Is Sweeney a hero or a villain? Any thoughts? I can't decide, I keep going back and forth. I understand why he does what he does, but still, he is murdering mostly innocent people...Opinions?
(PS: Michale Cerveris' take on "The Barber and His Wife" is pure genius.)
Featured Actor Joined: 1/8/06
He is neither. He is a man who was wrongfully accused his initial plot for revenge is ruined as he slowly loses his mind. He is so obsessed with killing the judge that he doesn't understand what is going on. in the song "Johanna" in the second act, it shows how he is numb to everything around him, all he thinks about is killing the judge. He doesn't care about Mrs. Lovett and he even loses his love for Johanna, he just wants to kill the judge and everyone at the end of the show gets in his way. When he kills the begger woman and when he realizes what he has done he is brought back to reality.
hmmm - I have a slightly different take on it. Is he a "hero" in the sense that Superman is, no, he's not. However, he is CLEARLY the protagonist of the piece. If you then look at Judge Turpin as his antagonist, and no one would argue that Turpin is a villain, then by that sense, yes, he is a hero.
(Bit of a logical mind game, but there it is...)
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/20/04
Mrs. Lovett is the villain of the piece.
He's an anti-hero.
Personally, I feel that every person in the show has flaws.
Sweeney: Kills people.
Lovett: Alows him to.
Pirelli: Blackmails
Tobias: Kills Sweeney, though a good cause, still a murder.
Judge: Pervert.
Beadle: Goes along with the Judge's plan to take Johanna and Lucy.
Anthony: Helps Johanna to run away, once again for a good cause, but ultimately a bad deed.
As you can see, no one is good, no one is bad, everyone is human with faults.
I disagree that Mrs. Lovett is the villain. Again, in a broader sense, in another piece, both she and Sweeney would CLEARLY be considered villains. In THIS piece, in this world, though, Sweeney is definitely the protagonist. Mrs. Lovett is not working against him, and therefore CAN'T be the villain.
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/16/05
I personally believe Anthony to be the only innocent one at the end of the show. They are all murderers, perverts, blackmailers, corrupt people. Even Johanna is a murderer, no matter how justified or necessary.
I find Anthony to still be the only naive, pure one left of the whole bunch. Which is always fun cause how many shows can you have with So many bad people who are VERY likable. I like everyone of them. To make so many guilty people have an appeal is what I find captivating and adds to the shows touch
Re: Johanna, is it still murder if it's in self defense? I don't think it is....
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/16/05
You don't need to shoot to kill...or in this case stab him to death
Lovett is DEFINITELY portrayed as the villain in the new revival.
I haven't seen the new production - in the past ones I've seen she's always shot Fogg as he was about to shoot her. Pure self defense. And really, I doubt she was thinking, "hmm, better shoot him in the legs just to be sure..." I doubt anyone would rule her as guilty of murder if she was brought up on charges for it.
Then again, she really is the only person in the show OTHER than Sweeney to kill someone, isn't she? The beadle kills a bird, but that doesn't count...
As sumofallthings said, Sweeney Todd is an anti-hero. The main character of the piece who we are drawn to root for despite their lack of any "heroic" quality.
I think it is far to simple to refer to every killing in the show as "murder."
Wickedgeek, certainly everyone has flaws, but I think there is far more to the judge's villainy than being a pervert. He misuses his power, rapes, and has predatory incestuous desires.
And Anthony "helping Johanna run away" how is that a "bad deed"?
jasonf, Lovett is the one who takes Sweeney's obsession with revenge and warps it for own ends, ultimately causing the deaths of many innocent people and perpetuating many of the subsequent events.
Although it is very difficult to argue that anyone other than Judge Turpin is THE VILLAIN.
The show is interested in exploring obsession and desire and the depths to which we will sink to fulfill those desires. Every character is effected in some way by their own obsessions.
Even Anthony is not free from this, I have never seen his obsession with Johanna as "pure."
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/1/05
jason- Johanna, Sweeney, and Tobias all kill...
Plus, there are other way to be evil besides murder..
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/16/05
In my eyes, and what I believe, a Christians eyes, murder is murder no matter how you look at it. She is still guilty as sin at the end of the show. Not saying shes damned to hell for it, especially her mental state at the time and what the circumstances were around it. But still, by the end of the show I believe all but 1 have committed dastardly acts
I believe Anthony is good at heart. He tries to get her away from the evil perverted Judge. He was doing the right thing. He didn't know she belonged to Sweeney, so he saw no wrong with trying to take her away.
While you may see it that way, it is certainly not a long standing "Christian" notion.
Circumstances are very important, and the implication made in the show is that Fogg has been horribly mistreating the inmates in the asylum, there are vast extenuating circumstances involved.
I do not believe that Johanna is "innocent" but I think there are far more shades that need to be taken into account than, "murder is murder."
Ljay, I really have no idea what the problem is with Anthony taking her away. She should not have been confined with Sweeney or with the Judge.
What I do see is that he has his own notions of controlling and confining her, and that his obsession with her freedom is not just for her, but also to fulfill his own desires.
I actually forgot about Toby....yeah, I guess that counts too :)
And of course there are other ways than murder to be evil - Turpin CERTAINLY is evil and he doesn't actually kill anyone.
I think we need to actually DEFINE villain. If you go to dictionary.com, the first two definitions are:
1 A wicked or evil person; a scoundrel.
2 A dramatic or fictional character who is typically at odds with the hero.
OK, so Lovett might fit the first (so does Sweeney), but she does NOT fit the second, as Turpin does.
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/16/05
Sorry, but thats just how I look at it. The most tyrannical dictator still deserves life, well maybe not deserves, but certainly not death. In my belief, I see God as being the only true power that has such power to do so. Otherwise, I see it as an offense, but we should have no say in taking life, no matter how cruel the person is. However a life behind bars never hurt anyone who doesn't mind slaughtering mass amounts of people without losing sleep.
My point is, I just can't justify something like that and not feel there was something else to be done
Again, what about self defense? Do you not see that as justifiable in that case?
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/16/05
I certainly would have to side with the defensive person, but still I can't help thinking that I would never be able to get over doing something like that.
In second grade, I remember when exactly it was I came to stick with this thought, I precisely remember hearing in religion class "Murderers go to Hell". Immediately I panicked and asked "What if your familys house was being robbed and you had to protect your family?" and she said "There are no excuses, it still counts"
I guess that left an indelible mark on me ever since and I have since come to accept that it is what I truly believe
And to actually make some relevance in this whole thread, I will say that I believe the Judge is the antagonist of the show and is the true villian. After all, Lovetts only terrible deed was jealousy, lust, and deceit. Who hasnt partaken in one of those three to get what they want? It is human nature. Although that makes it no more forgiveable, it still is more acceptable, whereas Turpins actions are just strictly criminal
C is for Company, I actually agree with you, although I have serious reservations with the idea of equating such feelings with "Christian Values."
Yet I also see it as an affront for us to judge others for their actions especially when we have not been in the situation. Therefore I agree that Johanna is not innocent, but I must stop short of calling what she did "murder." For me the importance is in the distinction and not imposing or own morality onto others.
Is it possible that something else could be done? Maybe, but we do not actually know that there was another choice.
(In case anyone else is reading this, I fully realize these characters are ficticious and have no "choice" yet it is an interesting exercise. Of course that is another matter, is the character damned because the Gods of their universe (Sondheim and Wheller) deemed them to do the deeds they did? )
Sweeney is an exercise in moral ambiguity.
He didn't know she belonged to Sweeney, so he saw no wrong with trying to take her away.
Johanna is a person, she doesn't "belong" to anyone. She should have been allowed to choose for herself from the beginning, but instead she was fought over like a trophy. She was "wronged" far more than Sweeney or the Judge were in having her taken away from them. Anthony is just an innocent bystander in the whole mess.
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/16/05
Poor Johanna was the distubred object of everybodys longing and greed. She and pre-prison Sweeney are the most tragic instances to be found in the show. Plus innocent people in the shop getting killed. Favorite moment still remains the man going in with the girl and George just turns around and makes one of the best faces ever and restrains himself
Videos