• The forums' spoiler embargo for all content from Pokémon Legends: Z-A's Mega Dimension DLC has been lifted! Feel free to talk about the new content from the expansion across the forums without the need of spoiler tabs!

    Please note that this lifted embargo only applies for the forums, and may still be in effect on other Bulbagarden sites.

Evil Pokémon

SinnohEevee

SinnohEevee

Well-Known Member
Scorbunny Fan
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Messages
3,019
Reaction score
2,782
Which Pokémon, other than the three evil Malamar from XY, do you find to be evil?
Out of memory, I can think of:
* Team Rocket's Meowth
* The Togepi in Where No Togepi Has Gone Before

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
 
Pretty much all the ghost and dark types seem evil or a based off real world myths that are pretty creepy.

Idk why but Chansey creeps me out,seems like they're hiding something...

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk
 
I wouldn't call that Togepi evil. Mischievous as hell, yes, but certainly not evil.
 
I would say most Pokémon with malicious intent; e.g. Gengar likes to place curses, Darkrai gives nightmares to people, and Giratina, as well as other Pokémon that act violently just for the sake of doing so, when it doesn't provide any benefit other than to humor themselves
 
Isn't the point of the anime that no Pokémon is truly evil or something like that?

Anyway, I guess there's Darkrai from PMDE.
 
leetic said:
Isn't the point of the anime that no Pokémon is truly evil or something like that?

Anyway, I guess there's Darkrai from PMDE.
Click to expand...

Yes, but they broke that with the three evil Malamar in XY. Plus, I find Team Rocket's Meowth to be evil. I wish Pikachu killed him in BW047.
 
Inlé said:
I would say most Pokémon with malicious intent; e.g. Gengar likes to place curses, Darkrai gives nightmares to people, and Giratina, as well as other Pokémon that act violently just for the sake of doing so, when it doesn't provide any benefit other than to humor themselves
Click to expand...
I don`t think Darkrai should really count then. It`s pokedex entries say that it isn`t done with malicious intent but is instead done to protect itself or it`s territory.
 
Inlé said:
I would say most Pokémon with malicious intent; e.g. Gengar likes to place curses, Darkrai gives nightmares to people, and Giratina, as well as other Pokémon that act violently just for the sake of doing so, when it doesn't provide any benefit other than to humor themselves
Click to expand...

With Darkrai or Giratina it would really depend on the canon. In the games, Darkrai's nightmares are a self-defense mechanism. The fact that the only one whose habitat we know of lives on a remote island (right next to Cresselia's island, where the cure for its nightmares can be found) may also suggest that it tries to seclude itself in order to avoid harming people unecessarily.

That being said, the Strange House in B2W2 offers some interesting implications. The ghost girl who appears seems to have died because she never awoke from a Darkrai's nightmare. But at one point, she appears and says this:

> "In the dark dream... I heard my dad’s voice... Forget about the Lunar Wing... Please stay here with me..."

Which sounds as though the Darkrai was compelling her to remain in the nightmare. So this Darkrai seems to have been an abberation - but did it want to keep her around out of malice, or out of loneliness?

Darkrai is pretty evil in the Mystery Dungeon universe, however.

As for Giratina, it's more territorial than anything, which is actually a good thing in its case because its territory its the symbiotic counterbalanacing universe that helps to uphold the material universe. It's really in everybody's best interest that Giratina strive to protect that world as best it can. The Pokédex may say that it was banished for its violence, but how do we know that's the truth when reality would instead suggest that it is a necessary guardian of the Distortion World? It doesn't seem any less at home in the Distortion World - it's where it can freely exist in its natural form, even - and we know that it is a being of antimatter. Perhaps the claim about it being "banished for its violence" was a human misinterpretation of seeing how its antimatter powers affected the matter in their world? "Oh, gosh, that monstrous thing coming out of that portal can annihilate the stuff around it, and it sure is fighting me hard! All I did was enter this weird cave! It must be some horrible creature, locked away for this vicious behavior!" When what they were really seeing was Giratina protecting the gateway into the Distortion World using its natural abilities.

(Personally, I am also a fan of the theory that it's the Pokémon from the Veilstone Myth, which stepped in on behalf of the Pokémon that were being needlessly killed by the man with the sword. But that is just a theory.)
 
Cofagrigus actually consumes grave robbers, but he's also just being protective.

Sableye has his soul stealing eyes, and I can't explain that. :(

Gengar appears to just be lonely in the Alolan dex, wanting a companion.

I think that since Meowth is a bit of an outcast for being able to speak, he joined TR in hope of being accepted.

All in all, I don't think that pokemon can really be evil.
 
That will depends on how one define the term "evil", and on what moral scale one is used to measure it.

Despite some pokemon have their Pokedex entries describing them possess harmful power or harmful by its nature, but, do they jeopardize the surrounding for the mere sake of enjoyment, or for self-protection, or act according to its animalistic instinct where it is just hunting for food for survival?

Personally I do not believe in "evil" pokemons, not because of I don't think pokemon will harm human being, but just because of a fundamental logic fallacy within this question where the definition of this term "evil" connotes the moral and ethic norm developed by and applies to human being, so does this adjective "evil" definitionally applicable to Pokemon where they are no human being? That says, in Real-Life, if a lion in the zoo attacks human, do you label that lion as "evil"? Yes it does inflict injury to someone, but you can't really say it commit some kind of crime nor it involved in any wrongdoings, as one cannot prove does it have the deliberate intention to offense someone or not.

While I believe there exist "dangerous" pokemons where they may be potentially harmful thus one should approach them with caution or even stay away from it, but I just do not believe in "evil" pokemons where they will deliberately harm someone for the mere sake of harming someone.
 
CrystaI said:
That will depends on how one define the term "evil", and on what moral scale one is used to measure it.

Despite some pokemon have their Pokedex entries describing them possess harmful power or harmful by its nature, but, do they jeopardize the surrounding for the mere sake of enjoyment, or for self-protection, or act according to its animalistic instinct where it is just hunting for food for survival?

Personally I do not believe in "evil" pokemons, not because of I don't think pokemon will harm human being, but just because of a fundamental logic fallacy within this question where the definition of this term "evil" connotes the moral and ethic norm developed by and applies to human being, so does this adjective "evil" definitionally applicable to Pokemon where they are no human being? That says, in Real-Life, if a lion in the zoo attacks human, do you label that lion as "evil"? Yes it does inflict injury to someone, but you can't really say it commit some kind of crime nor it involved in any wrongdoings, as one cannot prove does it have the deliberate intention to offense someone or not.

While I believe there exist "dangerous" pokemons where they may be potentially harmful thus one should approach them with caution or even stay away from it, but I just do not believe in "evil" pokemons where they will deliberately harm someone for the mere sake of harming someone.
Click to expand...

What about TR's Meowth and the three Malamar?
 
My reasoning is always based on the game canon, not anime canon.

But, if you would like to take the anime canon into consideration, then I will say it is because they have inserted some form of human personality into their characters. For TR's Meowth, does it act like a pokemon or human? To be fair, it indeed wanted to become a human. And for the three Malamar...... Other than required by the plot, I can't think of any reasoning behind their behaviors. That very intention of wanting to conquer the world is too human-like, no other pokemon ever had such line of thinking, even its pokedex entries never ever allude its entire species hold such thinking pattern. So I'll take that as plot-induced exception specific for those three respective individual Malamar, nothing else.
 
Sahma said:
You could consider Shadow Pokemon evil.
Click to expand...
Shadow Pokémon aren't evil, they've essentially been mistreated and experimented on until the "doors to their hearts" have become sealed. As a result of the experimentation, they began lashing out.
Shadow Pokémon are no more evil than Mewtwo is, and Mewtwo is definitely not evil.
Corrupt is a much better adjective.
 
Please note: The thread is from 9 years ago.
Please take the age of this thread into consideration in writing your reply. Depending on what exactly you wanted to say, you may want to consider if it would be better to post a new thread instead.
Back
Top Bottom