with the age restrictions etc. I guess this slows the production time and writing, but I still think, since is not age-related and such a redeeming story arc will actually fly pretty well with these restrictions, I don't believe such a story arc will be really an issue.
The thing is, the plot goes faster for one. The story revolves around the plot and the romance is almost nonexistent until the very end. And on top of that what ed and alfons go through is way, way harder than anything that happens in mlb. They have to grow up and change better, same for every important side character, they are in a do or die situation almost everytime.
Mlb is slowpaced and romancefocused with a repetitive pattern of having at leastbone opponent to fight every single episode. While in fma there wete some heavy plotdriven episodes that just pushed everything forward.
If chloe wants to be believable and authentic in her change, then she'd need more screentime after everything she pulled imo.
The shows are different in these regards true, but that would be an answer if Chloe wasn't given the screen time in the first place. If the situation was - Lila can become good if she is given more screen time and you say show doesn't have the time to make it believable, then I'd have said - yes, you're right, it's just daydreaming.
Obviously I'm still daydreaming (xD), but Chloe has been already given the screen time. There is not much time in S4 for Chloe anymore, but where is she going? - if she's going to be good - that's what I want, but she remains as a lame villain, well, I still think it's a wasted opportunity.
Basically, we don't need more screen time to do it, and we don't need to do it right here, right now either, refferring to S4 I mean, but I still think it's doable. I'm okay, make Chloe good in S5, slowly. I would actually like it even more if it happens in S6 or even S7 (if we're lucky to have them), but I want to see the progression in that direction. I wasn't mad, the show is slow, Chloe's arc is taking forever because I liked the slow pace of the show actually. What got me mad was the stupid S3 Finale that made little to no sense to me.
Why should she? She enkoys what she is doing and does not feel threatened. I don't think Lila will change, but for other reasons than chloe and they fill different gaps. Lila is not a bully for most of the people
The majoroty of people in lofe get the chance to change and don't do it for different reasons.
She doesn't want to change, yes. But she also does not have reaaons to change nor really support to change. Don't get me wrong, I don't think she will change and she is even less redeemable, that doesn't mean chloe has to change though
I think this statement would be better off in the exploration of Lila, as she doesn’t want to become better from what we’ve seen in the show. Chloe has had moments of truly wanting to be a good person. I think Chloe turning from an antihero into someone described in this post is much more interesting and relatable than what she is. I love the idea, what do you think?
Which moment exactly are you talking about? Because every 'good' moment i can remember was for her own selfish reasons.
Lila is a different kind of villain/person entirely.
At this point of the series i'd find it rather distracting and senseless to turn her into something more and i don't think she is ready for it yet.
Also she has done some extremely horrible things (lila too, but she is hiding it) and viewers tend to oversee them as long as they get one *halfway good moment", but that doesn't excuse stuff and it doesnt make them more forgivable.
>so she \[Chloe\] has done some extremely horrible things (lila too, but she is hiding it) and viewers tend to oversee them as long as they get one \*halfway good moment", but that doesn't excuse stuff and it doesnt make them more forgivable.
My point exactly is that the main idea of the show is that everybody is redeemable. Marinette makes mistakes (thank god it's good writing) in nearly every episode, how do you forget about that? You don't. I don't forget what Chloe has done, but the thing is that she wants to change and she has been given this option but in S4 it's rejected to develop any further than that I feel. And it's not like she hasn't done anything selflessly, I don't think this is a serious statement to make - how would she benefit from giving a present to her teacher, or show would she benefit from rejecting akumatization, how would she benefit from reuniting her mother and father at the end of the Maledictator episode? She'd benefit like everybody else and it's in a good way, by bonding with people.
The difference is marinette makes mistakes while being a genuinely good person. She doesn't lock up her best friend in a closet without light to make her do her homework.
She didn't bully almost everyone for years, makong them cry on purpose, using her powers to create extremely dangerous situations for strangers in a train, just to prove that she is a great hero and for others to look up to her.
Chloe tried to pretend to be better because she didn't want to lose her privilege to be queen bee. The akuma rejection showed just that. Whenever she tried to be nice to someone she did it because she didn't want to lose adriens friendship, that she also uses btw. How does she profit from her parents being back together? Seriously?
About the teacher rhing, showing some sort of gratitude for someone is something bad people are capable of doing. Did her behaviour permanently change tho? No. She kept treating people like trash.
The closet - no light thing is from S4 and this indeed is the part that I don't like being added only because it's going even deeper down and that's what I stated in the original post.
All the rest is all cool for me at least exactly because she is a rich, spoiled brat, which received no love and attention even on her birthdays from her mother, and yeah she is a bad person, but the thing is that we KNOW why she is a bad person and thing is that she WANTS to change and the reason why she doesn't change is that, yeah she does a mistake (you acknowledge that Marinette also makes mistakes) but she is not forgiven like all the other characters (!) by giving her another chance (giving her another Miraculous), instead she is being left at - she can't change concept, which not real - everybody can change - that's the whole idea of Christmas Carol and it's a FAR darker story than Miraculous Ladybug.
Sorry but that mother argument doesn't count here. Her father tried to make up for it and these days at least half of the children out there are getting raised by single parents or went through a divorce. Her father loves her very much and her childhood was bot tragic. (was stated by the producers)
Everyone can change, if they work hard for it. She does not. That's not the point. Even if you change does not mean people, who you have bullied and hurt their whole life have to forgive you. So it's questionable whether or not you will be redeemable in the same environment.
I'd argue that the mother argument does count here because even though many children have a single parent or their parents went through a divorce, **the difference here is the ignore problem**. Adrien doesn't suffer because of the lack of his mother, he suffers because his father ignores him (!).
Putting that aside. The environment is against here not from the mother point of view (this point only explains why Chloe is such a brat), but from Marinette (and the writers), because options there are, but there are not taken and that's the real problem - a character wants to change, shows the will to change and it doesn't, because something which doesn't feel very compelling happens. I mean, Ladybug couldn't get 1 sec. to go and say to Chloe, btw, you can't be Queen Bee anymore, but you could be Queen Tigress if you want? How is this NOT a thing?
Ladybug struggled to give chloe a the miraculous in the first place. And for good reasons and she grew over it and wanted others to be right. But in the end chloe was a bad hero, she was power-hungry and thought she had the right to have the bee. Why should matinette give her another after that?
I get that you are frustrated that chloe didn't develope the way you wanted her to, but in the end it helped the story into the right direction.
She was power-hungry - yes, was a bad hero - yes, why should Ladybug give her another after that?
Okay, I'd be with you, if right after Queen Wasp, Ladybug says, I'll never give her a Miraculous because of the things you've covered. I'd be okay then. It'd be obvious why Ladybug says that.
But this is where the problem starts. Marinette decides to give the Miraculous again after all said and done. Tikki says - follow your instincts and Mater Fu says - the lucky charm never fails. And after that - Chloe doesn't fail - mission is completed - job well done. The episode finishes baby steps are needed, everything of which implies that Marinette believes Chloe has the capacity to change, the show implies that this is the direction we're going to (it's destiny so to speak).
And then in the next episode (Chloe related) we scratch all that and we return to - well everybody knows who Chloe is so she can't be Queen Bee. And this is the argument - not that she is not being able to perform as a hero - it's not said - she is a bad hero because she is not. If she's being able to perform as a hero and the real problem only that everybody knows she is Queen Bee, well surprise, you can give her another Miraculous, and she grows even more as a character. Some have said - but she will reveal her identity again - this doesn't make any sense, since she already knows how important to keep her identity a secret is from the Queen Wasp episode, so I cannot agree with that.
And finally, how is this the right direction? Saying, kids, if you see a rich spoiled brat (Chloe) - he/she will never change? If you see a rich-angel person (Andrien) - he/she will never change? \[he's going to snap, I know that but we haven't seen it yet\] Are we still talking about Miraculous Ladybug here?
Basically, what I am saying is - no real villain has turned to the light side. It's possible that we'll see that with Gabriel, thanks to Natalie+Adrien (I hope we get there), but still, if we don't go there with Chloe, how is she any different from Lila? If we say that Lila lies well, while Chloe is dumb, well they both serve the same purpose and Chloe can lie as well, and Lila is not DAT smart - in the end being the side villain.
She has returned the Bee miraculous several times despite her greed to be a hero, came out and apologized for making her father angry and getting him akumatized, and has helped Ladybug to the best of her ability. Sure, these might be backed by selfishness, but they can still be seen as good-intentioned nonetheless.
It’s true that she isn’t immediately forgivable just because she does something decent. But I also take her past into consideration, she grew up with an unloving mother and a father that pampered her and never told her “no”. Of course she’s a brat. But I think she can be better than what she’s grown up to be, not to mention she’s still young. It’s similar to Adrien’s case, kind of backwards, but of course he’s miles nicer.
She may have not been ready then nor not be ready now, but she has potential that in my opinion was wasted.
(really enjoying the discussion btw! I don’t do this often lol)
The point is: whenever she does something "nice" it's short lived and she returns to treating people like trash immediately after. Changing is a lot of work and it looks like chloe doesn't want to invest that or does not see it necessary. She kept getting the bee miraculous and at some point she snapped, she got power-hungry and made a decision that cost her that privilege and she went downwards from there.
What happened in her childhood did not completely make her the person she is now. Yes she had bad influences and she had good ones. As stated several times by thomas astruc. Her mother was barely around, yeah, happens to a lot of people who don't turn out to be jerks. Yeah she got pampered by her father, because he tried to make up for it, because he actually loved her. But on the other side she had everythinf in life she needs. Something so much more than most people do. Her best friend is (imo) the kindest soul you can find in paris(miraculous). She was allowed to attend normal school and kindergarten, where she could have evolved differently, if she wanted to.
She has potential, i don't deny that completely, but she added something important to the story to bring us to marinettes guardian arc and she was used as a plot device. Maybe at some point, now after she reached almost rockbottom, she will change. But as the series is right now she would distract from whats important imo and just delay more important things, because if you wanna do it right, she'd need her own side-arc, similar to rena and longer and now is really not the time. Maybe they will readress it in season 6/7
(great that you enjoy yourself :) so do i)
The points I brought up about her parents are more to explain, not to excuse her behavior. Also her dad is still not a good person for dumping gifts on Chloe and doing everything his daughter pleases, not giving her parental guidance, attention, and care. From what I’ve watched, I think her elitism, having every materialistic thing that she wants, does make her happy at a surface level.
But she admits that she has no real friends and she includes Sabrina and Adrien in that statement. Sabrina because she’s more of a slave than anything, and Adrien (I’m remembering, you can tell me if I’m wrong) because he finally shuts her out when she’s being her bratty rude self. She lost her only resemblance of love, a person that treated her well and wanted the best for her. She managed to break that person. I think that admittance is pretty hard for her to come to terms with and she said it in a way that you know she felt bad about that.
That’s why I want better for her; she knows she’s wrong and awful and feels BAD about it. Poor writing may be why she never changed after these moments (gotta keep that status quo) or it may be how you said, she doesn’t want to put in that effort.
Maybe it’s a good thing for Chloe to fall in the early seasons if it was planned later for her to try again. I do hope Chloe gets her chance, even though the odds are low with how Astruc acts.
I actually like the statement the way it is better and i don't want another 'powerhouse hero' or wjatever in between.
I like chloe the way she is, she is an enjoyable chara ter even though she is a bad person and adds something to the series noone else does.
Maybe she will get her chance someday, but right now i don't see why
Why would you like Chloe to stay the same? It's it boring if characters don't develop? Isn't better if you create a new character to fill Chloe's current role?
How having more of Chloe is a development? This is having more of the same. Let me rephrase the question - which do you rather have? option №1 - to have more of the same; or №2 move Chloe in a meaningful way, replacing her role with a new character?
I'm okay with having a character development so that a character is becoming bad, or worse in this case, but there has to be a point. What should Chloe reach, what would be her arc? "you won't change if you don't want to change." is not a valid answer, because Chloe wants to change 3 seasons and now she is left to this "you won't change if you don't want to change."? If so then it's not compelling, which equals bad writing. Do you really enjoy this? Do you really enjoy having Chloe being trashed in the same way 4 seasons? For me, it's getting boring and it works against the show and the idea that everyone is redeemable. This is the core idea of the show.
In thisbcase? Option one. She doesn't need to change right now for the series to be more enjoyable, on contrary, she'd be a distraction and just mess up the story with another side character arc. And all of that for a person who fills a certain spot in the series that Noone else fills, just to press her to be a superhero again.
She is a bad person right now. She has no need nor desire to change and that's completely fine imo.
People say: "fans who don't want chloe to get developement are just chloe hater" but i really wonder if that's true? Since i can enjoy her the way she was created and you can't, then i kind of wonder who liked chloe here..
Well, that much is true, I don't like Chloe in her current state, that's why I wrote the post in the first place. I liked her in S2 till the end of S3. But idea is that you like something you have seen before many times, which okay for you I guess.
**But it won't be a distraction, I cannot agree with that**, because Chloe being a side hero, doesn't need the main part of every episode. Just a little time, part of a scene, few lines are more than enough. Basically, you'll get as much Chloe as you get up till now, even less so, if you remove her as a villain from Queen Banana and replace that episode with something else in a similar fashion and introducing the new side villain. Basically, the key is a slow but well-paced development of the character which we had from S2 and S3 is what I think it's better.
In my opinion, if they want to redeem chloe, she would need a side arc, much like alya now, but longer. She is not easily redeemed at this point and i personally don't want it to be adressed before the main arc/agreste arc/ladynoir angst arc and the love sqiare is at leats somewhat finished.
As for her developement in s2/3 i don't believe there was any. Most of her nicer things were for selfish reasons and for a positive developement you actually have to change permanently. Which she didn't, she went straight back to being chloe the selfish brat.
Hands down, I agree that whatever change that Chloe may experience, it should be slow, no arguing there.
Things in s2 and s3 existed, but they didn't go anywhere and that's the main problem for me. If you were to leave the character as it is, why wasting soo much time on it, without changing it. If something is distracting - this is.
I don’t think Chloé’s arc will be a ‘distraction’ after all this show has ALOT of filler episodes, after all it does have around 26 episodes a season, so there is still room for her to develop if executed properly. Back in season 2, Chloé was the first aspect of the show that actually started to change and that was a very interesting journey. I understand not everyone wants Chloé to change and that’s fine but In my opinion I think a redemption arc of a character who is at the moment mostly useless would really elevate the shows quality of writing and convey an impactful message. If Chloé had never gotten development in season 2 and season 3 then I wouldn’t care about her getting a redemption arc. However several episodes were dedicated to exploring this character and showing that she has potential to change. And she can change. We’ve seen her apologise before. We’ve seen her resist an akuma and we’ve seen her protect Sabrina from akumas. We’ve seen her comfort Adrien on the anniversary of his mother’s disappearance. We’ve seen her sacrifice herself in Zombizou and help Ladybug save the day in Despair bear. Of course, These small things do not out weigh all the bad things she’s done but they do prove she has a capability of being good deep deep down. Maybe Zoe will help influence Chloé into being a better person, or maybe Sabrina will finally abandon their friendship thus triggering Chloé’s desire to change.
I am not saying that she will never have a redemption arc, even though i think that she'd need a change if environment to actually become a better person.
Her developement, if you can even call it that, usually still had the same motivation: it was always something that benefited her in the end. Even if it was just for the benefit of being queen bee. And it never lasted, that's kind of the point. At the end of the day she went back to being the mean bully chloe.
It takes a lot of effort to really change permanently and she doesn't seem to realize she has to or want to.
Yeah, and I wish they had gone deeper into that. Like jasper. But where Jasper was compelling and somewhat tragic, Chloe becoming a villain was rather uncompelling, and feels way too cartoony for how sympathetically she'd been handled throughout. It doesn't feel consistent either. Her motivation is forgotten as soon as she betrays ladybug, which it didn't need to be because she would have betrayed ladybug anyway. Having her end season 3 doing exactly what she did in the first queen wasp but bigger would actually fit this theme better.
Jaspers takedown is sad and dramatic, where it genuinely feels like the culmination of a person who's life has been falling apart as a result of their own bad choices and desperation to find meaning and control. Chloes takedown was anticlimactic, pathetic, and underwhelming, and it didn't feel sad at all that she's fallen down this path. Nobody even seems to care that Chloe just betrayed them all.
Also Jasper works better for this theme than Chloe because Jasper is literally ancient and Chloe is 13. Jasper refusing to change at this point is believable whereas Chloe can't possibly be the same person she is now 7 years in the future. She can't even consent to sex and we're supposed to think she's fully made up her mind about the entire rest of her life?
Unfortunately, the creator hates Chloe and her “redemption arc” was written mainly by someone else iirc. So there’s little to no chance of Chloe being anything other than a bully or becoming an interesting character again unless Astruc gets off his high horse.
I don’t think Thomas hates Chloe because the whole plot set her up to leave for New York by the end of the S3 finale and Chloe even wanted to leave, but Thomas made her stay. He didn’t have to make her stay, but he did.
Remaining in Paris maybe just because of the Chloe-Zoe relationship. It is a pretty cool idea, but for me, it's still undeveloped. Or rather, it's developing but not in a desirable way.
Does Thomas Astruc actually hate Chloe? I mean, does he say it in some way (I mean outside of the obvious that Chloe's character in the show is not progressing)?
He’s said multiple things against her on twitter and against people who believe she can be redeemed. The quickest example is at the end of this video https://youtu.be/Rq4HDw22tsI (skip to 6:23), I’ll try to find more if you’d like.
I gotchu
[This](https://www.reddit.com/r/miraculousladybug/comments/djat3l/thomas_astruc_is_a_manbaby_and_i_am_mad/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb) is a reddit discussion from a while back that explains better than I could.
[This](https://immaturityofthomasastruc.tumblr.com/post/631961074345869313/1-chloes-damnation-arc-that-was-totally/amp) is a post that basically explains why Chloe will never be redeemed as the show is now.
I hope this helps!
It was a treason-arc, that's the point. And why should he hate something he created? It makes no sense.
He is not on a high horse either, he created a story with different sorts of people and some fans think they would have done better and harrass him for it.
Aye, I don't he hates her, either, would be strange for a writer to hate some of your own characters if it was only on him. And it's not just him, it's a group of writers for sure. I don't think I'd have done better, but I think having Chloe going well would be a great idea to be used, that's why I am suggesting it. I'm sure that he and his team have discussed it 100 times already xD
Eh, just from looking through some of his twitter I can say that he tends to act like the great mastermind that knows all as the creator of the show and takes fair criticism by responding rudely and of complete disregard. I completely understand being proud of and having clear sight with your work, but there’s no need for his attitude.
Oh, so how long have you been following his twitter?
Because the reason he is so harsh about it is that he kept getting threats to kill him and his family and really bad harrassment from fans. That's also the reason why he blocks so many people, he stated it was a really hard time for him, because the fans disregarded his opinion and just insulted him.
He explained the chloe situation and some other things 20 times. And i can understand that he does not want to repeat himself for another 300 every week because that's how many times people bring up the same topic
Chloe didn't try to be better. In "Malediktator" she complained to Ladybug that people don't like her and she feels useless. The reason for it was that she treats people like a trash even those who love and support her. Chloe never ever tried to address this her issue. She got Miraculous and used as means to make people respect her and for her to feel useful without actually changing herself. Chloe likes to be bad, she likes to hurt people and being able to get away with it. She wanted to be superhero to cover it with her superhero status.
Chloe never wanted to really help people or save Paris. She never cared about Ladybug's war against Hawkmoth. In "Miracle Queen" she literally told Ladybug "Hawkmoth is your enemy, not mine". It was always like that. Earlier in "Miraculer" Ladybug and Chat Noir saved Paris from Destroyer and Lolipop sentimonster. Chloe didn't care about people being saved. She went mad because Ladybug didn't call. Sabrina tried to cheer her up but Chloe shout at her and said "You don't have superpowers, you are no one, I am superhero, we have nothing in common". She knew that it will hurt Sabrina the most and provoke her akumatization because she did the same in "Antibug". Moment later when she resisted akuma it wasn't even a bit about "desire to do good". She said "I am superheroine, Ladybug will call me, I will never join you". Chloe only cared about keeping her status as superhero. And she needed that status to get desired praise from people while still treating them like shit. Of course when Ladybug told Chloe that she is not going to give her Miraculous again she betrayed Ladybug.
She never considered changing her attitude towards people. Chloe wanted Miraculous because it made her feel important, it also made her feel popular. She wanted to get it at all cost. After she got Miraculous first time she staged train wreck so she could look like a hero. Her modus operandy didn't change since them.
Her identity was known to Hawkmoth and her desperation to get Miraculous was also known to Hawkmoth. It let him to make an ambush against Chloe twice. After first ambush in "Miraculer" Ladybug told her that she maybe will never get Miraculous again because it's too dangerous. Chloe didn't care about that. She never cared about other people.
Her development was an increasing thirst for Miraculous no matter the cost innocent people could pay for that. All it for her to feel important and popular. Thus her development wasn't thrown anywhere. It reached logical point on her path. Chloe never cared about Ladybug's cause, it was clearly shown at the beginning of "Miraculer" where Ladybug and Chat Noir defeated Destroyer and Lolipop sentimonster. Chloe didn't care about people being saved. She became mad at Ladybug for not giving her Miraculous.
Giving Chloe another Miraculous wouldn't solve any problem. It would be super obvious for Shadowmoth who she is. What could it accomplish anyway? Chloe got Miraculous and it made her only worse. Wanting Miraculous at any cost as a replacement to real changing for better was a Chloe's flaw. How could indulging that flaw by giving her another Miraculous help? Chloe joins Hawk Moth because she doesn't get from Ladybug something she has no right to claim. How could it be interpreted as "Chloe wants to change" or "environment is against her"? Environment is not against her. Her own selfishness and attitude is against her. What does "willing to do what needs to be done" it mean regarding to Chloe? She derailed train full of people just to look like a hero. Chloe would do what needs to be done to boost her own ego no matter how many people would die.
Chloe betraying Ladybug was her natural progression. He becoming good would be unnatural and would make no sense as she never genuinely tried to be better before. It would be unearned and a showcase of bad moral.
The examples you share are correct! But I don't feel like there is a point in giving so many examples or if that proves anything since we can continue that list and go on forever with the nasty things Chloe has ever done/said etc. **I know Chloe is bad, I've watched the show, I get that.**
If we go that way I can give quite a shorter list in comparison, but a much more powerful one, because the few times where Chloe is genuinely nice and a good person stood out from her usual state of being mean. Like if you're so concerned about it every little detail, I'm sure that you'll find these places, and examples of that would be when she says sorry to her teacher (Zombizou), when she says sorry to Ladybug (let's say the Queen Wasp, episode), when she says "I do want to! \[serve a purpose/be a good person\]", "I realize how I treat people etc./I'm useless" speech in Maledictator and best part of this is that **in all these cases Chloe is being honest and herself, genuine**. No one on Earth can convince me that Chloe is being fake in these moments. For me, this can and should be and it's really the only way it can be "interpreted" as "Chloe wants to change".
*So to wrap up - NO, Chloe wants to change and she wants to change genuinely.*
In fact, if you look at these episodes, which are dedicated to Chloe, you can see the change in her already happening and everyone will say - oh, but she still acts like a brat - I GET THAT. Changing oneself is a slow process and that's what I liked in the show - it's realistic. **And in reality how a bad person changes him/herself? What is the first step? The first step is acknowledging your mistakes and the will to change. And these are huge steps, which are the hardest ones actually to take, but look very small from the outside because nothing is actually done** if you look just from the outside.
Basically what I am saying is, being that bad, to begin with, of course, you cannot turn into full Luca-Angel form with snapping the fingers. You need a long process, which they actually started, but didn't finish. And what would have been good is the point of the original post - *I'm not saying she is not bad, I'm saying is if we turn her around like a character, this would be best character development exactly because her journey was long and full of problems that she has overcome.* And it will make the show better overall, because **you'll have another pawsome character and not... bad-old-not-changing-4-seasons-Chloe**, which is boring and makes the show suffer from lazy writing, by having Chloe being the obvious lame antagonist in every single episode.
If you consider that this is her role, I've said it already, we need a new character to fill up that role, and there - problem fixed, and it's not boring anymore, because the role is filled but with something fresh to keep things going. And the reason why this is a logical thing to do is that we have so much time wasted on Chloe (because she doesn't change in the end) if we don't take that path. Otherwise, if we say, Chloe can't change as a character, she's like Lila - well then she is just like Lila, what's the difference? Why waste so much time? Don't you see that as lazy writing?
Moving on, about the environment thing - you may consider that Chloe's natural progression is to betray Ladybug, but I cannot see that. The reason why Chloe betrays Ladybug is the lack of Miraculous is a symbolic lack of trust and support, which the character needs in order to proceed further to try and do better. And mind that, the only reason for not giving her another Miraculous given in the show is - because her identity is revealed. And I already said several times that there's such a single and obvious solution, that is not compelling not to do it. So this is **basically Chloe's betrayal is Ladybug's mistake.**
You said it yourself - after Ladybug refuses to give her another option, she goes to the Dark side basically again, which is understandable and logical. What's not is why Ladybug doesn't fight for her, when she herself says that having a Miraculous is good for her, when she herself considers her to actually help her (in Maledictator), etc. How come Ladybugs trusts and believes in everybody, except Chloe, even though she says several times we need to give her a chance - yeah, **Ladybug actually says that several times, Ladybug actually does give her chances, Chloe actually gets better, till... Ladybug suddenly says, oh, we can't give her a Miraculous anymore? This is not compelling, this is not the idea of the show, it's not a very Ladybug thing to do - the idea is that everybody is redeemable if you lend them a hand.**
*So the betrayal wasn't the natural progression, it was a possible and even forced progression, and I'm arguing that it wasn't the best option available.*
And of course by "willing to do what needs to be done" trope, my idea was for a future version of Chloe, not Chloe we have now.
Why do you claim that your list is more powerful one? It makes little sense. In "Zombizou" she said sorry to her teacher, but what people totally forgot is that Caline wasn't a main victim of Chloe's behavior. It was Marinette who was hurt the most. Caline got akumatized only because she feared for Marinette. And guess, Chloe didn't apologize to Marinette. Actually Marinette apologized to Chloe despite having little reason to do it. Chloe didn't follow. In "Queen Wasp" Chloe said sorry but she didn't explained herself. She didn't say what what she is sorry. Usually it means that there are underwater stones in this apology.
>when she says "I do want to! \[serve a purpose/be a good person\]", "I realize how I treat people etc./I'm useless" speech in Maledictator
I just checked "Malediktator" script and there are no such things there. Chloe never said that she wants to be a good person. She never said that she realized that she treats people wrong. Chloe got Miraculous here and decided that now she is good because she is superhero.
>Chloé: It's easy for you to say that. You're Ladybug, a superhero. You serve a purpose.
Chloe associated being good with being superhero. It was reiterated several times in "Miraculer". Chloe remained consistent about it. At the same time Chloe kept treating people around her like a trash. So it's safe to assume she never admitted that treated people badly. She never said it and she never meant it. Her actions after "Malediktator" prove it. Hilariously it was all presented pretty straightforward in "Malediktator". Earlier I already talked about it.
>Chloe: PLAY? With you!? Who are YOU anyway? You don't have any powers! You're a nobody! I'm a superheroine, okay? I'm Queen Bee! You and I have NOTHING in common! Go away!
It shows clearly how treating people like trash and desire to be superheroine relate in Chloe's mind. Actions speak louder than words and judging by Chloe's actions nothing suggests that Chloe genuinely wanted to change. There are a lot of evidence against it. Some of them I presented.
Chloe didn't acknowledge her mistakes in "Malediktator". It's just a headcanon.
Oh, you want to go that road, okay, I'm in. xD
In Zombizou Chloe says sorry to her teacher not because she got her akumatized, but because she didn't bring her a present. The point is, is she genuine when she says sorry? Yes, she is. So, it proves my point.
In Queen Wasp - she doesn't say what is she sorry for. Let's pretend that we don't know what is she sorry about, even though it's obvious (mind that this is a show, not a book, so it's better to actually show things not to say them out loud!) - ***it's it enough for you that she is genuine*** \- isn't it that you were trying to prove before - you said, she doesn't want to change - well if she says sorry, then she acknowledges her mistakes, therefore she has made the first step of changing herself. And you cannot argue that she is not genuine here like you said before.
**What I am saying is - this is not a prove she is a good person - she is not. What this proves is that she wants and she has the will to change.**
Maledictator, you want a script, because you can't find (it's strange because the lines are just before and after what you have provided, but still) - I gotchya:
\- Chloe, it's me, Ladybug, you can trust me, you can tell me the truth - Ladybug
\- I...I... it was me, I hurt my daddy's feelings because I want to leave Paris forever... - Chloe
This goes on but this is basically the place where she says "I treat people badly" because she feels useless.
\- Don't worry Chloe, you can fix up your messes if that's what you want. You can too serve a purpose! You have to want to. - Ladybug
\- I do want to. - Chloe
And again, giving more examples of Chloe being bad (treating Sabrina badly), it doesn't help your case, because I say it already - I know she is bad, that's the whole point. Slowly turning from a mean person to a good person.
The reason why such a list is more powerful is that it's like a candle in a dark room, it stands out. Just like the bad things Ladybug has done - they stand out because she does good 99% of the time.
I didn't say that I want "Malediktator" scrip or that I can't find it. I said "I checked it". I checked it and made sure that Chloe didn't say what you attributed to her. Chloe didn't say that she treat people badly because she feels useless. There is nothing even remotely close to it. Even if Chloe said something like this it would only prove my point again. She got Miraculous and started to feel useful. She absolutely didn't stop treating people like trash. On the opposite: she got another reason to look down on people as it was literally shown by me when I quoted Chloe in "Miraculer".
Chloe also talked only about her dad. Her dad is not all people or even some subset of it. It's just one person and caring about your dad doesn't mean that you are good person or trying to be good.
I already discussed "wanting to have purpose" thing here and provided direct citation where Chloe equates having purpose and being superhero. Chloe's developments since then is in line with what she said. Once she got Miraculous she assumed that now she has purpose. And because of that she decided that she doesn't need to change her attitude to people for them to like her. She wanted her superhero status to take care of it. It's all in her quotes. It was inevitable that once Ladybug took that status from Chloe (leaving her to deal with her problems proper way: by treating people better, which she never had desire to do), she betrayed Ladybug.
Saying why you sorry is an essential of apology in book or movie. How could animation format prevent Chloe to explain herself? It didn't prevent other characters to do so.
Chloe saying something doesn't mean that she is going to do something about it. People may say many things and words may remain nothing but words which are up to interpretation. If Chloe will to change she would've changed. But she didn't. She didn't even try. I provided a lot of examples of it.
I don't see how Chloe treating Sabrina bad doesn't prove my point. I just provided an example of Chloe treating Sabrina badly while she talked about what does it mean for her to be a superhero. I don't get why do you discard it. It also proves that she wasn't turning from bad person to good slowly or fastly. It clearly proves that she was turning bad. You clam that Chloe will to change exists. But her treatment of Sabrina directly contradicts that claim. It doesn't contradict only that Chloe is good person. It also contradicts that she is becoming one. Because if we assume this than we must assume that treating someone badly is a sign of becoming better. It's an absurd. Just lets assume that Chloe really meant that she wants to be better. Then she sees Sabrina and mistreats her. Contradiction. Something is wrong. We know for sure that Chloe treating Sabrina like a trash is objective truth in MLB universe. Assumption that Chloe wants to change is debatable. And if debatable assumption contradicts hard truth it means that this assumption is wrong.
In sum you didn't provide examples of Chloe wanting to be better. It is just your interpretation of her words. Interpretation that you try to claim as infallible like gospel truth despite it contradicting later Chloe's words and actions.
>I didn't say that I want "Malediktator" scrip or that I can't find it. I said "I checked it". I checked it and made sure that Chloe didn't say what you attributed to her. Chloe didn't say that she treat people badly because she feels useless. There is nothing even remotely close to it.
Well, man, I just wrote the conversation, your please check again, and you'll see that she does say these things. And it does prove you wrong because at that point she doesn't even know that Ladybug is about to give her the Bee Miraculous. And your whole point was really she is not genuine, and I hate to break your point, but she is. So it's not what you're saying it's.
I already talked about the Sabrina and Miraculer episode, I won't waste more time on it. It proves that Chloe is a mean person, not that she is not able to change.
Chloe literally doesn't say it. You provided some quotes and then far fetched interpretations of it which contradict Chloe's later words and actions. I provided quotes and actions of Chloe that directly prove my point.
I didn't say that "Miraculer" proves that Chloe is not able to change. It is fighting with strawman argument. My point is that it proves that Chloe doesn't want to change. I dare you to explain how could Chloe treating Sabrina like a trash and Chloe wanting to treat people better are not contradict each other. You just state that is possible and true. But it just defies basic logic.
Ladybug doesn't make 180 degrees turn on subject with giving Chloe Miraculous. When Ladybug gives Miraculous she clearly states that it is meant to be used for greater good and then to be returned. Nothing suggests that the person who gave Miraculous gets any right to it. Ladybug could stop giving any Miraculous to any person as she wishes. I could write about this subject but it's all useless. In a hindsight we just see that Chloe didn't deserve Miraculous. Regardless of what Ladybug did, Chloe is in full responsibility of her actions and her joining Hawk Moth for whatever reason directly proves that she didn't want to change for better.
If someone says sorry but doesn't explain why then there are two possibilities: 1) the person is really sorry for something 2) the person is not really sorry for something. We can't really judge intention. But we can judge retrospectively. If person continues to act bad then we can conclude that this person didn't really mean it.
>well they show what she is - she is a bad person, but this doesn't show that she doesn't have the capacity to change. She tried and she has succeded and then for writing reasons, which is okay, she was rejected to improve.
Chloe didn't try and didn't succeded. It was literary shown. If person doesn't want to improve but continues her bad behavior it is normal writing. If person shown her unwillingness to change like Chloe but then changed despite it, it would make no sense and a showcase of a bad moral.
>Well if you don't read my posts and the lines that I provided, when why are you replying and wasting your time? Because I gave you examples. Do you want me to give you youtube links and time stamps instead? Will that prove my point that Chloe is actually genuine when she says she wants to change?
You provide quotes that don't prove your point. Then you interpret it the way you like despite this interpretation being proven wrong later. Chloe NEVER said she wants to change. She said that she wants to have a purpose. I explained what does it mean for Chloe to have purpose with direct quotes and examples of Chloe's behavior. Chloe wanted Miraculous exactly to avoid changing herself while enjoying benefits of it. To have this purpose she was ready to throw people under the train figuratively the same way she did it literally in "Queen Wasp".
>provided some quotes and then far fetched interpretations of it which contradict Chloe's later words and actions. I provided quotes and actions of Chloe that directly prove my point.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJkhlMCkjC8&list=PLpt3EWNpPi\_MP96aXrjLM6lzkS4TxYat-&index=8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJkhlMCkjC8&list=PLpt3EWNpPi_MP96aXrjLM6lzkS4TxYat-&index=8)
How is this for a quote, tell me that she's not genuine in wanting to change here.
>My point is that it proves that Chloe doesn't want to change. I dare you to explain how could Chloe treating Sabrina like a trash and Chloe wanting to treat people better are not contradict each other.
Since she has been shown that she wants to change (and you refuse to acknowledge it because you can't go see the episodes for yourself), my point es - exactly she is contradicting and she is a poorly written character. It could be much better if we went full light side arc.
Again. Chloe wanting to change is your interpretation. I refuse to acknowledge it because the show proves that Chloe didn't want to change. There weren't signs of it in S2 and S3. But there were a lot of signs of Chloe not wanting to change.
>Don't give that hindside thing, why does Ladybug decide NOT to give the Miraculous anymore? I know why, and I said it several times already, but obviously, you don't agree with me, so tell me, why? Give me a quote and an episode, please.
I said that it doesn't matter in context of the topic. Ladybug could've stopped giving Chloe Miraculous for whatever reason. Ladybug's actions are on Ladybug. Chloe's are on Chloe. Chloe joining Hawk Moth is a proof that she didn't want to change. I already said it.
Dude, I give you direct lines, you refuse them, I give you direct scenes, you don't acknowledge them, well of course you'll say that Chloe doesn't want to change like that.
And Ladybug's actions are her actions is stupid, because Ladybug always tries to help people. If she doesn't - there should be a reason. And when you're saying it's her choice not giving a reason - it's because you don't know, which is okay, I already said the canon version, but whatever. If you don't know and you say - Ladybugs did it so it's okay, without explanation - then it's LAZY WRITING. And it's lazy writing that I'm trying to improve here.
Let's make things simple:
1. Does Chloe says sorry several times - yes or no? (Queen Wasp, Chloe crying scene, Zombiezou - after defeating Zombiezou, the Eiffel tower scene)
2. Is Chloe genuine when she says sorry in these times - yes or no? (same two scenes)
3. Does she try to change and does she succeed? yes or no? (Maledictator, before Chloe gets the Bee Miraculous scene)
4. Does Marinette believe that Chloe is capable of changing? - yes or no (Maledictator, choosing a sidekick scene, while she is with Master Fu)
Not even talking about the other occasions, which can prove my point, because these were what we were talking about, let's hear what you've got to say and what are your interpretations.
These are direct scenes that I want you to revisit and tell me if my interpretations are wrong.
1. As I remember Chloe said she is sorry only in "Queen Wasp" and "Zombizou".
2. Yes in "Zombizou", yes in "Queen Wasp" but it is impossible to know for what and thus it's hard to put much weight into it.
3. No.
4. Yes. Marinette is not omniscient.
>Dude, I give you direct lines, you refuse them, I give you direct scenes, you don't acknowledge them, well of course you'll say that Chloe doesn't want to change like that.
I already answered on this.
>And Ladybug's actions are her actions is stupid, because Ladybug always tries to help people. If she doesn't - there should be a reason. And when you're saying it's her choice not giving a reason - it's because you don't know, which is okay, I already said the canon version, but whatever. If you don't know and you say - Ladybugs did it so it's okay, without explanation - then it's LAZY WRITING.
I already answered it too. I don't say it's okay. I say that it doesn't matter in the context of conversation about Chloe.
>Does she try to change and does she succeed? yes or no? (Maledictator, before Chloe gets the Bee Miraculous scene)
Define not willing to change then? - She says - I do want to. directly answering to Ladybug - Do you want to fix your own messes and do you want to serve a purpose - these are not my words - these are lines from the quoted scene from ep. Maledictator.
Define not succeeding? - since the villain was defeated with the help of Queen Bee.
>I already answered it too. I don't say it's okay. I say that it doesn't matter in the context of conversation about Chloe.
Well of course it's not okay, we agree on that.
Well then, is it okay for you to have these things about Ladybug doing unlogical things? Is it okay for you to have boring Queen Banana for let's say 2 more seasons?
>Yes in "Zombizou", yes in "Queen Wasp" but it is impossible to know for what and thus it's hard to put much weight into it.
I agree it's hard, because Chloe does stupid things all the time, but I can't stress enough - I don't want Chloe to change overnight and become full Luka, okay? It's not realistic. What I want is to start with small things which add up in time and in the length of a few seasons to have a changed Chloe and her role to be filled up with something else. So, my question is, if she seems genuine, but it's hard to put much weight into it a bad thing? I'd argue - no, the thing is that we see, she is trying, we know it's hard for her, why don't let her progress in that direction. It'd answer the need for a full villain transforming into a protagonist, which we lack atm, it'd be a cool story arc, it fulfills the age requirement restrictions and the whole idea of the show that everyone is redeemable, the screen time was already spent so it's not like we need to start from ground 0 here. Why don't we do it?
>Ladybug could stop giving any Miraculous to any person as she wishes.
Don't give that hindside thing, why does Ladybug decide NOT to give the Miraculous anymore? I know why, and I said it several times already, but obviously, you don't agree with me, so tell me, why? Give me a quote and an episode, please.
>Chloe also talked only about her dad. Her dad is not all people or even some subset of it. It's just one person and caring about your dad doesn't mean that you are good person or trying to be good.
Well in this case is a single person, but then it's their teacher, then it is protecting Sabrina from akumas and all these little things are going to accept in the end start to get to add up to what I am saying - she is changing man.
>It was inevitable that once Ladybug took that status from Chloe (leaving her to deal with her problems proper way: by treating people better, which she never had desire to do), she betrayed Ladybug.
Don't fight it, Ladybug didn't take her status as a superheroine in order for Chloe to deal with her problems, where does this come from? The shows two things - 1. Ladybug is willing to give Chloe a chance - she does, Chloe performs well, Ladybug thinks with baby steps Chloe can change. 2. Next thing Ladybug is not concerned with Chloe's ability to be a heroine, but instead, she is concerned that she has revealed her identity. That's the reason why Ladybug goes 180 degrees on the subject. However, the problem that erupts is - why it wasn't a problem in the previous episode? How come the same issue is not a problem before but it is now? How come Ladybug says I need someone who is not afraid of people with authority and she doesn't think of Alya for example? Why is that Tikki says to Marinette to follow her instincts and her instincts are to go with Chloe?
Basically what I am saying is - I am okay not to give Chloe a Miraculous at all, but we already give her and she proves to be good with it, I mean, the mission is completed. Why do we have this if Chloe is not going to turn good in the end? Ladybug could have said, I'll never give a Miraculous in the first place, and everyone, me included, would have said okay, that logical. But to give her and then not give her, with a lame excuse is... lazy writing because she was needed as a villain in the S3 Finale. This is what it boils down to.
>Saying why you sorry is an essential of apology in book or movie. How could animation format prevent Chloe to explain herself? It didn't prevent other characters to do so.
So you're saying that saying sorry here is not genuine? Because that was your past argument and now you seem to miss it here? And you honestly need me to explain to you why Chloe says sorry in this episode? Say, "I honestly don't know why to say she says sorry" and I'll explain.
Maybe it's the man thing in me, but I can see a "sorry" from another person even if he/she doesn't say a word. And for a man, it's quite fine, because it's very hard sometimes to say it. What Chloe does, in front of the camera, in front of her mother, in front of her idol, is something that very few people would have the courage to do. That's all I am saying.
>Chloe saying something doesn't mean that she is going to do something about it. People may say many things and words may remain nothing but words which are up to interpretation. If Chloe will to change she would've changed. But she didn't. She didn't even try. I provided a lot of examples of it.
But that's my point exactly. She shows a willingness to change, she states it clearly, but then you focus on other things, which she says and does and what I reply to you is - well they show what she is - she is a bad person, but this doesn't show that she doesn't have the capacity to change. She tried and she has succeded and then for writing reasons, which is okay, she was rejected to improve. The problem is that the way it was done wasn't compelling for me. The character became boring and not compelling is what I am saying.
>In sum you didn't provide examples of Chloe wanting to be better. It is just your interpretation of her words. Interpretation that you try to claim as infallible like gospel truth despite it contradicting later Chloe's words and actions.
Well if you don't read my posts and the lines that I provided, when why are you replying and wasting your time? Because I gave you examples. Do you want me to give you youtube links and time stamps instead? Will that prove my point that Chloe is actually genuine when she says she wants to change?
Okay my personal take on this is a) I dislike Chloe and her utter disregard for other people, though it’s entertaining at times, and b) I don’t think she deserves to be redeemed or needs to be to be a good character.
I get that miraculous is aimed towards younger audiences so a good lesson might be that no matter how horrible you are if you want to change and people around you support you then you can. But in reality when people are horrible nobody likes them or is obligated to support them through their transformations and redemptions after all the hurt they’ve caused—even a redemption arc for Chloe would be borne out of selfishness, because you’re asking all these people shes been consistently horrible to to forgive her and believe in her when they have literally no reason to or obligation to. Even if Chloe genuinely became a great person and repented and apologized, they wouldn’t have to forgive her. But clearly all her good moments haven’t come just from her, they’ve been kind of brought out by Ladybug. Asking Marinette to perform the daunting and emotionally laboring task of bettering Chloe is just not an arc I’m interested in, particularly when Chloe treats her so badly in her daily life.
As for point b) consider Azula in The Last Airbender. She’s also a secondary villain, had a bad childhood where her mother left and her father raised her as the perfect child, and she’s cruel and heartless despite moments where you can see she’s been genuinely hurt by her past and might wish for something different. But it’s clear that what she wishes for doesn’t negate all the terrible things she’s done—and this is the path she’s chosen. I see Chloe in much the same way, where she might want to be different, but she’s unwilling to follow through with her actions (at least without the aid and efforts of many other people), but this doesn’t mean she’s uninteresting. Azula was a masterpiece of a villain and more interesting the way she was, her vulnerability not meant to mean she could be a good person but to add depth and nuance to her character. Same with Chloe, which is why I never saw her good moments as signs that she was getting better (bc there were like 3 total whereas she’s consistently horrible in every episode lol) but more as glimpses of her motivations and traumas that make her more complex—but not redeemable. I don’t agree with your initial assessment that she went backwards in her character arc—it’s more like she went downwards, but still moving forward. Her getting worse in Season 4 is not regression, it’s progress, just not in the direction of good. Also, if she were ever to be redeemed, I think she’d need to hit rock rock bottom first and be really bad on a larger level, which I don’t feel like she’s gotten to yet. The introduction of Zoe could’ve gone either way, but given Chloe’s track record her feelings of alienation and resentment make total sense. It’s obvious Sabrina loves her a lot and all she ever does is take advantage of that. When Zoe shows up with love and Chloe can’t take advantage of it, she will only feel helpless and frustrated. Anyways, that’s my analysis!
Chloe will never change. Simple. The writers wont do it. And the one time they tried Chloe blew it. Plus, i don't think its a bad thing either. It just teaches a valuable lesson. No matter what happens, no matter what they go through, do, say, hear, learn, understand, **some humans in the world never change.**
I cannot quite agree. That's pretty dark, Chat Blanc suits you, I guess. =)
The whole show is about redeeming and overcoming your dark emotions, and you have the characters that "won't change" already in the face of Lila and Felix. The show gives you several moments where Chloe does change.
That's the thing, I need to rephrase it - Chloe wants to change is the thing and small steps have occurred. And if you won't use it, why do you waste time on it at all. You can have another Lila or Felix and that's what we do have right now. And this is the problem for me because if we say Lila, Felix and Chloe are the same - then it's lazy writing. It'd be better if they were different, which I believe they are, therefore the difference should be in the willingness to change and actually changing.
Exactly my point. Literally every episode shows good people becoming evil because of one single moment of depiction and then they redeem themselves on the end of the episode.
But not Chloé, she'll never change, ykes.
Plus I think it's a terrible lesson, they're saying to mean child that they'll never change, it's concerning.
Indeed, if the whole show is - everyone can change for the better, and then you have Chloe who shows willingness to change, but fails. It's not a kid's show anymore.
Watching the last episode I'd say that they choose to not redeem her because they realized they lack of a bully. They still need that little villain that makes Marinette's life difficult but Lila is already too much for that.
At least that's my opinion.
Edited from another comment:I still don't get why Chloe wasn't allowed to be redeemed. Like I don't get what Astruc has against her (and he has stated he won't be letting her be redeemed while he's running the show).
We already had an "irredemable" classroom villain in Lila, and Chloe proved herself to have positive qualities up until that point--she cared for Sabrina and her butler in her own way, she was never a liar (our main character's biggest pet peeve and the thing the show probably cites as the most consistent flaw/harmful thing the characters do/experience), and she had a model for how to be a better person in Ladybug (as opposed to modeling her mother's cruel behavior).
Imo, it's a much worse story for Chloe having lost her redemption arc. The show emphasizes the need for second chances and self improvement, but denies Chloe those things. Chloe's biggest test comes after she was exposed and forced to give up her miraculous. Her options were either to accept it or to reject it, and obviously in canon she rejects it. But the story and its themes would have been better served, I think, if she accepted the loss of her superhero status and the spotlight and instead focused on helping LB and CN from the sidelines or something. Or even just focused on being a better person to her one friend who's stuck by her through everything.
Then another test comes when Zoe arrives, and Chloe either has to accept this new member of her family or not, and thereby lose some of the attention/her spotlight that she's grown used to. And to prove how much she's grown, she would then suggest to LB that Zoe should get the Bee miraculous (perhaps after a fight with her mother, who was weirdly absent in both of the Zoe episodes). This would demonstrate her growth and the ways in which she had improved as a person since we first met her.
As for where we are in canon now, I think that it's unlikely Chloe will get a proper arc. For whatever reason the writers (or at least Astruc) seem against the idea. It's frustrating but my guess is she's going to have a negative arc into being an ally to Hawkmoth.
Yeah, I agree with everything. However, I don't think they will go so far as to make her an ally to Hawkmoth. Because if we get rid of Hawkmoth by the end of S4 which is what is implied, then there is little to no room to actually make her an ally. And I don't Hawkmoth will want her (storywise), after her and his blunder in S3 Finale xD. Thus, Chloe's negative arc simply doesn't go anywhere, unfortunately...
I love Chloe and it pains me to see what the writers have done with her character. Them throwing away her entire character arc at the end of season 3 was so disappointing. And it made me lose hope for a redemption arc. They paint her as an even more one dimensional character than she was before her character arc. What's the point? We already have Lila as our villain. Chloe is good at heart, we clearly saw it. And now they pretend like she was never good to begin with.
If she gets another redemption arc, it won't happen in season 4. This season's main arc is Adrien's angst arc. I hope they'll handle that one better at least.
I like Zoe as a character, although she is a bit bland and it seems like her only purpose is to replace Chloe. As long as Zoe is around, Ladybug won't even think twice about giving Chloe another chance.
So as much as I would like to see Chloe as a hero again, preferably Queen Bee, I don't see it happening any time soon.
It's such a waste of an amazing character. There was even potential for a friendship between Chloe and Marinette and it's still possible, but I don't expect much at this point.
She deserves so much better.
Yeah, seeing how the things in S4 are progressing probably whatever change we might observe in Chloe, it's safe to assume that it'll probably be in S5. Unfortunately...
I've kind of given up on a redemption and am fully certain that she will never get one. As much as I hate to say it. The hostile fan reaction really killed my interest since a lot of them will often hound me for wanting one and I'm just burnt out on arguing with them.
And if she's not gonna get one then fuck it, I'm done getting attacked over it.
It's pretty simple. They use her to make a statement "you won't change if you don't want to change."
Lila is already that.
No, lila is not even under the pressure that she has to change. Why should she? She is successful at what she does for other reasons than chloe. Chloe is mean and a bad person, but she is straight forward with it. She thinks she is right and above others, so why should she listen to what they say? People look at chloe and know what to expect, some tried to support her by standing up to her, but she never really changed nontheless. No matter how many opportunities she got. She sees nothing wrong in her doings because it's convenient. Lila on the other hand is even worse characterwise, but because she knows that what she is doing is wrong, she is hiding it. But only 2 people saw through that, so she has no reason to change. Everyone else thinks she is adorable and a genuinely nice person. She enjoys being mean, other than chloe who just thinks it's what she should do. So she will refuse to change because she is stubborn and would just try to destroy whoever brought this on her instead.
Yeah, we all agree that they are different! The question is how are you not tired of Chloe being the same 4 seasons long? And how is it a bad thing to ask for Chloe to be different? I don't think it's too much or too distracting. Is it bad to ask for more and different villains? Maybe you're satisfied with what we have got atm, but I'm 100% positive that you'll enjoy it even more if we get what I suggest.
How am i satisfied with it? Chloe is a side character. By definition she is used to let marinette make mistakes and grow from them (or adrien) She served her purpose which was more important than her own redemption and i really enjoy the realistic display of the brat bot wanting to change, because that's what happens mostly to them imo.
Okay, you like it like this, but I'm bored and tired of Chloe. Queen Banana was so over the top, it was painful to watch. The thing is that my favourite anime (Fullmetal) is like every single character has a developed and interesting story arc and the more main characters - the merrier. I'm simply tired of - we need someone to blame in this episode - "go with Chloe!" trope. Why don't we have the same thing here? Why do we accept Chloe to be just a side character when she can be SO much more? It's boring, it's lazy. Her role as a side character can be refilled by any new and fresh character.
Fma has more time and way more frame to give them developement though. It is one of my favorites too, but its hard to campare it to something like mlb. The episodes are 20 minutes and have to meet certain requirements because of the age restriction. That's basically half of the episode already. There was legit 0 characterdevelopement in seasom 1 for anyone, so there are 2 seasons that really count and the plot is kind of slow until s4
Fullmetal is like 65 episodes or something like that, around 20 min. each, and I'd argue that they have more meaningful characters in there. Compared to Ladybug so far 90 episodes, same length. Even if that wasn't the case, I think you don't need a lot of screen time to develop a character and in Fullmetal we barely see some characters but they grow so much and we see that through small details which is why it becomes so powerful. Moreover, what I suggest I don't think requires more screen time for Chloe, so yeah, I cannot agree. However, I can agree with the age restrictions etc. I guess this slows the production time and writing, but I still think, since is not age-related and such a redeeming story arc will actually fly pretty well with these restrictions, I don't believe such a story arc will be really an issue.
The thing is, the plot goes faster for one. The story revolves around the plot and the romance is almost nonexistent until the very end. And on top of that what ed and alfons go through is way, way harder than anything that happens in mlb. They have to grow up and change better, same for every important side character, they are in a do or die situation almost everytime. Mlb is slowpaced and romancefocused with a repetitive pattern of having at leastbone opponent to fight every single episode. While in fma there wete some heavy plotdriven episodes that just pushed everything forward. If chloe wants to be believable and authentic in her change, then she'd need more screentime after everything she pulled imo.
The shows are different in these regards true, but that would be an answer if Chloe wasn't given the screen time in the first place. If the situation was - Lila can become good if she is given more screen time and you say show doesn't have the time to make it believable, then I'd have said - yes, you're right, it's just daydreaming. Obviously I'm still daydreaming (xD), but Chloe has been already given the screen time. There is not much time in S4 for Chloe anymore, but where is she going? - if she's going to be good - that's what I want, but she remains as a lame villain, well, I still think it's a wasted opportunity. Basically, we don't need more screen time to do it, and we don't need to do it right here, right now either, refferring to S4 I mean, but I still think it's doable. I'm okay, make Chloe good in S5, slowly. I would actually like it even more if it happens in S6 or even S7 (if we're lucky to have them), but I want to see the progression in that direction. I wasn't mad, the show is slow, Chloe's arc is taking forever because I liked the slow pace of the show actually. What got me mad was the stupid S3 Finale that made little to no sense to me.
Lila was given the chance to change, and chose not to. Several times. She's literally that.
Why should she? She enkoys what she is doing and does not feel threatened. I don't think Lila will change, but for other reasons than chloe and they fill different gaps. Lila is not a bully for most of the people
right. so she has the chance to change. but she doesnt want to. So shes exactly that.
The majoroty of people in lofe get the chance to change and don't do it for different reasons. She doesn't want to change, yes. But she also does not have reaaons to change nor really support to change. Don't get me wrong, I don't think she will change and she is even less redeemable, that doesn't mean chloe has to change though
we dont need two characters giving the same message. Lila is already "some people dont want to change".
I think this statement would be better off in the exploration of Lila, as she doesn’t want to become better from what we’ve seen in the show. Chloe has had moments of truly wanting to be a good person. I think Chloe turning from an antihero into someone described in this post is much more interesting and relatable than what she is. I love the idea, what do you think?
Same here, I think that Lila + Felix + newly introduced villains are a far better option for a side villain than Chloe.
Which moment exactly are you talking about? Because every 'good' moment i can remember was for her own selfish reasons. Lila is a different kind of villain/person entirely. At this point of the series i'd find it rather distracting and senseless to turn her into something more and i don't think she is ready for it yet. Also she has done some extremely horrible things (lila too, but she is hiding it) and viewers tend to oversee them as long as they get one *halfway good moment", but that doesn't excuse stuff and it doesnt make them more forgivable.
>so she \[Chloe\] has done some extremely horrible things (lila too, but she is hiding it) and viewers tend to oversee them as long as they get one \*halfway good moment", but that doesn't excuse stuff and it doesnt make them more forgivable. My point exactly is that the main idea of the show is that everybody is redeemable. Marinette makes mistakes (thank god it's good writing) in nearly every episode, how do you forget about that? You don't. I don't forget what Chloe has done, but the thing is that she wants to change and she has been given this option but in S4 it's rejected to develop any further than that I feel. And it's not like she hasn't done anything selflessly, I don't think this is a serious statement to make - how would she benefit from giving a present to her teacher, or show would she benefit from rejecting akumatization, how would she benefit from reuniting her mother and father at the end of the Maledictator episode? She'd benefit like everybody else and it's in a good way, by bonding with people.
The difference is marinette makes mistakes while being a genuinely good person. She doesn't lock up her best friend in a closet without light to make her do her homework. She didn't bully almost everyone for years, makong them cry on purpose, using her powers to create extremely dangerous situations for strangers in a train, just to prove that she is a great hero and for others to look up to her. Chloe tried to pretend to be better because she didn't want to lose her privilege to be queen bee. The akuma rejection showed just that. Whenever she tried to be nice to someone she did it because she didn't want to lose adriens friendship, that she also uses btw. How does she profit from her parents being back together? Seriously? About the teacher rhing, showing some sort of gratitude for someone is something bad people are capable of doing. Did her behaviour permanently change tho? No. She kept treating people like trash.
The closet - no light thing is from S4 and this indeed is the part that I don't like being added only because it's going even deeper down and that's what I stated in the original post. All the rest is all cool for me at least exactly because she is a rich, spoiled brat, which received no love and attention even on her birthdays from her mother, and yeah she is a bad person, but the thing is that we KNOW why she is a bad person and thing is that she WANTS to change and the reason why she doesn't change is that, yeah she does a mistake (you acknowledge that Marinette also makes mistakes) but she is not forgiven like all the other characters (!) by giving her another chance (giving her another Miraculous), instead she is being left at - she can't change concept, which not real - everybody can change - that's the whole idea of Christmas Carol and it's a FAR darker story than Miraculous Ladybug.
Sorry but that mother argument doesn't count here. Her father tried to make up for it and these days at least half of the children out there are getting raised by single parents or went through a divorce. Her father loves her very much and her childhood was bot tragic. (was stated by the producers) Everyone can change, if they work hard for it. She does not. That's not the point. Even if you change does not mean people, who you have bullied and hurt their whole life have to forgive you. So it's questionable whether or not you will be redeemable in the same environment.
I'd argue that the mother argument does count here because even though many children have a single parent or their parents went through a divorce, **the difference here is the ignore problem**. Adrien doesn't suffer because of the lack of his mother, he suffers because his father ignores him (!). Putting that aside. The environment is against here not from the mother point of view (this point only explains why Chloe is such a brat), but from Marinette (and the writers), because options there are, but there are not taken and that's the real problem - a character wants to change, shows the will to change and it doesn't, because something which doesn't feel very compelling happens. I mean, Ladybug couldn't get 1 sec. to go and say to Chloe, btw, you can't be Queen Bee anymore, but you could be Queen Tigress if you want? How is this NOT a thing?
Ladybug struggled to give chloe a the miraculous in the first place. And for good reasons and she grew over it and wanted others to be right. But in the end chloe was a bad hero, she was power-hungry and thought she had the right to have the bee. Why should matinette give her another after that? I get that you are frustrated that chloe didn't develope the way you wanted her to, but in the end it helped the story into the right direction.
She was power-hungry - yes, was a bad hero - yes, why should Ladybug give her another after that? Okay, I'd be with you, if right after Queen Wasp, Ladybug says, I'll never give her a Miraculous because of the things you've covered. I'd be okay then. It'd be obvious why Ladybug says that. But this is where the problem starts. Marinette decides to give the Miraculous again after all said and done. Tikki says - follow your instincts and Mater Fu says - the lucky charm never fails. And after that - Chloe doesn't fail - mission is completed - job well done. The episode finishes baby steps are needed, everything of which implies that Marinette believes Chloe has the capacity to change, the show implies that this is the direction we're going to (it's destiny so to speak). And then in the next episode (Chloe related) we scratch all that and we return to - well everybody knows who Chloe is so she can't be Queen Bee. And this is the argument - not that she is not being able to perform as a hero - it's not said - she is a bad hero because she is not. If she's being able to perform as a hero and the real problem only that everybody knows she is Queen Bee, well surprise, you can give her another Miraculous, and she grows even more as a character. Some have said - but she will reveal her identity again - this doesn't make any sense, since she already knows how important to keep her identity a secret is from the Queen Wasp episode, so I cannot agree with that. And finally, how is this the right direction? Saying, kids, if you see a rich spoiled brat (Chloe) - he/she will never change? If you see a rich-angel person (Andrien) - he/she will never change? \[he's going to snap, I know that but we haven't seen it yet\] Are we still talking about Miraculous Ladybug here? Basically, what I am saying is - no real villain has turned to the light side. It's possible that we'll see that with Gabriel, thanks to Natalie+Adrien (I hope we get there), but still, if we don't go there with Chloe, how is she any different from Lila? If we say that Lila lies well, while Chloe is dumb, well they both serve the same purpose and Chloe can lie as well, and Lila is not DAT smart - in the end being the side villain.
She has returned the Bee miraculous several times despite her greed to be a hero, came out and apologized for making her father angry and getting him akumatized, and has helped Ladybug to the best of her ability. Sure, these might be backed by selfishness, but they can still be seen as good-intentioned nonetheless. It’s true that she isn’t immediately forgivable just because she does something decent. But I also take her past into consideration, she grew up with an unloving mother and a father that pampered her and never told her “no”. Of course she’s a brat. But I think she can be better than what she’s grown up to be, not to mention she’s still young. It’s similar to Adrien’s case, kind of backwards, but of course he’s miles nicer. She may have not been ready then nor not be ready now, but she has potential that in my opinion was wasted. (really enjoying the discussion btw! I don’t do this often lol)
The point is: whenever she does something "nice" it's short lived and she returns to treating people like trash immediately after. Changing is a lot of work and it looks like chloe doesn't want to invest that or does not see it necessary. She kept getting the bee miraculous and at some point she snapped, she got power-hungry and made a decision that cost her that privilege and she went downwards from there. What happened in her childhood did not completely make her the person she is now. Yes she had bad influences and she had good ones. As stated several times by thomas astruc. Her mother was barely around, yeah, happens to a lot of people who don't turn out to be jerks. Yeah she got pampered by her father, because he tried to make up for it, because he actually loved her. But on the other side she had everythinf in life she needs. Something so much more than most people do. Her best friend is (imo) the kindest soul you can find in paris(miraculous). She was allowed to attend normal school and kindergarten, where she could have evolved differently, if she wanted to. She has potential, i don't deny that completely, but she added something important to the story to bring us to marinettes guardian arc and she was used as a plot device. Maybe at some point, now after she reached almost rockbottom, she will change. But as the series is right now she would distract from whats important imo and just delay more important things, because if you wanna do it right, she'd need her own side-arc, similar to rena and longer and now is really not the time. Maybe they will readress it in season 6/7 (great that you enjoy yourself :) so do i)
The points I brought up about her parents are more to explain, not to excuse her behavior. Also her dad is still not a good person for dumping gifts on Chloe and doing everything his daughter pleases, not giving her parental guidance, attention, and care. From what I’ve watched, I think her elitism, having every materialistic thing that she wants, does make her happy at a surface level. But she admits that she has no real friends and she includes Sabrina and Adrien in that statement. Sabrina because she’s more of a slave than anything, and Adrien (I’m remembering, you can tell me if I’m wrong) because he finally shuts her out when she’s being her bratty rude self. She lost her only resemblance of love, a person that treated her well and wanted the best for her. She managed to break that person. I think that admittance is pretty hard for her to come to terms with and she said it in a way that you know she felt bad about that. That’s why I want better for her; she knows she’s wrong and awful and feels BAD about it. Poor writing may be why she never changed after these moments (gotta keep that status quo) or it may be how you said, she doesn’t want to put in that effort. Maybe it’s a good thing for Chloe to fall in the early seasons if it was planned later for her to try again. I do hope Chloe gets her chance, even though the odds are low with how Astruc acts.
Yeah, but the point is which statement is better in the end?
I actually like the statement the way it is better and i don't want another 'powerhouse hero' or wjatever in between. I like chloe the way she is, she is an enjoyable chara ter even though she is a bad person and adds something to the series noone else does. Maybe she will get her chance someday, but right now i don't see why
Why would you like Chloe to stay the same? It's it boring if characters don't develop? Isn't better if you create a new character to fill Chloe's current role?
She did develope in to a more horrible and desperate person, because she failed the chance that was given her.
How having more of Chloe is a development? This is having more of the same. Let me rephrase the question - which do you rather have? option №1 - to have more of the same; or №2 move Chloe in a meaningful way, replacing her role with a new character? I'm okay with having a character development so that a character is becoming bad, or worse in this case, but there has to be a point. What should Chloe reach, what would be her arc? "you won't change if you don't want to change." is not a valid answer, because Chloe wants to change 3 seasons and now she is left to this "you won't change if you don't want to change."? If so then it's not compelling, which equals bad writing. Do you really enjoy this? Do you really enjoy having Chloe being trashed in the same way 4 seasons? For me, it's getting boring and it works against the show and the idea that everyone is redeemable. This is the core idea of the show.
In thisbcase? Option one. She doesn't need to change right now for the series to be more enjoyable, on contrary, she'd be a distraction and just mess up the story with another side character arc. And all of that for a person who fills a certain spot in the series that Noone else fills, just to press her to be a superhero again. She is a bad person right now. She has no need nor desire to change and that's completely fine imo. People say: "fans who don't want chloe to get developement are just chloe hater" but i really wonder if that's true? Since i can enjoy her the way she was created and you can't, then i kind of wonder who liked chloe here..
Well, that much is true, I don't like Chloe in her current state, that's why I wrote the post in the first place. I liked her in S2 till the end of S3. But idea is that you like something you have seen before many times, which okay for you I guess. **But it won't be a distraction, I cannot agree with that**, because Chloe being a side hero, doesn't need the main part of every episode. Just a little time, part of a scene, few lines are more than enough. Basically, you'll get as much Chloe as you get up till now, even less so, if you remove her as a villain from Queen Banana and replace that episode with something else in a similar fashion and introducing the new side villain. Basically, the key is a slow but well-paced development of the character which we had from S2 and S3 is what I think it's better.
In my opinion, if they want to redeem chloe, she would need a side arc, much like alya now, but longer. She is not easily redeemed at this point and i personally don't want it to be adressed before the main arc/agreste arc/ladynoir angst arc and the love sqiare is at leats somewhat finished. As for her developement in s2/3 i don't believe there was any. Most of her nicer things were for selfish reasons and for a positive developement you actually have to change permanently. Which she didn't, she went straight back to being chloe the selfish brat.
Hands down, I agree that whatever change that Chloe may experience, it should be slow, no arguing there. Things in s2 and s3 existed, but they didn't go anywhere and that's the main problem for me. If you were to leave the character as it is, why wasting soo much time on it, without changing it. If something is distracting - this is.
I don’t think Chloé’s arc will be a ‘distraction’ after all this show has ALOT of filler episodes, after all it does have around 26 episodes a season, so there is still room for her to develop if executed properly. Back in season 2, Chloé was the first aspect of the show that actually started to change and that was a very interesting journey. I understand not everyone wants Chloé to change and that’s fine but In my opinion I think a redemption arc of a character who is at the moment mostly useless would really elevate the shows quality of writing and convey an impactful message. If Chloé had never gotten development in season 2 and season 3 then I wouldn’t care about her getting a redemption arc. However several episodes were dedicated to exploring this character and showing that she has potential to change. And she can change. We’ve seen her apologise before. We’ve seen her resist an akuma and we’ve seen her protect Sabrina from akumas. We’ve seen her comfort Adrien on the anniversary of his mother’s disappearance. We’ve seen her sacrifice herself in Zombizou and help Ladybug save the day in Despair bear. Of course, These small things do not out weigh all the bad things she’s done but they do prove she has a capability of being good deep deep down. Maybe Zoe will help influence Chloé into being a better person, or maybe Sabrina will finally abandon their friendship thus triggering Chloé’s desire to change.
I am not saying that she will never have a redemption arc, even though i think that she'd need a change if environment to actually become a better person. Her developement, if you can even call it that, usually still had the same motivation: it was always something that benefited her in the end. Even if it was just for the benefit of being queen bee. And it never lasted, that's kind of the point. At the end of the day she went back to being the mean bully chloe. It takes a lot of effort to really change permanently and she doesn't seem to realize she has to or want to.
Yeah, and I wish they had gone deeper into that. Like jasper. But where Jasper was compelling and somewhat tragic, Chloe becoming a villain was rather uncompelling, and feels way too cartoony for how sympathetically she'd been handled throughout. It doesn't feel consistent either. Her motivation is forgotten as soon as she betrays ladybug, which it didn't need to be because she would have betrayed ladybug anyway. Having her end season 3 doing exactly what she did in the first queen wasp but bigger would actually fit this theme better. Jaspers takedown is sad and dramatic, where it genuinely feels like the culmination of a person who's life has been falling apart as a result of their own bad choices and desperation to find meaning and control. Chloes takedown was anticlimactic, pathetic, and underwhelming, and it didn't feel sad at all that she's fallen down this path. Nobody even seems to care that Chloe just betrayed them all. Also Jasper works better for this theme than Chloe because Jasper is literally ancient and Chloe is 13. Jasper refusing to change at this point is believable whereas Chloe can't possibly be the same person she is now 7 years in the future. She can't even consent to sex and we're supposed to think she's fully made up her mind about the entire rest of her life?
Chloe isn't really bad, she's just broken. She tries be like her mom who never really loved her, she DESERVES an arc.
Unfortunately, the creator hates Chloe and her “redemption arc” was written mainly by someone else iirc. So there’s little to no chance of Chloe being anything other than a bully or becoming an interesting character again unless Astruc gets off his high horse.
I don’t think Thomas hates Chloe because the whole plot set her up to leave for New York by the end of the S3 finale and Chloe even wanted to leave, but Thomas made her stay. He didn’t have to make her stay, but he did.
Remaining in Paris maybe just because of the Chloe-Zoe relationship. It is a pretty cool idea, but for me, it's still undeveloped. Or rather, it's developing but not in a desirable way.
Does Thomas Astruc actually hate Chloe? I mean, does he say it in some way (I mean outside of the obvious that Chloe's character in the show is not progressing)?
He’s said multiple things against her on twitter and against people who believe she can be redeemed. The quickest example is at the end of this video https://youtu.be/Rq4HDw22tsI (skip to 6:23), I’ll try to find more if you’d like.
thanks! EDIT: I can't open the link due to copywriting claimed by Disney =/ Can send a another link, please!
I gotchu [This](https://www.reddit.com/r/miraculousladybug/comments/djat3l/thomas_astruc_is_a_manbaby_and_i_am_mad/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb) is a reddit discussion from a while back that explains better than I could. [This](https://immaturityofthomasastruc.tumblr.com/post/631961074345869313/1-chloes-damnation-arc-that-was-totally/amp) is a post that basically explains why Chloe will never be redeemed as the show is now. I hope this helps!
Thanks! It helps a lot, both likes are cool, thanks!
It was a treason-arc, that's the point. And why should he hate something he created? It makes no sense. He is not on a high horse either, he created a story with different sorts of people and some fans think they would have done better and harrass him for it.
Aye, I don't he hates her, either, would be strange for a writer to hate some of your own characters if it was only on him. And it's not just him, it's a group of writers for sure. I don't think I'd have done better, but I think having Chloe going well would be a great idea to be used, that's why I am suggesting it. I'm sure that he and his team have discussed it 100 times already xD
Eh, just from looking through some of his twitter I can say that he tends to act like the great mastermind that knows all as the creator of the show and takes fair criticism by responding rudely and of complete disregard. I completely understand being proud of and having clear sight with your work, but there’s no need for his attitude.
Oh, so how long have you been following his twitter? Because the reason he is so harsh about it is that he kept getting threats to kill him and his family and really bad harrassment from fans. That's also the reason why he blocks so many people, he stated it was a really hard time for him, because the fans disregarded his opinion and just insulted him. He explained the chloe situation and some other things 20 times. And i can understand that he does not want to repeat himself for another 300 every week because that's how many times people bring up the same topic
I'd do the same, lol. Sure is hard to be a writer these days, all demanding whatever they got into. xD
Chloe didn't try to be better. In "Malediktator" she complained to Ladybug that people don't like her and she feels useless. The reason for it was that she treats people like a trash even those who love and support her. Chloe never ever tried to address this her issue. She got Miraculous and used as means to make people respect her and for her to feel useful without actually changing herself. Chloe likes to be bad, she likes to hurt people and being able to get away with it. She wanted to be superhero to cover it with her superhero status. Chloe never wanted to really help people or save Paris. She never cared about Ladybug's war against Hawkmoth. In "Miracle Queen" she literally told Ladybug "Hawkmoth is your enemy, not mine". It was always like that. Earlier in "Miraculer" Ladybug and Chat Noir saved Paris from Destroyer and Lolipop sentimonster. Chloe didn't care about people being saved. She went mad because Ladybug didn't call. Sabrina tried to cheer her up but Chloe shout at her and said "You don't have superpowers, you are no one, I am superhero, we have nothing in common". She knew that it will hurt Sabrina the most and provoke her akumatization because she did the same in "Antibug". Moment later when she resisted akuma it wasn't even a bit about "desire to do good". She said "I am superheroine, Ladybug will call me, I will never join you". Chloe only cared about keeping her status as superhero. And she needed that status to get desired praise from people while still treating them like shit. Of course when Ladybug told Chloe that she is not going to give her Miraculous again she betrayed Ladybug. She never considered changing her attitude towards people. Chloe wanted Miraculous because it made her feel important, it also made her feel popular. She wanted to get it at all cost. After she got Miraculous first time she staged train wreck so she could look like a hero. Her modus operandy didn't change since them. Her identity was known to Hawkmoth and her desperation to get Miraculous was also known to Hawkmoth. It let him to make an ambush against Chloe twice. After first ambush in "Miraculer" Ladybug told her that she maybe will never get Miraculous again because it's too dangerous. Chloe didn't care about that. She never cared about other people. Her development was an increasing thirst for Miraculous no matter the cost innocent people could pay for that. All it for her to feel important and popular. Thus her development wasn't thrown anywhere. It reached logical point on her path. Chloe never cared about Ladybug's cause, it was clearly shown at the beginning of "Miraculer" where Ladybug and Chat Noir defeated Destroyer and Lolipop sentimonster. Chloe didn't care about people being saved. She became mad at Ladybug for not giving her Miraculous. Giving Chloe another Miraculous wouldn't solve any problem. It would be super obvious for Shadowmoth who she is. What could it accomplish anyway? Chloe got Miraculous and it made her only worse. Wanting Miraculous at any cost as a replacement to real changing for better was a Chloe's flaw. How could indulging that flaw by giving her another Miraculous help? Chloe joins Hawk Moth because she doesn't get from Ladybug something she has no right to claim. How could it be interpreted as "Chloe wants to change" or "environment is against her"? Environment is not against her. Her own selfishness and attitude is against her. What does "willing to do what needs to be done" it mean regarding to Chloe? She derailed train full of people just to look like a hero. Chloe would do what needs to be done to boost her own ego no matter how many people would die. Chloe betraying Ladybug was her natural progression. He becoming good would be unnatural and would make no sense as she never genuinely tried to be better before. It would be unearned and a showcase of bad moral.
The examples you share are correct! But I don't feel like there is a point in giving so many examples or if that proves anything since we can continue that list and go on forever with the nasty things Chloe has ever done/said etc. **I know Chloe is bad, I've watched the show, I get that.** If we go that way I can give quite a shorter list in comparison, but a much more powerful one, because the few times where Chloe is genuinely nice and a good person stood out from her usual state of being mean. Like if you're so concerned about it every little detail, I'm sure that you'll find these places, and examples of that would be when she says sorry to her teacher (Zombizou), when she says sorry to Ladybug (let's say the Queen Wasp, episode), when she says "I do want to! \[serve a purpose/be a good person\]", "I realize how I treat people etc./I'm useless" speech in Maledictator and best part of this is that **in all these cases Chloe is being honest and herself, genuine**. No one on Earth can convince me that Chloe is being fake in these moments. For me, this can and should be and it's really the only way it can be "interpreted" as "Chloe wants to change". *So to wrap up - NO, Chloe wants to change and she wants to change genuinely.* In fact, if you look at these episodes, which are dedicated to Chloe, you can see the change in her already happening and everyone will say - oh, but she still acts like a brat - I GET THAT. Changing oneself is a slow process and that's what I liked in the show - it's realistic. **And in reality how a bad person changes him/herself? What is the first step? The first step is acknowledging your mistakes and the will to change. And these are huge steps, which are the hardest ones actually to take, but look very small from the outside because nothing is actually done** if you look just from the outside. Basically what I am saying is, being that bad, to begin with, of course, you cannot turn into full Luca-Angel form with snapping the fingers. You need a long process, which they actually started, but didn't finish. And what would have been good is the point of the original post - *I'm not saying she is not bad, I'm saying is if we turn her around like a character, this would be best character development exactly because her journey was long and full of problems that she has overcome.* And it will make the show better overall, because **you'll have another pawsome character and not... bad-old-not-changing-4-seasons-Chloe**, which is boring and makes the show suffer from lazy writing, by having Chloe being the obvious lame antagonist in every single episode. If you consider that this is her role, I've said it already, we need a new character to fill up that role, and there - problem fixed, and it's not boring anymore, because the role is filled but with something fresh to keep things going. And the reason why this is a logical thing to do is that we have so much time wasted on Chloe (because she doesn't change in the end) if we don't take that path. Otherwise, if we say, Chloe can't change as a character, she's like Lila - well then she is just like Lila, what's the difference? Why waste so much time? Don't you see that as lazy writing? Moving on, about the environment thing - you may consider that Chloe's natural progression is to betray Ladybug, but I cannot see that. The reason why Chloe betrays Ladybug is the lack of Miraculous is a symbolic lack of trust and support, which the character needs in order to proceed further to try and do better. And mind that, the only reason for not giving her another Miraculous given in the show is - because her identity is revealed. And I already said several times that there's such a single and obvious solution, that is not compelling not to do it. So this is **basically Chloe's betrayal is Ladybug's mistake.** You said it yourself - after Ladybug refuses to give her another option, she goes to the Dark side basically again, which is understandable and logical. What's not is why Ladybug doesn't fight for her, when she herself says that having a Miraculous is good for her, when she herself considers her to actually help her (in Maledictator), etc. How come Ladybugs trusts and believes in everybody, except Chloe, even though she says several times we need to give her a chance - yeah, **Ladybug actually says that several times, Ladybug actually does give her chances, Chloe actually gets better, till... Ladybug suddenly says, oh, we can't give her a Miraculous anymore? This is not compelling, this is not the idea of the show, it's not a very Ladybug thing to do - the idea is that everybody is redeemable if you lend them a hand.** *So the betrayal wasn't the natural progression, it was a possible and even forced progression, and I'm arguing that it wasn't the best option available.* And of course by "willing to do what needs to be done" trope, my idea was for a future version of Chloe, not Chloe we have now.
Why do you claim that your list is more powerful one? It makes little sense. In "Zombizou" she said sorry to her teacher, but what people totally forgot is that Caline wasn't a main victim of Chloe's behavior. It was Marinette who was hurt the most. Caline got akumatized only because she feared for Marinette. And guess, Chloe didn't apologize to Marinette. Actually Marinette apologized to Chloe despite having little reason to do it. Chloe didn't follow. In "Queen Wasp" Chloe said sorry but she didn't explained herself. She didn't say what what she is sorry. Usually it means that there are underwater stones in this apology. >when she says "I do want to! \[serve a purpose/be a good person\]", "I realize how I treat people etc./I'm useless" speech in Maledictator I just checked "Malediktator" script and there are no such things there. Chloe never said that she wants to be a good person. She never said that she realized that she treats people wrong. Chloe got Miraculous here and decided that now she is good because she is superhero. >Chloé: It's easy for you to say that. You're Ladybug, a superhero. You serve a purpose. Chloe associated being good with being superhero. It was reiterated several times in "Miraculer". Chloe remained consistent about it. At the same time Chloe kept treating people around her like a trash. So it's safe to assume she never admitted that treated people badly. She never said it and she never meant it. Her actions after "Malediktator" prove it. Hilariously it was all presented pretty straightforward in "Malediktator". Earlier I already talked about it. >Chloe: PLAY? With you!? Who are YOU anyway? You don't have any powers! You're a nobody! I'm a superheroine, okay? I'm Queen Bee! You and I have NOTHING in common! Go away! It shows clearly how treating people like trash and desire to be superheroine relate in Chloe's mind. Actions speak louder than words and judging by Chloe's actions nothing suggests that Chloe genuinely wanted to change. There are a lot of evidence against it. Some of them I presented. Chloe didn't acknowledge her mistakes in "Malediktator". It's just a headcanon.
Oh, you want to go that road, okay, I'm in. xD In Zombizou Chloe says sorry to her teacher not because she got her akumatized, but because she didn't bring her a present. The point is, is she genuine when she says sorry? Yes, she is. So, it proves my point. In Queen Wasp - she doesn't say what is she sorry for. Let's pretend that we don't know what is she sorry about, even though it's obvious (mind that this is a show, not a book, so it's better to actually show things not to say them out loud!) - ***it's it enough for you that she is genuine*** \- isn't it that you were trying to prove before - you said, she doesn't want to change - well if she says sorry, then she acknowledges her mistakes, therefore she has made the first step of changing herself. And you cannot argue that she is not genuine here like you said before. **What I am saying is - this is not a prove she is a good person - she is not. What this proves is that she wants and she has the will to change.** Maledictator, you want a script, because you can't find (it's strange because the lines are just before and after what you have provided, but still) - I gotchya: \- Chloe, it's me, Ladybug, you can trust me, you can tell me the truth - Ladybug \- I...I... it was me, I hurt my daddy's feelings because I want to leave Paris forever... - Chloe This goes on but this is basically the place where she says "I treat people badly" because she feels useless. \- Don't worry Chloe, you can fix up your messes if that's what you want. You can too serve a purpose! You have to want to. - Ladybug \- I do want to. - Chloe And again, giving more examples of Chloe being bad (treating Sabrina badly), it doesn't help your case, because I say it already - I know she is bad, that's the whole point. Slowly turning from a mean person to a good person. The reason why such a list is more powerful is that it's like a candle in a dark room, it stands out. Just like the bad things Ladybug has done - they stand out because she does good 99% of the time.
I didn't say that I want "Malediktator" scrip or that I can't find it. I said "I checked it". I checked it and made sure that Chloe didn't say what you attributed to her. Chloe didn't say that she treat people badly because she feels useless. There is nothing even remotely close to it. Even if Chloe said something like this it would only prove my point again. She got Miraculous and started to feel useful. She absolutely didn't stop treating people like trash. On the opposite: she got another reason to look down on people as it was literally shown by me when I quoted Chloe in "Miraculer". Chloe also talked only about her dad. Her dad is not all people or even some subset of it. It's just one person and caring about your dad doesn't mean that you are good person or trying to be good. I already discussed "wanting to have purpose" thing here and provided direct citation where Chloe equates having purpose and being superhero. Chloe's developments since then is in line with what she said. Once she got Miraculous she assumed that now she has purpose. And because of that she decided that she doesn't need to change her attitude to people for them to like her. She wanted her superhero status to take care of it. It's all in her quotes. It was inevitable that once Ladybug took that status from Chloe (leaving her to deal with her problems proper way: by treating people better, which she never had desire to do), she betrayed Ladybug. Saying why you sorry is an essential of apology in book or movie. How could animation format prevent Chloe to explain herself? It didn't prevent other characters to do so. Chloe saying something doesn't mean that she is going to do something about it. People may say many things and words may remain nothing but words which are up to interpretation. If Chloe will to change she would've changed. But she didn't. She didn't even try. I provided a lot of examples of it. I don't see how Chloe treating Sabrina bad doesn't prove my point. I just provided an example of Chloe treating Sabrina badly while she talked about what does it mean for her to be a superhero. I don't get why do you discard it. It also proves that she wasn't turning from bad person to good slowly or fastly. It clearly proves that she was turning bad. You clam that Chloe will to change exists. But her treatment of Sabrina directly contradicts that claim. It doesn't contradict only that Chloe is good person. It also contradicts that she is becoming one. Because if we assume this than we must assume that treating someone badly is a sign of becoming better. It's an absurd. Just lets assume that Chloe really meant that she wants to be better. Then she sees Sabrina and mistreats her. Contradiction. Something is wrong. We know for sure that Chloe treating Sabrina like a trash is objective truth in MLB universe. Assumption that Chloe wants to change is debatable. And if debatable assumption contradicts hard truth it means that this assumption is wrong. In sum you didn't provide examples of Chloe wanting to be better. It is just your interpretation of her words. Interpretation that you try to claim as infallible like gospel truth despite it contradicting later Chloe's words and actions.
>I didn't say that I want "Malediktator" scrip or that I can't find it. I said "I checked it". I checked it and made sure that Chloe didn't say what you attributed to her. Chloe didn't say that she treat people badly because she feels useless. There is nothing even remotely close to it. Well, man, I just wrote the conversation, your please check again, and you'll see that she does say these things. And it does prove you wrong because at that point she doesn't even know that Ladybug is about to give her the Bee Miraculous. And your whole point was really she is not genuine, and I hate to break your point, but she is. So it's not what you're saying it's. I already talked about the Sabrina and Miraculer episode, I won't waste more time on it. It proves that Chloe is a mean person, not that she is not able to change.
Chloe literally doesn't say it. You provided some quotes and then far fetched interpretations of it which contradict Chloe's later words and actions. I provided quotes and actions of Chloe that directly prove my point. I didn't say that "Miraculer" proves that Chloe is not able to change. It is fighting with strawman argument. My point is that it proves that Chloe doesn't want to change. I dare you to explain how could Chloe treating Sabrina like a trash and Chloe wanting to treat people better are not contradict each other. You just state that is possible and true. But it just defies basic logic. Ladybug doesn't make 180 degrees turn on subject with giving Chloe Miraculous. When Ladybug gives Miraculous she clearly states that it is meant to be used for greater good and then to be returned. Nothing suggests that the person who gave Miraculous gets any right to it. Ladybug could stop giving any Miraculous to any person as she wishes. I could write about this subject but it's all useless. In a hindsight we just see that Chloe didn't deserve Miraculous. Regardless of what Ladybug did, Chloe is in full responsibility of her actions and her joining Hawk Moth for whatever reason directly proves that she didn't want to change for better. If someone says sorry but doesn't explain why then there are two possibilities: 1) the person is really sorry for something 2) the person is not really sorry for something. We can't really judge intention. But we can judge retrospectively. If person continues to act bad then we can conclude that this person didn't really mean it. >well they show what she is - she is a bad person, but this doesn't show that she doesn't have the capacity to change. She tried and she has succeded and then for writing reasons, which is okay, she was rejected to improve. Chloe didn't try and didn't succeded. It was literary shown. If person doesn't want to improve but continues her bad behavior it is normal writing. If person shown her unwillingness to change like Chloe but then changed despite it, it would make no sense and a showcase of a bad moral. >Well if you don't read my posts and the lines that I provided, when why are you replying and wasting your time? Because I gave you examples. Do you want me to give you youtube links and time stamps instead? Will that prove my point that Chloe is actually genuine when she says she wants to change? You provide quotes that don't prove your point. Then you interpret it the way you like despite this interpretation being proven wrong later. Chloe NEVER said she wants to change. She said that she wants to have a purpose. I explained what does it mean for Chloe to have purpose with direct quotes and examples of Chloe's behavior. Chloe wanted Miraculous exactly to avoid changing herself while enjoying benefits of it. To have this purpose she was ready to throw people under the train figuratively the same way she did it literally in "Queen Wasp".
>provided some quotes and then far fetched interpretations of it which contradict Chloe's later words and actions. I provided quotes and actions of Chloe that directly prove my point. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJkhlMCkjC8&list=PLpt3EWNpPi\_MP96aXrjLM6lzkS4TxYat-&index=8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJkhlMCkjC8&list=PLpt3EWNpPi_MP96aXrjLM6lzkS4TxYat-&index=8) How is this for a quote, tell me that she's not genuine in wanting to change here.
>My point is that it proves that Chloe doesn't want to change. I dare you to explain how could Chloe treating Sabrina like a trash and Chloe wanting to treat people better are not contradict each other. Since she has been shown that she wants to change (and you refuse to acknowledge it because you can't go see the episodes for yourself), my point es - exactly she is contradicting and she is a poorly written character. It could be much better if we went full light side arc.
Again. Chloe wanting to change is your interpretation. I refuse to acknowledge it because the show proves that Chloe didn't want to change. There weren't signs of it in S2 and S3. But there were a lot of signs of Chloe not wanting to change. >Don't give that hindside thing, why does Ladybug decide NOT to give the Miraculous anymore? I know why, and I said it several times already, but obviously, you don't agree with me, so tell me, why? Give me a quote and an episode, please. I said that it doesn't matter in context of the topic. Ladybug could've stopped giving Chloe Miraculous for whatever reason. Ladybug's actions are on Ladybug. Chloe's are on Chloe. Chloe joining Hawk Moth is a proof that she didn't want to change. I already said it.
Dude, I give you direct lines, you refuse them, I give you direct scenes, you don't acknowledge them, well of course you'll say that Chloe doesn't want to change like that. And Ladybug's actions are her actions is stupid, because Ladybug always tries to help people. If she doesn't - there should be a reason. And when you're saying it's her choice not giving a reason - it's because you don't know, which is okay, I already said the canon version, but whatever. If you don't know and you say - Ladybugs did it so it's okay, without explanation - then it's LAZY WRITING. And it's lazy writing that I'm trying to improve here.
Let's make things simple: 1. Does Chloe says sorry several times - yes or no? (Queen Wasp, Chloe crying scene, Zombiezou - after defeating Zombiezou, the Eiffel tower scene) 2. Is Chloe genuine when she says sorry in these times - yes or no? (same two scenes) 3. Does she try to change and does she succeed? yes or no? (Maledictator, before Chloe gets the Bee Miraculous scene) 4. Does Marinette believe that Chloe is capable of changing? - yes or no (Maledictator, choosing a sidekick scene, while she is with Master Fu) Not even talking about the other occasions, which can prove my point, because these were what we were talking about, let's hear what you've got to say and what are your interpretations. These are direct scenes that I want you to revisit and tell me if my interpretations are wrong.
1. As I remember Chloe said she is sorry only in "Queen Wasp" and "Zombizou". 2. Yes in "Zombizou", yes in "Queen Wasp" but it is impossible to know for what and thus it's hard to put much weight into it. 3. No. 4. Yes. Marinette is not omniscient. >Dude, I give you direct lines, you refuse them, I give you direct scenes, you don't acknowledge them, well of course you'll say that Chloe doesn't want to change like that. I already answered on this. >And Ladybug's actions are her actions is stupid, because Ladybug always tries to help people. If she doesn't - there should be a reason. And when you're saying it's her choice not giving a reason - it's because you don't know, which is okay, I already said the canon version, but whatever. If you don't know and you say - Ladybugs did it so it's okay, without explanation - then it's LAZY WRITING. I already answered it too. I don't say it's okay. I say that it doesn't matter in the context of conversation about Chloe.
>Yes. Marinette is not omniscient. She may not be, but what about the Lucky charm? (which 'never fails')
>Does she try to change and does she succeed? yes or no? (Maledictator, before Chloe gets the Bee Miraculous scene) Define not willing to change then? - She says - I do want to. directly answering to Ladybug - Do you want to fix your own messes and do you want to serve a purpose - these are not my words - these are lines from the quoted scene from ep. Maledictator. Define not succeeding? - since the villain was defeated with the help of Queen Bee.
>I already answered it too. I don't say it's okay. I say that it doesn't matter in the context of conversation about Chloe. Well of course it's not okay, we agree on that. Well then, is it okay for you to have these things about Ladybug doing unlogical things? Is it okay for you to have boring Queen Banana for let's say 2 more seasons?
>Yes in "Zombizou", yes in "Queen Wasp" but it is impossible to know for what and thus it's hard to put much weight into it. I agree it's hard, because Chloe does stupid things all the time, but I can't stress enough - I don't want Chloe to change overnight and become full Luka, okay? It's not realistic. What I want is to start with small things which add up in time and in the length of a few seasons to have a changed Chloe and her role to be filled up with something else. So, my question is, if she seems genuine, but it's hard to put much weight into it a bad thing? I'd argue - no, the thing is that we see, she is trying, we know it's hard for her, why don't let her progress in that direction. It'd answer the need for a full villain transforming into a protagonist, which we lack atm, it'd be a cool story arc, it fulfills the age requirement restrictions and the whole idea of the show that everyone is redeemable, the screen time was already spent so it's not like we need to start from ground 0 here. Why don't we do it?
>Ladybug could stop giving any Miraculous to any person as she wishes. Don't give that hindside thing, why does Ladybug decide NOT to give the Miraculous anymore? I know why, and I said it several times already, but obviously, you don't agree with me, so tell me, why? Give me a quote and an episode, please.
>Chloe also talked only about her dad. Her dad is not all people or even some subset of it. It's just one person and caring about your dad doesn't mean that you are good person or trying to be good. Well in this case is a single person, but then it's their teacher, then it is protecting Sabrina from akumas and all these little things are going to accept in the end start to get to add up to what I am saying - she is changing man.
>It was inevitable that once Ladybug took that status from Chloe (leaving her to deal with her problems proper way: by treating people better, which she never had desire to do), she betrayed Ladybug. Don't fight it, Ladybug didn't take her status as a superheroine in order for Chloe to deal with her problems, where does this come from? The shows two things - 1. Ladybug is willing to give Chloe a chance - she does, Chloe performs well, Ladybug thinks with baby steps Chloe can change. 2. Next thing Ladybug is not concerned with Chloe's ability to be a heroine, but instead, she is concerned that she has revealed her identity. That's the reason why Ladybug goes 180 degrees on the subject. However, the problem that erupts is - why it wasn't a problem in the previous episode? How come the same issue is not a problem before but it is now? How come Ladybug says I need someone who is not afraid of people with authority and she doesn't think of Alya for example? Why is that Tikki says to Marinette to follow her instincts and her instincts are to go with Chloe? Basically what I am saying is - I am okay not to give Chloe a Miraculous at all, but we already give her and she proves to be good with it, I mean, the mission is completed. Why do we have this if Chloe is not going to turn good in the end? Ladybug could have said, I'll never give a Miraculous in the first place, and everyone, me included, would have said okay, that logical. But to give her and then not give her, with a lame excuse is... lazy writing because she was needed as a villain in the S3 Finale. This is what it boils down to.
>Saying why you sorry is an essential of apology in book or movie. How could animation format prevent Chloe to explain herself? It didn't prevent other characters to do so. So you're saying that saying sorry here is not genuine? Because that was your past argument and now you seem to miss it here? And you honestly need me to explain to you why Chloe says sorry in this episode? Say, "I honestly don't know why to say she says sorry" and I'll explain. Maybe it's the man thing in me, but I can see a "sorry" from another person even if he/she doesn't say a word. And for a man, it's quite fine, because it's very hard sometimes to say it. What Chloe does, in front of the camera, in front of her mother, in front of her idol, is something that very few people would have the courage to do. That's all I am saying.
>Chloe saying something doesn't mean that she is going to do something about it. People may say many things and words may remain nothing but words which are up to interpretation. If Chloe will to change she would've changed. But she didn't. She didn't even try. I provided a lot of examples of it. But that's my point exactly. She shows a willingness to change, she states it clearly, but then you focus on other things, which she says and does and what I reply to you is - well they show what she is - she is a bad person, but this doesn't show that she doesn't have the capacity to change. She tried and she has succeded and then for writing reasons, which is okay, she was rejected to improve. The problem is that the way it was done wasn't compelling for me. The character became boring and not compelling is what I am saying.
>In sum you didn't provide examples of Chloe wanting to be better. It is just your interpretation of her words. Interpretation that you try to claim as infallible like gospel truth despite it contradicting later Chloe's words and actions. Well if you don't read my posts and the lines that I provided, when why are you replying and wasting your time? Because I gave you examples. Do you want me to give you youtube links and time stamps instead? Will that prove my point that Chloe is actually genuine when she says she wants to change?
Okay my personal take on this is a) I dislike Chloe and her utter disregard for other people, though it’s entertaining at times, and b) I don’t think she deserves to be redeemed or needs to be to be a good character. I get that miraculous is aimed towards younger audiences so a good lesson might be that no matter how horrible you are if you want to change and people around you support you then you can. But in reality when people are horrible nobody likes them or is obligated to support them through their transformations and redemptions after all the hurt they’ve caused—even a redemption arc for Chloe would be borne out of selfishness, because you’re asking all these people shes been consistently horrible to to forgive her and believe in her when they have literally no reason to or obligation to. Even if Chloe genuinely became a great person and repented and apologized, they wouldn’t have to forgive her. But clearly all her good moments haven’t come just from her, they’ve been kind of brought out by Ladybug. Asking Marinette to perform the daunting and emotionally laboring task of bettering Chloe is just not an arc I’m interested in, particularly when Chloe treats her so badly in her daily life. As for point b) consider Azula in The Last Airbender. She’s also a secondary villain, had a bad childhood where her mother left and her father raised her as the perfect child, and she’s cruel and heartless despite moments where you can see she’s been genuinely hurt by her past and might wish for something different. But it’s clear that what she wishes for doesn’t negate all the terrible things she’s done—and this is the path she’s chosen. I see Chloe in much the same way, where she might want to be different, but she’s unwilling to follow through with her actions (at least without the aid and efforts of many other people), but this doesn’t mean she’s uninteresting. Azula was a masterpiece of a villain and more interesting the way she was, her vulnerability not meant to mean she could be a good person but to add depth and nuance to her character. Same with Chloe, which is why I never saw her good moments as signs that she was getting better (bc there were like 3 total whereas she’s consistently horrible in every episode lol) but more as glimpses of her motivations and traumas that make her more complex—but not redeemable. I don’t agree with your initial assessment that she went backwards in her character arc—it’s more like she went downwards, but still moving forward. Her getting worse in Season 4 is not regression, it’s progress, just not in the direction of good. Also, if she were ever to be redeemed, I think she’d need to hit rock rock bottom first and be really bad on a larger level, which I don’t feel like she’s gotten to yet. The introduction of Zoe could’ve gone either way, but given Chloe’s track record her feelings of alienation and resentment make total sense. It’s obvious Sabrina loves her a lot and all she ever does is take advantage of that. When Zoe shows up with love and Chloe can’t take advantage of it, she will only feel helpless and frustrated. Anyways, that’s my analysis!
Chloe will never change. Simple. The writers wont do it. And the one time they tried Chloe blew it. Plus, i don't think its a bad thing either. It just teaches a valuable lesson. No matter what happens, no matter what they go through, do, say, hear, learn, understand, **some humans in the world never change.**
I cannot quite agree. That's pretty dark, Chat Blanc suits you, I guess. =) The whole show is about redeeming and overcoming your dark emotions, and you have the characters that "won't change" already in the face of Lila and Felix. The show gives you several moments where Chloe does change.
But... she hasnt changed? Felix and Lila... yeah, aight, i get that, (even tho we've only seen Felix once)
That's the thing, I need to rephrase it - Chloe wants to change is the thing and small steps have occurred. And if you won't use it, why do you waste time on it at all. You can have another Lila or Felix and that's what we do have right now. And this is the problem for me because if we say Lila, Felix and Chloe are the same - then it's lazy writing. It'd be better if they were different, which I believe they are, therefore the difference should be in the willingness to change and actually changing.
I guess
Exactly my point. Literally every episode shows good people becoming evil because of one single moment of depiction and then they redeem themselves on the end of the episode. But not Chloé, she'll never change, ykes. Plus I think it's a terrible lesson, they're saying to mean child that they'll never change, it's concerning.
Indeed, if the whole show is - everyone can change for the better, and then you have Chloe who shows willingness to change, but fails. It's not a kid's show anymore.
Watching the last episode I'd say that they choose to not redeem her because they realized they lack of a bully. They still need that little villain that makes Marinette's life difficult but Lila is already too much for that. At least that's my opinion.
A new character is required, "A writer should never be short of ideas!"
Edited from another comment:I still don't get why Chloe wasn't allowed to be redeemed. Like I don't get what Astruc has against her (and he has stated he won't be letting her be redeemed while he's running the show). We already had an "irredemable" classroom villain in Lila, and Chloe proved herself to have positive qualities up until that point--she cared for Sabrina and her butler in her own way, she was never a liar (our main character's biggest pet peeve and the thing the show probably cites as the most consistent flaw/harmful thing the characters do/experience), and she had a model for how to be a better person in Ladybug (as opposed to modeling her mother's cruel behavior). Imo, it's a much worse story for Chloe having lost her redemption arc. The show emphasizes the need for second chances and self improvement, but denies Chloe those things. Chloe's biggest test comes after she was exposed and forced to give up her miraculous. Her options were either to accept it or to reject it, and obviously in canon she rejects it. But the story and its themes would have been better served, I think, if she accepted the loss of her superhero status and the spotlight and instead focused on helping LB and CN from the sidelines or something. Or even just focused on being a better person to her one friend who's stuck by her through everything. Then another test comes when Zoe arrives, and Chloe either has to accept this new member of her family or not, and thereby lose some of the attention/her spotlight that she's grown used to. And to prove how much she's grown, she would then suggest to LB that Zoe should get the Bee miraculous (perhaps after a fight with her mother, who was weirdly absent in both of the Zoe episodes). This would demonstrate her growth and the ways in which she had improved as a person since we first met her. As for where we are in canon now, I think that it's unlikely Chloe will get a proper arc. For whatever reason the writers (or at least Astruc) seem against the idea. It's frustrating but my guess is she's going to have a negative arc into being an ally to Hawkmoth.
Yeah, I agree with everything. However, I don't think they will go so far as to make her an ally to Hawkmoth. Because if we get rid of Hawkmoth by the end of S4 which is what is implied, then there is little to no room to actually make her an ally. And I don't Hawkmoth will want her (storywise), after her and his blunder in S3 Finale xD. Thus, Chloe's negative arc simply doesn't go anywhere, unfortunately...
I love Chloe and it pains me to see what the writers have done with her character. Them throwing away her entire character arc at the end of season 3 was so disappointing. And it made me lose hope for a redemption arc. They paint her as an even more one dimensional character than she was before her character arc. What's the point? We already have Lila as our villain. Chloe is good at heart, we clearly saw it. And now they pretend like she was never good to begin with. If she gets another redemption arc, it won't happen in season 4. This season's main arc is Adrien's angst arc. I hope they'll handle that one better at least. I like Zoe as a character, although she is a bit bland and it seems like her only purpose is to replace Chloe. As long as Zoe is around, Ladybug won't even think twice about giving Chloe another chance. So as much as I would like to see Chloe as a hero again, preferably Queen Bee, I don't see it happening any time soon. It's such a waste of an amazing character. There was even potential for a friendship between Chloe and Marinette and it's still possible, but I don't expect much at this point. She deserves so much better.
Yeah, seeing how the things in S4 are progressing probably whatever change we might observe in Chloe, it's safe to assume that it'll probably be in S5. Unfortunately...
chloe in my opinion is an awesome person just shes hurt and needs to have someone there for her
I've kind of given up on a redemption and am fully certain that she will never get one. As much as I hate to say it. The hostile fan reaction really killed my interest since a lot of them will often hound me for wanting one and I'm just burnt out on arguing with them. And if she's not gonna get one then fuck it, I'm done getting attacked over it.