Serenity (The Operative)

[Sinewmire]

I'd been wondering. If Malcolm Reynolds is the textbook example of Chaotic Good, then what is The Operative, his opponent in the movie?

At first I thought "Lawful Evil". He operates within the Alliance, and he is a self admitted monster. However, due to his status - without Rank of name, and near limitless authority - is he really Lawful?

Can you enforce law without using it?

Is he really Evil, too? He does kill children, but his motives are sound, though his faith may be misplaced. Personally I think he is, but it's an interesting discussion.

I'd invite your opinions.

Discuss!

(I think this belongs here, rather than, say the Movies section, because it involves DnD mechanics. Feel free to move it, nice mr/s moderator/s)

[Nerd-o-rama]

He commits Evil deeds for Lawful ends. That's the inverse of your typical Lawful Evil character, but I think it fits just fine.

And incidentally, just to provoke more arguing, in my book Mal was Chaotic Neutral until the events of the movie. He had a good heart, but let self-interest rule him too much until he finally snapped at the destruction of Book's settlement.

[hamishspence]

not everyone likes idea of discussing alignment of any character, fictional or otherwise, saying its too restricting. I do though.

The Operative "Evil, but for a good cause" He admits to being "a monster" in the movie itself.

Champions of Ruin had several generic descriptions, from "I Am Not Evil" "There Is No Evil" "Driven To Evil" "Better To Reign In Hell Than Serve In Heaven"

For him, best might be "The Ends Justify The Means"

[ocato]

I firmly believe that the Operative is LE. He's a lawful evil monk/rogue and a character I've really been wanting to make.

[hamishspence]

Complete Scoundrel places Mal Reynolds as CG. However, that might be the Serenity version.

EDIT: It also places Captain Jack Sparrow as CN, and Riddick as CE, for comparison.

[Mr.Bookworm]

Mal is most certainly Chaotic Neutral.

He does try to do good, but remember that entire scene where he kicked a man off their craft to leave him to the tender mercies of the Reavers, rather than abandoning their loot?

The Operative is Neutral Evil, I'd say. He's willing to do anything to achieve his ends, be it Good, Evil, Lawful, or Chaotic.

[hamishspence]

yes- maybe complete scoundrel was a bit over-generous with some alignments. It does put Han as True Neutral though (probably as of when you meet him in first movie)

[horngeek]

When Mal first appears in the TV show (Firefly) during a sequence of the Browncoat War, he is LG, as he is considerate of his men, goes out of his way to help them, and is working as a soldier.

For the rest of Firefly, he is CN, as he is a smuggler, and is really just trying to make his own way. However, he has leanings towards CG, as several times, we see him going out of his way to defend somone where many people would just walk away. The same applies at the start of Serenity.

By the end of Serenity, he is CG, as he has gone out of his way to do an act, not because it will benefit him, but because people need to know the truth. The chaotic part is the "I aim to misbehave".

[Kurald Galain]

The straitjacket of alignment really doesn't fit with the moral ambiguities of Firefly.

[Magnor Criol]

I dunno...I can see a strong argument for Lawful Neutral for the Operative.

He does evil things, yes, but he also recognized times when good things needed to be done - for instance, the climactic stand-down order at the end of the movie.

Then there's the guy he killed at the beginning of the movie; yes, he killed him, but he didn't really want to; he just needed to, as part of his duty. He had to execute his duty, which meant he had to execute that man. He did it in the most honorable, straightforward way he could.

Yes, he broke laws, but being Lawful isn't really about following all the laws, and being Chaotic isn't about breaking them. It's following a code of discipline, a personal standard, whatever you want to call it - it's an ordered, standard, predictable way of behaving. And he definitely did that. He's definitely Lawful.

He had a directive, and he carried it out, even when it made him do things he didn't entirely want to do or things he wouldn't have done 'normally'. He subsumed his entire being, personality, and will into his job as the Operative - he was damn near a robot, really.

I'd say he's a ruthless LN, somewhat close to the edge of LE.

Mal, meanwhile, I'd say is pretty much split between CN and CG. He looks out for his team almost as much as he just looks out for himself, and the things he does usually tie in to one of those two facets.

[hamishspence]

Evil done for altruistic reasons is still evil, if you take Exalted Deeds approach. If you consider altruism can raise a normally Evil deed to Neutral (which BoED definitely doesn't) only then would he be more Neutral than evil.

EDIT: BoED does prize altruism, to the extend that normally Good deeds done for purely selfish reasons are defined as Neutral, but, its "No amount of Good motives can make an Evil deed Neutral" approach, is pretty much the only way to avoid "Anything is OK done for The Greater Good" moral relativism.

[Nerd-o-rama]

He does evil things, yes, but he also recognized times when good things needed to be done - for instance, the climactic stand-down order at the end of the movie.

Yeah, but only because he'd had the crap beaten out of him by the hero and then shown the error of his ways. The entire movie up to that point he had been firmly for eradicating River and anyone associated with her.

Realizing that his evil deeds had accomplished no good was the beginning of his path to LGness. Maybe.

[hamishspence]

yes, seems possibly more ruthless than Dredd, who is famously LN at best.

[chiasaur11]

I'd put Mal under good most of the time.

I mean, he's barely able to keep enough money in the coffers for food and fuel most of the time, yet he runs free jobs for the needy.

Don't get me wrong, he'd like to be CN, but his conscience won't let him pull it for long.

[ocato]

At the end of Serenty, the operative loses his faith in the law and the perfect world that would be created with it. His ruthlessness and devotion go out the window and you're left with a sort of shell of a man. I'd say that after the experience, he's True Neutral. Now, if there is something else to be added concerning his future actions (canon sources) then I would be willing to say he went LG or in another direction. As it stood at the end of the movie, he had and was nothing.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Mal as of the war-NG. He was doing everything he could to help his men, but he doesn't seem particularly Lawful or Chaotic.

Mal as of Firefly-CN with CG leanings. He looks out for him and his, everyone else can go to hell, and he takes more offense for insults to his people than insults to him, but don't forget the result of the train job.

Mal as of Serenity-decidedly CN, he's good when he can afford to be, but he'd rather dump an innocent than the haul needed to keep his ship flying. I say he stayed CN throughout, too. He went after Miranda due to anger over Book's death, and while he took huge risks getting the data out, I view that as not indicative of real shift, just a return of the CG leanings throughout the show. He does the right thing when he can afford to or when the need is overwhelming, but looks out for his crew and himself otherwise.

The Operative-LN. He wants nothing more than a perfect world, and he'll do whatever he has to to do it. He commits Evil acts for noble reasons, and does so with a personal code and a true sorrow over the acts. He's TN by the end, remember his "empty shell" comments. And yes, definitely a Monk.

[The_Snark]

I'm not sure why so many people are advocating a neutral alignment for the Operative. Just because he has an altruistic goal in mind and regrets the need for killing innocents doesn't make the fact that he planned to kill that many people in cold blood less of an evil act.

The thing (that we see) which really pushes him over the line was his plan to flush out Mal by ordering the extermination of everybody known to associate with them. Sure, a lot of those people were probably criminals, and some of them might have even merited death sentences by Alliance law, but others might have only been guilty of harboring fugitives. It really didn't matter to him what they'd done; all that mattered was that he could use their deaths to get closer to his objective. It is a thoroughly evil act, and while he regrets the need for it, he would still do it again if necessary, and the way he regards himself makes you think that this is more or less standard operating procedure for him.

He is, essentially, already at the bottom of the slippery slope that is the End Justifies the Means philosophy: he's willing to accept absolutely anything that furthers his goal of a perfect world.

[Ascension]

I support Mal as CN with a slight good inclination and The Operative as LN with a slight evil inclination.

I still say alignment is largely useless when dealing with antiheroes, though.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

He is, essentially, already at the bottom of the slippery slope that is the End Justifies the Means philosophy: he's willing to accept absolutely anything that furthers his goal of a perfect world.

But his goals are LG, even if his means are LE. That says neutral to me. Of course, I firmly believe the ends justify the means, and that if you're not willing to consider what the final results of your acts will be, you're not making the right decisions.

[Leewei]

Mal is a great exemplar of CG. If his ship doesn't fly, he and his crew are as good as dead. He's as kind to most folks that circumstances allow him to be. The exception is authority figures. At the end of The Train Job, he returned the medicine and put himself at risk of capture to save the town. He may occasionally do some questionable or even downright nasty things, but he's largely doing them under extreme circumstances due to his fairly extreme career choice.

The Operative was categorically Lawful Evil. He referred to himself as a monster, clearly killed or worse for a living, and had little remorse for his actions as they were done in the name of the greater good. He served the system, and while he certainly violated many laws in doing so, he had a rigorous code of behavior. He also held himself accountable to those he served. Ultimately, if he did commit unlawful acts of mayhem, it was due to overriding duty. Very Lawful; very Evil.

[Weezer]

I think that the Operative is LN but straying dangerously close to LE. What I think is keeping him from LE is that when he learned of the extent of the Alliances involvement with the Reavers he allows Mal to escape and becomes disillusioned with the alliances ability to create "a world without sin"

[Cathaidan]

At the end of Serenty, the operative loses his faith in the law and the perfect world that would be created with it. His ruthlessness and devotion go out the window and you're left with a sort of shell of a man. I'd say that after the experience, he's True Neutral. Now, if there is something else to be added concerning his future actions (canon sources) then I would be willing to say he went LG or in another direction. As it stood at the end of the movie, he had and was nothing.

See, I always viewed this scene from a different angle. What if the operative wasn't ordered to destroy River? I mean, that's what the Blue Hand guys are all about. I always thought that the operative knew the entire time about the Reavers and his orders were to stop River from letting anyone know the truth. When only the crew of Serenity could know the truth, then they all have to die but once the signal was sent out to everyone, there's nothing the Operative could do at that point. Killing the crew of Serenity no longer furthered his ideal of a perfect world, so he let them go.

[Nerd-o-rama]

But his goals are LG, even if his means are LE. That says neutral to me. Of course, I firmly believe the ends justify the means, and that if you're not willing to consider what the final results of your acts will be, you're not making the right decisions.

You can be Lawful Evil with Lawful Good intentions. You don't get alignment by averaging your actions and your intent.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

You can be Lawful Evil with Lawful Good intentions. You don't get alignment by averaging your actions and your intent.

But actions cannot be evaluated in a vacuum. What he intended to happen because of his actions is just as important. He was attempting to create a perfect world that would make everyone's lives better. Yes, his acts were evil, but he was attempting to help everyone at the expense of a few. Not necessarily Palpentine here.

[MeklorIlavator]

See, I always viewed this scene from a different angle. What if the operative wasn't ordered to destroy River? I mean, that's what the Blue Hand guys are all about. I always thought that the operative knew the entire time about the Reavers and his orders were to stop River from letting anyone know the truth. When only the crew of Serenity could know the truth, then they all have to die but once the signal was sent out to everyone, there's nothing the Operative could do at that point. Killing the crew of Serenity no longer furthered his ideal of a perfect world, so he let them go.

Then why does he refer to himself as a broken man afterwards? If he knew about it beforehand then there would be no reason for him to change. Also, I believe that in one of the comics, he is ordered to take up the task after the Blue hand men fail.

[Gray Jester]

But actions cannot be evaluated in a vacuum. What he intended to happen because of his actions is just as important. He was attempting to create a perfect world that would make everyone's lives better. Yes, his acts were evil, but he was attempting to help everyone at the expense of a few. Not necessarily Palpentine here.

True, but on the other hand, I would agree with the people who say he is LE. Just because his intentions are good does not make his actions any better, and he is willing to order entire villages of innocents (Shep. Book's place) wiped out simply to further his goals. That's definitely evil, I see nothing neutral about it, even if he has the best intentions in the world.

[Mewtarthio]

See, I always viewed this scene from a different angle. What if the operative wasn't ordered to destroy River? I mean, that's what the Blue Hand guys are all about. I always thought that the operative knew the entire time about the Reavers and his orders were to stop River from letting anyone know the truth. When only the crew of Serenity could know the truth, then they all have to die but once the signal was sent out to everyone, there's nothing the Operative could do at that point. Killing the crew of Serenity no longer furthered his ideal of a perfect world, so he let them go.

I disagree. Look at his face when he watches the transmission. That's not the face of a man thinking, "Oh, crap, looks like I lose." He's clearly horrified by what he sees.

But actions cannot be evaluated in a vacuum. What he intended to happen because of his actions is just as important. He was attempting to create a perfect world that would make everyone's lives better. Yes, his acts were evil, but he was attempting to help everyone at the expense of a few. Not necessarily Palpentine here.

Actions alone cannot be evaluated in a vaccuum, true, and some morally questionable acts may get a reprieve if your intentions are pure, but The Operative goes too far. The man slaughters civilians simply to draw out his target. He intentionally promotes an atmosphere of terror because he thinks it'll work out in the long run. Sure, he may not be as evil as Palpatine, but Palpatine's pretty far down the Evil spectrum. Where do you draw the line?

[ShneekeyTheLost]

The majority of the people the Operative killed are, at best, shady semi-legal cyndacites, and more commonly, outright outlaws themselves. Hell, just doing business with Mal means skirting the unpleasant side of the law. So the Operative ordered executions of criminals, how is this an evil act?

He is the quintessential example of Lawful Neutral. Good and evil do not concern him. Following his orders does. He has the strength of conviction to do what is necessary to stop something which could completely destroy the governing body of the entire known galaxy. Hell, he skirted evil a whole lot less than many Paladins in games where they were trying to 'save the world'.

His task was not a simple one, but the orders were straightforward: Capture or kill River Tam, the fate of the galaxy rests on your sucessful completion of this mission.

[chiasaur11]

The majority of the people the Operative killed are, at best, shady semi-legal cyndacites, and more commonly, outright outlaws themselves. Hell, just doing business with Mal means skirting the unpleasant side of the law. So the Operative ordered executions of criminals, how is this an evil act?

He is the quintessential example of Lawful Neutral. Good and evil do not concern him. Following his orders does. He has the strength of conviction to do what is necessary to stop something which could completely destroy the governing body of the entire known galaxy. Hell, he skirted evil a whole lot less than many Paladins in games where they were trying to 'save the world'.

His task was not a simple one, but the orders were straightforward: Capture or kill River Tam, the fate of the galaxy rests on your sucessful completion of this mission.

He murdered a monastery planet, complete with innocent children.

If that isn't evil...

[ShneekeyTheLost]

He murdered a monastery planet, complete with innocent children.

If that isn't evil...

They were harboring known fugatives. They had been given information which let them KNOW the Law was out after them, and still they harbored and sheltered them. At the very least, this makes them accomplises, and outlaw themselves.

It is a shame that the mostly evil army got a bit too... entheusastic... about following orders... really they should have let the children survive and placed them in orphanages after killing all the criminally culpable individuals engaged in an act of Treason... but they do tend to get carried away sometimes, and it's not like we could have told them WHY they were sent out, now could we?