Castlevania Netflix

[Dr.Samurai]

I get that it's a common trope, and overused even. I just feel it falls a bit short as a critique here. It's not like she was making eyes at Trevor and then suddenly gets snatched through a window screaming for a big strong man to come rescue her.

She attempted something dangerous to do what she thought was the right thing to do.

If we're talking Mary Jane in Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy, I get it. But I just feel she needed rescuing precisely because she's an independent person with courage and conviction and took a chance to stop Dracula. She's no different than Alucard in this respect.

[The Troubadour]

The complaint of the damsel-in-distress is that it's been done to death. It's a legitimate critique that these story elements are cliche, lazy, and that some people would like a variation.

Indeed. And while that was how things happened in the source material, the writers have already changed a lot from said material, so they could easily have also changed this if they wanted to.

[Dr.Samurai]

What was changed from the source material? (I've only played SotN.)

[The Troubadour]

Off the top of my head:
- Trevor's personality (he wasn't resentful against the people of Wallachia in the game, for instance).
- Alucard's and Dracula's appearances (they're based on the newer games; in the NES ones, they looked more like Bela Lugosi's portrayal of Dracula).
- The Codrii didn't exist in the game, and Sypha was an agent of the Church.
- In fact, the whole "corrupt church" plot is brand-new.

[Kyberwulf]

No other male character is helpless blah blah blah.. despite . Ya know.. all the townspeople that were killed. All the priests lackeys that Trevor killed. All the speakers who are pretty helpless.

[The Troubadour]

Plot devices aren't characters.

[Giggling Ghast]

Ugh, are we at the point in the culture wars that a man can't aid woman without people screaming, "OMG SO SEXIST WTF"?

The Damsel in Distress trope is criticized because it suggests that women are dependent on men for their safety. Yes, Trevor saves Sypha from the cyclops, but Sypha rescues Trevor later from the mob and they act as equals in the battle against Dracula's demons.

She's perfectly capable; she just happened to encounter a situation she wasn't prepared for. Please don't get your knickers in a twist over some illusory power imbalance.

[Reddish Mage]

No other male character is helpless blah blah blah.. despite . Ya know.. all the townspeople that were killed. All the priests lackeys that Trevor killed. All the speakers who are pretty helpless.

Knew someone would say this. To this I point out 1)

Plot devices aren't characters.

And 2) that everyone else getting killed were just plain killed, not depowered, rendered helpless, had their ability to effect agency taken away. The same goes for other's being tortured, Sypha's grandfather, for example, is choosing not to respond not having that choice taken away from him. The Bishop gets to confront the demons that will kill him and say his piece and potentially fight back before getting killed.

Also (and this is an essential part of being a damsel-in-distress), Sypha and Lisa, are both disempowered to motivate the actions of a male character.

So yes, the damsel-in-distress trope definitely doesn't apply to any of the male characters and not just because their maleness. Its also because no one is disempowered in quite the damselly way.

Ugh, are we at the point in the culture wars that a man can't aid woman without people screaming, "OMG SO SEXIST WTF"?

Amazon just mentioned she didn't like it (and let's go on) and I pointed out she had a point after I saw a WTF response. No one screaming or using all caps and "OMG" or "WTF" except some of the reply's recharacterizing a rather bored response.

That sort of overhyped reaction to someone expressing a feeling and another delivering a clinical analysis is suggestive of fear, hatred and shutting down the conversation. It is not the way to engage in constructive dialogue about the (in)appriopriteness and (over)use of a classic trope.

[scalyfreak]

That sort of overhyped reaction to someone expressing a feeling and another delivering a clinical analysis is suggestive of fear, hatred and shutting down the conversation. It is not the way to engage in constructive dialogue about the (in)appriopriteness and (over)use of a classic trope.

Sypha isn't perceived as a classic damsel in distress by the majority of posters in this thread. Using her as proof that damsels in distress are a bad thing, is therefor pointless, since she isn't one to begin with.

That's the impression I get from most of these posts anyway.(And agree with. Sypha is cool.)

You may also want to consider that telling people who disagree with you that they are over-reacting due to fear and innate hatred isn't generally a good way to make someone willing to listen to your point of view.

[Reddish Mage]

Sypha isn't perceived as a classic damsel in distress by the majority of posters in this thread. Using her as proof that damsels in distress are a bad thing, is therefor pointless, since she isn't one to begin with.

Again, I specifically said I was pointing out she was a damsel-in-distress. I specifically avoided saying that this was a bad thing or rendering any opinion of my own on the matter.

So I specifically disagree with you on that. She was a damsel-in-distress. What she did afterwards doesn't change what happened before. In fact, I would note the damsel trope often gets dropped on all sorts of female characters that are otherwise capable (check comics going back to 1980's on super-heroines, female warriors, and so on) and happens at any point of the story. I gave multiple damselly factors, all of which were fulfilled by both Sypha and Lisa (but no other character). The trope can be subverted in various ways (the damsel can rescue herself unexpectedly for example) but here the disempowerment and dependence is complete, as is motivation for male action.

Also if someone reply's by making up a quote using all caps and giving a hyperbolic characterization to my rather disinterested observation or someone else's semi-bored comments. I'm going to point out its not only creating a strawman, but going into destructive speech territory.

I am not saying that Sypha isn't a balanced character, or a competent one, or the show cannot balance her damsel-in-distress moment with her bad-ass ones. I just point out the damsel thing happened, it happened twice in one show.

Some might reasonably think the damsel thing is a cliche the show was better without, a more novel narrative would have been better and could serve the same purpose...but I don't have an opinion either way. I am saying that one can think the damsel-in-distress is overused without feeling or claiming much more than it is a very tired trope.

[Lacuna Caster]

I suppose it wouldn't have done any harm if Sypha was just recruited as an active partner from the beginning, but I feel like the damsel-in-distress angle is being overblown. It's a relatively minor aspect to her overall presence in the story thus far.

Off the top of my head:
- Trevor's personality (he wasn't resentful against the people of Wallachia in the game, for instance).
- Alucard's and Dracula's appearances (they're based on the newer games; in the NES ones, they looked more like Bela Lugosi's portrayal of Dracula).
- The Codrii didn't exist in the game, and Sypha was an agent of the Church.
- In fact, the whole "corrupt church" plot is brand-new.

Interesting. It might actually be nice to have a non-token not-all-religion-is-evil character in the trio if you've got a universe with tangible face-eating demons, but I'm generally cool with the corrupt-church angle.

[Devonix]

I suppose it wouldn't have done any harm if Sypha was just recruited as an active partner from the beginning, but I feel like the damsel-in-distress angle is being overblown. It's a relatively minor aspect to her overall presence in the story thus far.


Interesting. It might actually be nice to have a non-token not-all-religion-is-evil character in the trio if you've got a universe with tangible face-eating demons, but I'm generally cool with the corrupt-church angle.

We've seen corrupt people in the church, that doesn't mean the church is corrupt. It's early days yet for the show. But Trevor's annoyance and reaction does make sense, even in the game the Belmonts were exiled from their ancestral lands because people didn't like how they delt with monsters.

Trevor being annoyed at saving the same people who chose to let his home burn and people be exiled makes sense.

[Dr.Samurai]

Again, I specifically said I was pointing out she was a damsel-in-distress. I specifically avoided saying that this was a bad thing or rendering any opinion of my own on the matter.

It's being presented as a bad thing, and despite you claiming otherwise, going into women being helpless and rescued and motivating men seems to suggest that you also think it is a bad thing.

She was a damsel-in-distress. What she did afterwards doesn't change what happened before.

Perhaps to you it doesn't. But the rest of us are seeing beyond her gender and looking towards her character.

Trevor is a drunk has-been that has given up. He's bitter about the treatment of his family, and using that as an excuse not to care and to run away from his responsibility. Despite being the *only* person with the skill set needed to oppose and defeat Dracula, and save Wallachia, he spends his time drinking.

Sypha has been a hero throughout the entire four episodes. She went in search of the Sleeping Warrior, wanted to continue even after being petrified and rescued, but chose instead to allay her grandfather's grief. She chose to stay to fight for the people, even after being told a mob would be coming for them before nightfall. And she fought the demons to save Gresit.

So we have a guy with some serious character flaws. And we have a heroic woman.

But none of that matters because she was caught off guard by a cyclops...

In fact, I would note the damsel trope often gets dropped on all sorts of female characters that are otherwise capable (check comics going back to 1980's on super-heroines, female warriors, and so on) and happens at any point of the story. I gave multiple damselly factors, all of which were fulfilled by both Sypha and Lisa (but no other character). The trope can be subverted in various ways (the damsel can rescue herself unexpectedly for example) but here the disempowerment and dependence is complete, as is motivation for male action.

The trope doesn't need to be subverted all the time. Just let people tell the story they want to tell. Dracula's wife gets burned at the stake. That's the story of Dracula in Castlevania. Sypha gets petrified and found by Trevor. That's the story of Sypha in Castlevania. It's not a big deal.

Steve Trevor is helpless and unconscious in the movie Wonder Woman, drowning and unable to do anything. He has no... Agency!!! Oh my god! Wonder Woman dives in and rescues him. And this encounter serves no other purpose than to motivate her to leave the island and go to the World of Man.

Big deal. Who cares that one is a man and the other is a woman? It's not intrinsically better for "subverting" the trope. It's the same ****.

The problem is you're not complaining that someone had to be rescued to motivate the hero. You're specifically complaining that a woman had to be rescued to motivate a man. And that's just not an interesting point to make in this case. It's being blown out of proportion.

Also if someone reply's by making up a quote using all caps and giving a hyperbolic characterization to my rather disinterested observation or someone else's semi-bored comments. I'm going to point out its not only creating a strawman, but going into destructive speech territory.

There was no strawman and your points about fear, hatred, and destructive speech are inane and alarmist.

I am not saying that Sypha isn't a balanced character, or a competent one, or the show cannot balance her damsel-in-distress moment with her bad-ass ones. I just point out the damsel thing happened, it happened twice in one show.

We know what happened in the show. We also watched it. You're saying that two women were bound and needed to be rescued. We're saying we know, that's okay.

Some might reasonably think the damsel thing is a cliche the show was better without, a more novel narrative would have been better and could serve the same purpose...

Right. The show would have been better if Sypha was either a man OR didn't get surprised by the cyclops, didn't have a grandfather caring after her, didn't believe in a prophecy about a sleeping warrior man, and didn't fight *alongside* Trevor, but rather led Trevor in combat.

We know what's being suggested.

but I don't have an opinion either way

Consider me super skeptical of this statement.

I am saying that one can think the damsel-in-distress is overused without feeling or claiming much more than it is a very tired trope.

You're acting as if there was no more than this to read in Amazon's posts. Is that what you mean to say? That we're reading too much into it and this was just a "oh man, I hate cliches" post?

[Lemmy]

I suppose it wouldn't have done any harm if Sypha was just recruited as an active partner from the beginning (...)

It'd be a lot less interesting, though... Not only it'd be needlessly different from the source material, we wouldn't have one of the coolest action scenes in the show. Besides, since Sypha saves Trevor as well (and is essential to his battle plan against the demons), it's not like she being a "damsel in distress" is a thing... She had to be rescued once. She was caught by surprise and was in trouble... Like literally every non-Belmont who walked into that chamber.

Interesting. It might actually be nice to have a non-token not-all-religion-is-evil character in the trio if you've got a universe with tangible face-eating demons, but I'm generally cool with the corrupt-church angle.

The show does differentiate between "the corrupt church" and true faith, though. Trevor calls aid from an actual priest during his fight against the demon... And it works! Hell! Even Trevor's whip's power comes from being blessed. The demons even say that the only reason they can enter the church is because of the corruption of its clergy.

It's not so much a "religion is corrupting" trope as it's a "giant organizations are powerful, and power corrupts" trope.

[Zurvan]

The church hating plot comes from the author not liking the church and not being able to leave his political views out of the the adaptation, pathetic if you ask me, later they have Trevor make a joke remarking how that one priest was okish because holy water is a thing on the game.

I will just copy and paste Sypha backstory according to the game lore and you guys come to your own conclusions. Releax it's spolier free.

Spoiler: Sypha story

Show

Sypha Belnades, also known as Syfa Velnumdes, Cipher Fernandez, or Cipher Vernades, is one of the protagonists of Castlevania III: Dracula's Curse. She also appears in Castlevania Judgment as a playable character.

The instruction booklet of the English version of Dracula's Curse referred to Sypha as a "Mystic Warlord", and the game itself refers to her with male pronouns, leading to confusion of Sypha's gender among players.

Story

Early life
Sypha Belnades was a witch who harnessed the energy of spirits to command the power of the elements. Sypha grew up among witches in Wallachia. When she was very young, children of the night, including the vampire Carmilla, darkened the hearts of men and helped spark the great witch trials which resulted in the death of many of Sypha's sister witches. Both of her parents were killed in the process.

Sypha escaped and was found wandering near a monastery in Wallachia and was granted protection by the church. Sypha would remain at that monastery for some time and would train as a monk. She eventually mastered the elements of fire, ice, and lightning by making a deal with spirits.

Sypha had a burning desire to destroy anything tainted by darkness who she felt was responsible for mankind's actions against her kind and would become a hunter for the church.

Dracula's Curse
In Wallachia, during the year 1476, the populace became disturbed when monsters, who had until that point only been talked about in legend, started to appear in populated areas. According to rumors, they were commanded by a mysterious Count in black known as Dracula. Viewing the situation with great concern, the Eastern Orthodox Church sent out their troops to subdue to the threat. Because he was suspected to be a vampire, a secret team was deployed to find and defeat Dracula.

Sypha was part of the hunting party formed by the Church to take on Dracula. Since the people of Wallachia were known to be afraid of witches, and because the young woman Lisa had been executed by the population for suspicion of witchcraft months prior, Sypha had disguised herself as a man in order to move around without concern. She was eventually captured by a Cyclops and was turned into a statue.

After receiving no word from Wallachia for some time, the church turned to the Belmont family as a last resort. Trevor Belmont stepped forward to end the oppression of Wallachia.

Trevor managed to put an end to the cyclops, and Sypha was freed of her petrification. She then decided to go along with him. Together with [removed due possible spoliers], and Alucard, Dracula's son, the heroes fought their way to Dracula's castle.

[S@tanicoaldo]

I never thought I would say this about a video game story, but it does sound better.

It does give Sypha more independence and agency, the church in a much more interesting organization, with a lot of political power, as it had in that time, it gets the right church for the right place, it paints it in a more sympathetic light, I guess it only doesn't solve the damsel in distress problem.

Can we get an anime out of this story?

[Velaryon]

Off the top of my head:
- Trevor's personality (he wasn't resentful against the people of Wallachia in the game, for instance).
- Alucard's and Dracula's appearances (they're based on the newer games; in the NES ones, they looked more like Bela Lugosi's portrayal of Dracula).
- The Codrii didn't exist in the game, and Sypha was an agent of the Church.
- In fact, the whole "corrupt church" plot is brand-new.

What personality did Trevor even have in Castlevania III? That game is from an era where there cutscenes were pretty rare and characters weren't all that deeply developed.

[Lacuna Caster]

The church hating plot comes from the author not liking the church and not being able to leave his political views out of the the adaptation, pathetic if you ask me, later they have Trevor make a joke remarking how that one priest was okish because holy water is a thing on the game.

I will just copy and paste Sypha backstory according to the game lore and you guys come to your own conclusions. Releax it's spoiler free.

Huh. So the cyclops, cross-dressing and Lisa's fate are all preserved pretty-much intact. To be fair, if people being burned at the stake is a canon element of the main plot, then pre-existing church corruption isn't a major stretch, though that corruption being instigated by a different vampire is an interesting twist.

I never thought I would say this about a video game story, but it does sound better.

I, too, have a weakness for monastery-raised demon-hunting lady-orphans with a thirst for righteous vengeance.

[S@tanicoaldo]

Huh. So the cyclops, cross-dressing and Lisa's fate are all preserved pretty-much intact. To be fair, if people being burned at the stake is a canon element of the main plot, then pre-existing church corruption isn't a major stretch, though that corruption being instigated by a different vampire is an interesting twist.

I think Zurvan pointed out earlier that the fact that the population killed her rather than an evil archbishop (Something that is not even a thing in the orthodox Church) makes more sense for Dracula's revenge, or somehting.

[Kyberwulf]

The people still killed her. The priest didn't light her up by himself. He was just the excuse the people needed to light her up. The story the old lady tells, is that she is the only one that protested against it.

Again I don't get this misogynistic viewpoint of people to reduce a female character down to a troupe. They take away her agency and any story elements to make her nothing more then one thing that happen to her.They take away any effect she has on the story going forward, just to make her stay in her place, at one point in her story.

Also, you don't just "point out" something as a neutral position. When you do, it's to point something out as a positive, or a negative. I think we can assume you weren't pointing out that "damseling' was a positive thing? You are just trying to weasel your way out of things, to make yourself seem like an unbiased observer.

Seriously, this is like pointing out that Princess Leia isn't a character at all, because on there way to Alderan, and subsequent finding out it was destroyed. Then being captured. They find out that the princess is on board. They rescue her, and free her. That's it. Nothing else. She is only a Damsel in distress troupe. Nothing else she does in the story matters in the slightest. Nevermind the fact that no one knew she was on board, or that finding her and saving her wasn't in the mission. They only found out while trying to get off the ship. Then they had to save her because it is the right thing to do. Not because she was a woman, but because she was the leader of something important.

[S@tanicoaldo]

The people still killed her. The priest didn't light her up by himself. He was just the excuse the people needed to light her up. The story the old lady tells, is that she is the only one that protested against it.

Again I don't get this misogynistic viewpoint of people to reduce a female character down to a troupe. They take away her agency and any story elements to make her nothing more then one thing that happen to her.They take away any effect she has on the story going forward, just to make her stay in her place, at one point in her story.

Also, you don't just "point out" something as a neutral position. When you do, it's to point something out as a positive, or a negative. I think we can assume you weren't pointing out that "damseling' was a positive thing? You are just trying to weasel your way out of things, to make yourself seem like an unbiased observer.

Seriously, this is like pointing out that Princess Leia isn't a character at all, because on there way to Alderan, and subsequent finding out it was destroyed. Then being captured. They find out that the princess is on board. They rescue her, and free her. That's it. Nothing else. She is only a Damsel in distress troupe. Nothing else she does in the story matters in the slightest. Nevermind the fact that no one knew she was on board, or that finding her and saving her wasn't in the mission. They only found out while trying to get off the ship. Then they had to save her because it is the right thing to do. Not because she was a woman, but because she was the leader of something important.

The conversion of the Bishop and mayor implies he was the one who did most of the work.

I think that is not the part of the star wars movie people complain about.

It's something to do with being slaved I think. Never was a big SW fan.

[Kyberwulf]

It doesn't matter though. The people are the ones allowing her to burn. You might think being part of a mob absolves them of the crimes they commit, and puts it solely on the person "leading". I however don't. I think they are all responsible. Dracula then judges all of humanity on them. Hate does use logic.

I don't care what people are complaining about. I am using the people's argument in this forum to point out a popular female character to disempower her. You can take ANY character, point out one aspect of their backstory, or story. Then USE that to make them irrelevant to anything that happens in the future.

I don't understand why Reddish mage and Amazon are being so misogynistic.

[S@tanicoaldo]

I don't understand why Reddish mage and Amazon are being so misogynistic.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

Sometimes I swear to the gods, I can't even.

[Dr.Samurai]

It does give Sypha more independence and agency

She is independent the entire time in the show. I don't get what you guys are talking about. She has agency. She makes her own choices the entire time.

Claiming she didn't have agency because she was petrified is like claiming she doesn't have agency if she faints or goes to sleep at night. The woman literally does whatever she wants throughout the entire season.

What you're saying here is that Sypha should be allowed to do whatever she wants but not suffer any consequences from it that might limit her ability to do things, because she is a woman.

Why should that be the case?

I guess it only doesn't solve the damsel in distress problem.

We should just turn Sypha into a man. That would solve the problem right?

What personality did Trevor even have in Castlevania III? That game is from an era where there cutscenes were pretty rare and characters weren't all that deeply developed.

Yeah, that list struck me as a little weak. Basically, they changed Sypha's affiliation, and put a bishop in front of the mob killing Lisa.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

Sometimes I swear to the gods, I can't even.

Well, what's being said is that Sypha's abilities, motivations, and accomplishments are not enough. She's not allowed to ever need help from a man. She's not allowed fatherly figures. She's not allowed to be on a good guy team if she isn't leading.

It's holding female characters to different standards. It's... weird. It's supposedly done in the name of helping women, but it's so contrived and poorly thought out. She has to be perfect, essentially, to warrant no complaints.

In other words, it's not enough to have a woman character that does stuff. It has to be a particular woman character that does particular things, avoids particular scenarios, etc.

[S@tanicoaldo]

In other words, it's not enough to have a woman character that does stuff. It has to be a particular woman character that does particular things, avoids particular scenarios, etc.

You got it. Just becuase it's a female character doesn't make it ok, if they are been used to perpetuate sexist conceps and tropes it's not something good.

Or something, I don't really care. My favorite female characters are Bayonetta and Tank Girl.

[Dr.Samurai]

You got it. Just becuase it's a female character doesn't make it ok, if they are been used to perpetuate sexist conceps and tropes it's not something good.

Exactly.

So if needing to be rescued is a sexist concept, or being an equal among a group of men is a sexist concept, then what you're saying is "just because it's a female, she can never need rescuing and she must lead men, not fight alongside them".

Do you see the problem?

We're saying Sypha's character is fine as portrayed. She wasn't really a damsel. And Reddish Mage literally said everything that happens afterwards doesn't matter because she was a damsel. He falls just shy of calling it sexist, but we can all read between the lines.

So it's basically making a rule that women can't be rescued or it's sexist. And that's not a reasonable position.

[S@tanicoaldo]

Exactly.

So if needing to be rescued is a sexist concept, or being an equal among a group of men is a sexist concept, then what you're saying is "just because it's a female, she can never need rescuing and she must lead men, not fight alongside them".

Do you see the problem?

We're saying Sypha's character is fine as portrayed. She wasn't really a damsel. And Reddish Mage literally said everything that happens afterwards doesn't matter because she was a damsel. He falls just shy of calling it sexist, but we can all read between the lines.

So it's basically making a rule that women can't be rescued or it's sexist. And that's not a reasonable position.

You need to look at the big picture, it's not the fact that she needs be rescued; it's the fact that this has been used countless times in a harmful way to the point where the trope itself becomes harmful. Tropes are neutral the way they are used may end up corrupting then.

It's been a while since I played video games, but I love comics and I'm going to use them as an example.

Have you ever heard of the league of extraordinary gentlemen? Not the terrible movie but the comics by Alan Moore and illustrated by Kevin O'Neill?

In that comic there is a character called Galley-Wag, he himself is an awesome character, sweet, kind and brave but because he is based on a thing that was corrupted by society his appearance is... Problematic at best, downright offensive at worse.

You get it now? It’s not about the character, it’s about the whole picture.

[Kyberwulf]

Yeah, but you are trying to say that your interpretation of the whole picture that matters. When in fact, the whole picture is so nebulous. All the points of data can be defined and redefined, that looking at the whole picture is pointless. Sure things can be problematic. IF given enough time, those things will change. Wither through intervention or naturally.

This whole saying everything involving the "rescuing of a woman" thing turns them into just a troupe thing, is bad in and of itself. For one, that troupe just means that Damsel in distress, is the primary and in fact ONLY purpose of that character. Which isn't really bad or good in an of itself. It isn't an interesting character to be sure. It just means that she isn't the primary focus of that story. Which again, isn't bad in of itself.

That isn't this character though. She has so much more to do with the story then just, she needs rescuing.

Also, what's wrong with looking at the big picture, then everything is sexist, everything is racist, everything is everything if you look at everything and point it all out. The problem with that though.... To paraphrase Syndrome. If everything is special, then nothing is special. Meaning, if everything is sexist, nothing is sexist. You lose any definition of the words. So in essence, it doesn't matter if it is sexist or not. When you look at the big picture you lose any sense definition. You end up seeing only what you want to see.

[Reddish Mage]

He falls just shy of calling it sexist, but we can all read between the lines.

Ok, while I specifically avoided sexism as a critique, and instead suggesting that someone else could have reasons outside of sexism to dislike a trope appearing (because the pattern I identify appears constantly, giving rise to a criticism of being cliche).

One could label the damsel-in-distress trope as sexist, but the only accusations of sexism are those that have been leveled against me, I am not interested in talking about sexism.

I am interested mainly in 1) the interesting fact that the trope is used so often (why is that so) and 2) whether its overused.

Tangentially, I'm interested in 3) if its more interesting if Sypha wasn't put in that situation in this particular animation. However, I haven't heard anything interested on that front. Sypha's origin is a rather minor plot-point, so I'm not sure how interesting it is to the animation in general, but the above two points are still interesting to me.

[Amazon]

I guess it only doesn't solve the damsel in distress problem.

Except it does, in this version of the story (Much better and coherent by the way) she is not being saved by Trevor to be delivered to her father figure.

First of all she is her own thing, she is not a member of a generic good group who are never shown doing any good to the people, she has a desire and a motivation that doesn't involve finding a guy (Alucard) to solve the problems.

She got defeated by the Cyclopes yes, but she is not saved, the fact that killing the beast frees her is not intentional, and then she join forces with Trevor as equals not as a thing to be saved and delivered.

Overall a much better story.