Don't You Think Light Yagami and Walter White Are Similar?

They're almost one in the same. One could argue that the character of Walter White drew inspiration from Death Note.

• Both were deeply tragic anti-heroes with sympathetic intentions who gradually became villains as the series progressed.
• Both were able to outsmart law enforcement for long periods of time.
• Both were ruthless, highly intelligent sociopaths who manipulated the people around them and used murder to further their goals.
• Both had family members who were police officers, and they're family members pursued them as well.
• Both had aliases to hide their true identity.: Walt had "Heisenberg" and Light had "Kira".

Do you think they are the same? Tell me what you think.

Neither are anti-heroes.

How do you figure?

Because an anti-hero is a flawed hero. These characters are in no way, heroes. Both were insanely selfish, and decidedly evil men with way too much ego. Nothing they did was for good. Light did it to become a god and White did it to build an empire for himself. They both used 'good' intentions as excuses for their pursuit of power. They both are about as bad as bad gets.

An anti-hero is a main character who lacks heroic qualities, they don't even necessarily have to be "good guys". The same way an anti-villian is an antagonist with who has heroic qualities and good intentions, but just goes about them the wrong way. Their initial intentions were good: Walter wanted to protect his family, but eventually got sucked into the world of the drug trade to the point that he only looked out for himself. Light wanted to make the world a better place by killing criminals, but the power went to his head and drove him crazy.

Sure, if you want to use the classical definition of anti-hero. But that is getting into semantics and if that's your game, then I'll pass, as the conversation had soured into something uninteresting.

Walter and Light both used 'good intentions' as excuses to do the evil they had wanted to do. Walter admitted as much and Tsugumi has stated as much for Light. It was all about power, not doing good.

So you're basically just going to ignore my entire argument, and say its "getting into semantics"? Gotcha.

As you can see, I actually addressed your counter-argument. But if you are going to just piss and moan about me not using the classical definition of the term, then yeah, I guess I should ignore future replies towards me.

No, you repeated the same thing you said before and disregarded everything I said. That is the actual definition of an anti-hero, and I don't see why using it is unethical.

I repeated it because you obviously didn't take those facts into consideration. And the common use of the term has effectively replaced the classic definition. No need to cry over it, I am not even interested in talking about it. If you want to call them anti-heroes, fine. By your definition, any main character that is not the ideal hero is an anti-hero, up to and including outright villains. We live in a time where we have much more specific definitions for characters. These two do not fit the current use of the term, 'anti-hero'.

Also, both had monkiers used to identify their criminal selves. Kira and Heisenberg respectively. You should add that one in.

1. That is your definition of an anti-hero, and you cannot prove that this is a widely accepted definition; therefore it is an invalid argument. Who do I believe more, you or the actual dictionary? Nobody is crying about anything and you're getting all mad for no reason, chill out.

2. If you noticed, I did say in the OP that both were villains; although they started out as anti-heroes. Walt went into the drug trade with the intention of securing his family's future after his death, he did not go in with the intention of looking out for himself although that eventually became his goal later on.

Never thought to compare them but they are kinda similar.

I understand the debate about Light, I mean the guy did see himself as a god. Walt though? I don't see the debate, I saw him as an anti-hero up until the point he poisoned Brock to get Jesse to turn on Gus.

Probably should add that.

Actually, I can. Look it up, it's on the internet.

Tell you what, I was wrong. I, as an English minor, have no clue what I am talking about. You are the most correct person in the universe and we would all do better to worship you and study your posts for ages. There. Feel better? Can you move on now, knowing that I have admitted defeat to your greatness?

Additionally, I found an article that was published about you. Please honor me by reading it.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/new-report-confirms-you-are-most-interesting-most,34857/?ref=auto

Yea, you're clearly just trolling and I'm gonna leave you alone.

It wasn't trolling. I got the impression that you legitimately needed to be right about something I repeatedly informed you that I had no interest in discussing. Even after I told you I wanted to drop it, you persisted. So the next logical step is that you needed me to admit defeat before you could move on. The article was supposed to merely inform you on what you likely already knew; that you are the most important person in the universe and no one should ever question you. I was wrong to use the more common use of a phrase. I am horribly embarrassed for even questioning your logic. What a fool I am.

I know I said I'd leave you alone, but I felt the need to respond to this. I don't believe you are right, and I'm simply debating your opinion not because I think you are stupid and I'm smart; but because [shocker] I disagree with you. There are plenty of flawed heroes, who aren't considered anti-heroes. Batman is a manipulative, neurotic, and cold-hearted dick; but he is considered a hero. Ironman is an arrogant and narcissistic jerk, but he is considered a hero. Meaning the dictionary definition is the correct definition.

Even after I have expressed a 100% lack of interest in the discussion you want to have, even after admitting that I was a fool for questioning your godly nature, even after you yourself have said you were going to drop the issue, you still feel the need to have the discussion... I can only pray for mercy on my soul at this point.

They're almost one in the same. One could argue that the character of Walter White drew inspiration from Death Note.

• Both were deeply tragic anti-heroes with sympathetic intentions who gradually became villains as the series progressed.

How is Walter an anti-hero? He cooked Meth and killed a lot of people. He had dozens of chances to leave the industry to do better by his family AFTER he raised the money to cure his cancer and he stayed in it. And Light had a God complex who killed criminals for a high. Neither can ever be considered anything with the word hero in it.

• Both were able to outsmart law enforcement for long periods of time.

So is Batman. Are they similar to Batman?

• Both were ruthless, highly intelligent sociopaths who manipulated the people around them and used murder to further their goals.

Welcome to the underworld of drug trafficking and mobsters. Also, Walter wasn't a sociopath.

• Both had family members who were police officers, and they're family members pursued them as well.

Family drama makes for good story. But that's one.

• Both had aliases to hide their true identity.: Walt had "Heisenberg" and Light had "Kira".

Well, I guess by this argument they're superheroes too. Or super villains too.

• Do you think they are the same? Tell me what you think.

They're nothing similar and I doubt the creator of Breaking Bad even knows what Death Note is.

1. Because they were the main characters of their respective series but lacked heroic qualities.

2. Batman isn't a villain, and I don't see the point you're trying to make here.

3. I would consider him to be one. He was fearless, lied to people, rarely showed remorse for his actions, and he manipulated his family and Jesse.

4. Yep

5. No they aren't

6. They pretty much are.