The third option I guess - when I can trace how the character came to this. It'd be what I'm fine for if there are already setups before. The damages a villain cause isn't necessarily a measure on how evil they're, it'd be more of how powerful or competent they're. Typically anti-villainous characters would be easier to believably change due to them already having some virtues before, which is already a setup for their change. I think it'd be harder (but not impossible, except for cases below) to trace a straight villain changing by themselves as they often look down on virtue, and often media don't give convincing arguments to uphold virtue.

Though generally if a character has crossed pure evil territory in their crimes (not merely them causing huge damage, btw), it should be at best them being forced for mutual benefit if they want a teamup between them and the heroes, which'd be not actually redeemed, what I'm sick of is people treating benefitting, good outcomes, or little decency/amiable of their as being good, which is the usual move of justifying villains by over-rewarding them, and overlooking the fact that evil vs evil is a thing.

If they want to "stop" these kind of villain's threats, without killing them, it should not be them realizing and changing themselves IMO, but merely being "tamed" and thus retired, or at the very least, due to outside influence like no past memories (e.g. Sougo remaking Time Jacker's life from scratch). Inversely, it'd not be a redemption if a character is only evil due to outside influence, like being brainwashed, such as berserk forms, they never did anything wrong even if they'd feel regret for it.

This'd be probably a wild assumption about you, but I sometimes can have thought that you'd want for all villains, of any kind, to get changed, because it can seem to me that in KR you prioritize paragons (e.g. most main Riders) changing and developing people around them for the better, and if you didn't get that, you'd blame the "supposed" paragon instead, because everyone is capable of change without exceptions. At least coming from you disagreeing with Ryuki's ending of it negating the changes happened to the Riders even if it'd revert the countless Rider War victims, but media often depicting mercy for a room of change as letting villains go, also gives a vibe of prioritizing change over the safety of people - it's worth the cost of to make them change no matter how long it is... I'd want to know more regarding redemptions you won't agree with, but other than those done in shows you dislike (Gaim, Revice) - I thought by this before you may not rank Geats above Zero-One with you listing 2 of latter's examples below.

The reason you'd disagree with Micchy's redemption is because of the sheer crimes he committed? (I do think that he can fit pure evil too, but I'd be actually fine if they leave them being subdued at the end of ep. 46, rather than resolution at ep. 47) Or because there'd be other reason? (I'd hope you can be objective on this, regardless of it being Gaim) Because Gai's crimes rival Micchy's in scale with practically zero positive traits (like Ryoma) to 'balance'. Gai has corporate sabotage, conspiracy, genocide, vandalism, treason, abuse, incrimination, obstruction of justice, brainwashing, torture, terrorism, and the 1843 complaints involving age spoofing, faking reasons of absence, illegal auction bidding, illicit sales, misappropriation of company finances for personal benefit, plagiarizing technology, ossession of a fake bank account, sexual/moral harassment, tax evasion, etc.

I wonder how'd you refer (other than Evolt fighting Killbus) to Kuroto (True Ending or Another Ending's Zombie Survival) or Masamune's (pleading for Kiriya to stop Kuroto) last seen actions. There are enough people who point out Kuroto wasn't redeemed and Daichi should be given similar treatment (he's the type to only do good for benefit by then too). The only change would be him treating the Jamatos better, and done for plot irony in Riders being now the threats and Jamatos being defenders - perhaps the equivalent can be Kuroto treating Poppy better and shielded her from an attack.

The regretful part is shown in him apologizing to others with a bow.... "Ark would kill me too" sounds like characters like Kuroto which actually never repented - and what would make sense more and likely less hated tbh.

Even if he'd prefer force Riders out, he'd not bat an eye if Riders died in his pursuit of goals (like Shirowe), including if he directly throws them under the bus (Keiwa, Ace, Niramu), if it can get closer to his plans. Before he'd also have no qualms murdering Neon because she was infected (he'd also wish her dead after she got cured) which carries over in how he approaches the phase 2 Jamatos. Though Ace's real circumstances behind his wishes manages to have him gradually let go of his worldview, it's not that what Michinaga did was what's necessary and needed, but it was him being blinded by his cynicism, to be so caught up in his negative bias, always assuming the worst in others and doing what "needs" to be done. Cynicism isn't the sensible approach people make it out to be (often being lauded over idealism), it's a dogmatic and narrow-minded view with unearned sense of superiority that leads to laziness, negligence, cruelty and callousness, even if you mean well.

Can't be redeemed if they have never done wrong/bad things before. Reversible outcomes or not doesn't make something not bad (e.g. being stopped at attempted murder won't make them innocent). If they've been bad before by their own volition, they'd be redeemed if they realize they're wrong and want to change for good.

It's maybe because he's in better place than the actual main cast, getting his Driver back, has multiple Thousers, and being in overall steady place, by comparison to the main protagonists (or even other former villains) - MetsubouJinrai.net are all killed, Fuwa is possibly dead, Yua can't henshin and likely loses Fuwa, and Aruto likely has his efforts and visions crushed by Lyon's victory.

Fuwa's implanted false memories were done because of Gai and even if they were real, the event that would have lead up to them would still be Gai's fault, Aruto losing his Humagear parent happened due to Gai's shenanigans iirc, Yua was clearly extremely unhappy working under him while having the chip in her head to force her obedience (plus the implication of her being a victim of sexual harassment exists), Jin, Horobi and Ikazuchi would have never become evil if Gai didn't have an absurd reaction to having a strict father which ended up with him in a massive position of wealth and power, I don't remember Naki's deal off the top of my head but he/they was used as part of Fuwa's false memories and I think Eden or Lucifer's wife died due to infected nanomachines which of course, Gai was to blame for them getting infected.

Fuwa and Yua have good reason to doubt his sincerity as I already explained and although I haven't seen the post series stuff so this is clearly just how it sounds to me, but Gai is wealthy so it seems to me that when starting a new company, he was in a significantly better shape than Aruto was when Gai forced him out of Hiden Industries. Getting infected by Dan the Man is fucking hilarious though and I welcome it, he does seem to actively be trying to atone but everything he did feels waaaay too big to ever make up for in his lifetime.

Also, bringing up Kuroto is interesting here, he doesn't really *have* a redemption arc and is pretty much held on to a leash by the heroes, who still very much don't like him, while also holding a grudge against his dad which might have been a good motivator for him to be with the heroes for a while. I think the key difference is that while Kuroto technically had noble intentions if I remember correctly, he never really gets this redemption arc but is still a total dickweed the entire time whereas Gai has been a massive asshole only to turn to the camera and go "waaah my dad was strict so I'm not evil anymore". I can guarantee that Gai would have been more popular if he just stayed a villain the entire time, instead they pulled a Gangrel and nobody likes it when that happens lmao, haven't seen post series Ex-Aid stuff either so I don't know all the details that well tbf



I agree that what Michinaga did was undeniably bad, the guy himself agrees that he's a hypocrite in that regard but that's part of why he's so interesting to me, he does a lot of bad shit to achieve his goal but it doesn't seem like he gets any enjoyment out of it outside of wanting to wipe Ace's smug smile off his face as he could not beat him, Michinaga did what he felt was needed even though he clearly got quite a few people killed because of his actions, I think the reason he feels particularly bad about getting Sara killed because by then, he found out there was another way beyond having like, a large scale trolley problem. Personally, I would have added a scene of Michinaga breaking down after realizing just how much he screwed up and added to people's suffering just because he hadn't realized sooner that another way was possible but I'm also a sucker for "My god, what have I done?" Shit being done right lol. Fantastic writeup, I could not have written that better myself

Well, Asakura doesn't look happy either. And the king from Kiva rampaged with a sad, offended face, and the recent Akaishi in the end turned out to be an unhappy lonely man (although before that he smiled like the Joker), and even in Geats Girori himself does not seem particularly happy. The suffering villain is a fairly common type.

Sorry, can you explain the difference between the third and fourth options in the poll?

The third option is when the audience sees the villain's path to the light side. That is, the viewers sees when he begins to doubt, sees why, sees changes in him and that very transition. But at the same time, all this can only happen in the character?s head and he may not interfere in events or continue to play the role of an antagonist before fully became good. The fourth is about actions. The character apologizes, helps, saves people. What is in his head in this version is secondary, because everything is in plain sight.

No offense but I think there has to be a deliberate attempt at media illiteracy here if you're comparing someone who kills because he enjoys killing people without a shred of regret other than not being able to kill the man he wants to violently murder out of revenge as he's a violent sociopath to someone who did what he thought was needed to save the world and was deeply upset at causing another death after finding another way. Girori wanted Kamen Riders to be virtuous heroes and was upset by Geats not fitting his vision of an ideal Kamen Rider while also constantly winning which risked making his show boring, meaning he saw Geats as a threat to his business. These examples aren't very comparable

Same this and the fact him and Kuroto never really face any repercussions for their actions is why I Didn't like either of it

Even when I want a character to receive a redemption arc and it actually happens, that doesn't necessarily mean I'll agree with the execution. Like, I already explained about Mutsuki and there's an even worse example with Aguilera. You're right that I appreciate the true heroes who help to change people for the better and thus expect them to honestly represent the values they preach. However, I've come to realize that sometimes there are people who the hero cannot change no matter how hard they try, as some people are okay with being villains and don't want to change. Regarding my Reiwa Rider Ranking, redemption arcs aren't the only criteria for my enjoyment of a show. Saber and Geats get a big advantage simply for not having a Work Competition arc.

Motive is important. I know you don't put much stake in tragic backstories, but I believe they can be used to gain insight in to a person's actions and how to potentially redeem them. So, while Gai and Mitsuzane both have a ridiculously long list of crimes, I can sympathize with Gai due to seeing how he ended up like that and the moral he needed to learn from his past so that he could turn his life around. He felt pressured to live up to his father's impossible 1000% expectations and didn't realize how much he lost touch with his morality until it was too late. Now, Mitsuzane's motive, on the other hand, is Mai. He may not be the only yandere in the franchise, but even Kusaka (Happy Kaixa Day!) would draw the line at sacrificing humanity since he canonically only ever kills Orphenochs.

I'd refer to Kuroto as an antivillain and Masamune as a villain. While Kuroto does engage in petty behavior, like infecting Emu for sending fanmail, he was serious about saving Sakurako and helped to create the cure to revive the Bugster victims, albeit using means that were too extreme and not without consequence, as Kiriya points out that Jungo's suicide is something that Kuroto cannot undo. Masamune is much more depraved though, as he showed no remorse for deleting Saki's data as punishment and probably only sided with Kiriya out of spite for his son.

I mean, Gai is a very young-looking 45 year-old, so you might be underestimating his longevity.

I'm aware, but even if he was just as rich and powerful in his early 20's it wouldn't matter as again, he's done too much wrong for such a cheap redemption arc and he got Gangrel'ed which is a shame, I hated him when the show was airing but because he was such a fantastic villain that was able to make everyone in the fandom agree he's a massive asshole but for such a barebones tragic backstory that honestly doesn't explain jack shit as to why he did what he did. I can understand having a childhood filled with immense pressure like that can be very mentally damaging but it just doesn't make sense to me to have a character like that nearly wipe out the entire planet

Then there is still Akaishi, who believed that submitting to Giff was the only way to save humanity. Moreover, his position is even more justified, because it has worked for centuries.
By the way, even if it?s off topic: it seemed to me that all Girori?s chatter about saving the world was empty chatter to lure more heroic guys into the show. That is, Hotaro or Eiji would most likely refuse to participate in the DGP because they have nothing to write on a piece of paper for wishes, but they would definitely take part in saving the world. However, many viewers, and the show itself, judging by the final episodes, take his words at face value. Maybe it's a cultural difference, but it doesn't work for me.How can one admire the heroism of the riders if they are essentially playing in the sandbox he created? How can you call them ?saviors of the world? if the main threat to this world is your game? That is, by allowing Dapan to participate, Girori literally personally added the option of the apocalypse to the list of options for the final of the DGP. So for me, his speeches about the heroism of the riders are the same as admiration for animals from a poacher.