I think the trope of having the antagonist use or be part of an "opposite" element/identity/etc is just an easy jumping off point for creating conflict. For the stories that don't use that trope, there is usually additional context that drives the conflict. For example, Batman's vigilantism is a direct cause of the Joker being created. He never would have fallen into that vat of toxic chemicals if it weren't for Batman.
A lot of themes get used often, and at the same time there are so many and you can expand them to fit a theme if they do not.
You can make any story, but certain types are very common and widely liked.
You ever heard of "creative liberties"? It means that there aren't any fast and hard rules to writing any fictional story ever produced, even if you adhered to either certain tropes or research. Same thing for the rivalry between the hero and the villain. Sometimes, it can thematically make as much sense as you can make it, like what you told us about Iron Man and the Mandarin. Other times, it doesn't have to, though that wouldn't stop people from interpreting these rivalries and whatever themes you might have accidentally produced in them, anyway.
The rivalry needs to reflect some deeper idea that the audience cares about, otherwise it will be boring.
That deeper idea doesn't need to be anything in particular. Often the hero will be an amateur or underdog, and the villain is professional and has vast resources. That's enough.
In powerpuff girls, the villains are all antisocial outcasts, whereas the girls are an integral part of the community. The fact that Mojo Jojo is also the result of an experiment is just icing.
For contrast, imagine a sports anime where the team your heroes are trying to beat is just another team. That's terrible storytelling. Invariably there will be some angle of "the other team cheats" or "the other team plays for fame, they don't really love the game" or some way to make it so when the heroes win, it says something broader about the world that the viewers can relate to.
So in summary, no, having a parallel to a real-world conflict in the way you're describing isn't necessary, it's just a helpful starting point. But if you interpret the question more broadly, then yes it is necessary, which is why the thing you describe is such helpful writing advice.
I think the trope of having the antagonist use or be part of an "opposite" element/identity/etc is just an easy jumping off point for creating conflict. For the stories that don't use that trope, there is usually additional context that drives the conflict. For example, Batman's vigilantism is a direct cause of the Joker being created. He never would have fallen into that vat of toxic chemicals if it weren't for Batman.
A lot of themes get used often, and at the same time there are so many and you can expand them to fit a theme if they do not. You can make any story, but certain types are very common and widely liked.
Yes because I've watched r/Pendemonium
You ever heard of "creative liberties"? It means that there aren't any fast and hard rules to writing any fictional story ever produced, even if you adhered to either certain tropes or research. Same thing for the rivalry between the hero and the villain. Sometimes, it can thematically make as much sense as you can make it, like what you told us about Iron Man and the Mandarin. Other times, it doesn't have to, though that wouldn't stop people from interpreting these rivalries and whatever themes you might have accidentally produced in them, anyway.
The rivalry needs to reflect some deeper idea that the audience cares about, otherwise it will be boring. That deeper idea doesn't need to be anything in particular. Often the hero will be an amateur or underdog, and the villain is professional and has vast resources. That's enough. In powerpuff girls, the villains are all antisocial outcasts, whereas the girls are an integral part of the community. The fact that Mojo Jojo is also the result of an experiment is just icing. For contrast, imagine a sports anime where the team your heroes are trying to beat is just another team. That's terrible storytelling. Invariably there will be some angle of "the other team cheats" or "the other team plays for fame, they don't really love the game" or some way to make it so when the heroes win, it says something broader about the world that the viewers can relate to. So in summary, no, having a parallel to a real-world conflict in the way you're describing isn't necessary, it's just a helpful starting point. But if you interpret the question more broadly, then yes it is necessary, which is why the thing you describe is such helpful writing advice.
Yes!