Does Marvel have a problem with their villains?

[DACrowe]

Truth be told, you're not going to find Halloween costumes or lunch boxes with Kingpin on them either. You won't see a lot of his dialogue quoted very much as well. I'm okay with this because that's not what makes a good villain for me. To me, it's about how good the character was written, how well the actor portrays that character and in a few rare cases, it's how well it compares to his comic book counterpart.

I liked Michael Clark Duncan's Kingpin but compared to D'Onofrio's Kingpin, it's not even close. As of this moment, D'O's Kingpin is the definitive version outside of comics. His performance has been praised by critics and fans alike. He even said it was some of his finest work as an actor and I agree. From the staccato and halted inflections in his voice whenever he delivered his dialogue to the subtle, physical tics he gave the character along with the intensity, emotion and vulnerability elevated his performance above just the repeating of his lines and hitting his marks; he made the character his own. It was easy to see that D'O put some of himself in that character and it was as much about his craft as an artist as well as getting paid for outstanding work. To me, that puts Kingpin right up there with Ledger's Joker, McKellen/Fassbender's Magneto and Hiddleston's Loki.

You will hear no argument from me about D'Onofrio. I love his take on the Kingpin. He is actually the only villain in the entire MCU that is actually intimidating, menacing, and remembered for more than his sense of humor (sorry Loki fans). I love what he did in crafting a character who is imminently watchable and terrifying. I disagree that he is up there with Ledger's Joker, or McKellen's Magneto, but he is definitely something special.

But I partially contribute this to the relative autonomy the Netflix model had. I just hope that now that it is a success that the need to "connect" everything in future seasons (cough, Punisher, cough) will not be a detriment to later seasons of Daredevil the way that it watered down Jon Favreau's Iron Man ambitions. Seriously though, everything about that series is spectacular.

 

[jmc]

Villains are awesome but I don't quite agree with the last part of that statement. Marvel has done great with their heroes despite that they haven't been at the top with their villains. Overall I don't think any superhero movie studio can match them in the hero department.

I'd also say that there are very few franchises where there's a pretty even balance between the hero and the villain. For me I think Xavier and Magneto, and Thor and Loki, are the two ones where I feel that there is true symbiosis and both just enhance each other. Unless I'm forgetting something the rest of the movies have me favoring the hero or the villain to significant extent.

The films aren't reaching their potential without the villains to compliment the hero.

 

[Legendver2]

Spidey's like the Batman of Marvel in terms of a rogues gallery. Now that Spidey is back with Marvel, I am pretty hyped to eventually see a legit Carnage/Venom, a legit Goblin, Morlun, Kraven, Mysterio, and Morbius. If DC can do a Suicide Squad movie, Marvel can do a Sinister Six movie for phase 4.

 

[Silvermoth]

Well...he's not really back. Marvel is care taking him for Sony at least at the start. Then he goes back

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

So Ultron and then who are the other two? Kang, Modok, Nefaria, Lord Templar or High Evolutionary? Possibly Namor if you consider him a villain. I also wouldn't doubt that Ultron somehow survived. He can upload himself.

Good question - I'd say definitely Kang and probably Baron Zemo. Nefaria would be up there as well. Namor would make a great villain some day.

 

[starscream22]

AoU just came out in May and I don't particularly hear people still talking about or gushing over Ultron. What's your point?

I do agree with him that Bane had a far bigger impact on the pop culture landscape than Ultron, easily.

Read before you post and maybe you'll get the point!

Who the heck said anything specifically about Ultron? He said the whole MCU save for Loki and I'm simply saying prove it if it is indeed a fact.

Now if he would've said that "Broken Bat" was one the greater stories, then I wouldn't have objected that.

 

[Oscorp]

This place has, expectedly, turned into a dick measuring contest between Marvel fanboys and DC fanboys. I personally don't see the point in discussing whether or not Bane is a great and memorable villain, when this is about Marvel Studios' villains. Two bads don't make one good anyway, so it doesn't really matter. If other studios lack in memorable villains, it doesn't make Marvel Studios' villains any better, and vice versa.

To me, my biggest disappointment is the wasted potential. I expected more from Red Skull. Ronan is a villain that absolutely not should have been killed. Mandarin in the comics is a walking cliché, but they could make him more interesting in other ways than what they did in Iron Man 3. The villains in Iron Man 2 should have been given better material. Same goes for Malekith. To me, this point stands even though I found Zod in Man of Steel to be boring, or Bane to be slightly overrated.

 

[Legendver2]

I'm pretty disappointed they killed Ronan off as well. They could have saved him for an appearance in the eventual Inhumans film. Doesn't he get an arranged marriage to Crystal and more or less join the side of the Inhumans? Wasted opportunities there.

 

[Tony Stark]

This place has, expectedly, turned into a dick measuring contest between Marvel fanboys and DC fanboys. I personally don't see the point in discussing whether or not Bane is a great and memorable villain, when this is about Marvel Studios' villains. Two bads don't make one good anyway, so it doesn't really matter. If other studios lack in memorable villains, it doesn't make Marvel Studios' villains any better, and vice versa.

To me, my biggest disappointment is the wasted potential. I expected more from Red Skull. Ronan is a villain that absolutely not should have been killed. Mandarin in the comics is a walking cliché, but they could make him more interesting in other ways than what they did in Iron Man 3. The villains in Iron Man 2 should have been given better material. Same goes for Malekith. To me, this point stands even though I found Zod in Man of Steel to be boring, or Bane to be slightly overrated.

Sorry I don't mean to sound like this is directed at you, but this is just in genreal to the **** measuring. This is like the kid that starts a fight and calls foul. Bane, Zod, etc. they're all fair game, when you have DC fanboys that lead the fight and say stupid things like Loki is only remembered for his sense of humor.


The truth is both companies have problem with some of their villians, but implied in having a threat "does Marvel have a probem with their villains" is that other companies do not.

 

[ernesth100]

You know every villain they killed either has two or more versions and probably has a way to be brought back. Or was so boring no one would care if they were brought back or not. The following can be brought back because they have more than one version.

Iron Monger(there are other versions)
Whiplash(there are other versions)
Red Skull(Hell they could just say the tesseract teleported Red Skull or something I wouldn't mind, or use one of the other versions)




Justin Hammer and Abomination didn't even die, but are being held prisoner. Ultron is technically a articificial intelligence so they could just say he's been hiding in a computer system coming up with the perfect algorithm to defeat the Avengers or something like that.




And

Spoiler

There's another version of Yellowjacket according to the wikipedia page. But then again, Ant-Man survived the Quantum Realm so we don't even know if Yellowjacket is dead or if he survived too.

Ronan and Malekith are definately dead and I could care less if they come back. There are a couple of space villaons like Ronan and a couple of magical elf demons or whatever Malekith was to replace them with. That's one thing Marvel needs to improve on(villains personalities). But they could probably be brought back by some magical means or something if needed.


But there are several villains who haven't seen the light of day just yet so why focus on the dead ones? It's not like they need to come back just yet. We're not getting the Cabal, Masters of Evil or the Squadron Supreme anytime soon. After Infinity War then we can worry about whether or not Marvel has a problem with killing off villains.

 

[Angryfantasyfan]

The Red Skull had to die for Hydra to live, and since I consider it an excellent villain, I'm okay with that.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

I'm learning that people have different expectations from these films. It's not dick measuring to look at what other studios are doing because it helps temper expectations to realistic levels. Marvel gets a lot of flack but they've given us two great villains in Loki and Kingpin. Fox has only ever given us Magneto (young and old). And Ledger's Joker is the only recent DC movie villain that I consider great. Not saying Marvel can't improve but it seems people always want more and are never happy.

What do people think of Darren Cross? I thought he was a really good villain.

 

[John Locke]

The truth is both companies have problem with some of their villians, but implied in having a threat "does Marvel have a probem with their villains" is that other companies do not.

No it isn't. This is the Marvel forum frequently visited by Marvel fans. Sure some hardcore DC fans might come in here to stir up trouble but that doesn't take away from the fact that the debate was brought up by Marvel fans who think there is a problem with their villains.

And to be honest, they are the only company with a villain problem at this time. There are only four superhero franchises, the MCU, the DCEU, X-Men, and Fantastic Four. Any villains from franchises in the companies' past are not part of the equation on if they have a problem today. Fantastic Four has to get their heroes right before they can focus on the villains. Most X-Men fans are fine with their villains albeit most wish Magneto hogging the spotlight. The DCEU has one villain and a couple out of context clips from future villains so DC fans can't decide if there is a villain problem yet. The MCU has had roughly 16 villains and arguably the only one fans thoroughly enjoyed was Loki. Not every complaint or criticism at a franchise, no matter the side, is an attack from the other side.

What do people think of Darren Cross? I thought he was a really good villain.

He's one of the better MCU villains. I was genuinely afraid of his plan of Yellowjackets soldiers. But he was Loki in Obadiah Stane's clothing. What mad him great, other than Stoll's acting, is what made those two villains great.

 

[metaphysician]

I feel like Ronan would be more credible if he had wasted that planet with Nova Core where the final showdown was.

And you don't think this would have made the Guardians come off as incompetent failures who, when the rubber hits the road, continue to be incompetent and fail. . . why?

 

[cleverusername8]

Short answer, yes.

Longer answer, Marvel has fine villains in their other media. The shows, games, comics (of course), and other forms of media seem to portray these villains decently well with some exceptions here or there. It's just the movies that keep dropping the ball on crafting an interesting villain with motivations that I can care about. Most of them seem to be the clean cut "I'm greedy" or "I hate the main hero for treating me badly" or "I'm evil for the sake of it" sort of deal. There are no shades of gray with these guys, they are just straight up bad guys that don't have an ounce of relatability. Because relatable villains, irregardless of their actions or poor character traits, are the best villains.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

No it isn't. This is the Marvel forum frequently visited by Marvel fans. Sure some hardcore DC fans might come in here to stir up trouble but that doesn't take away from the fact that the debate was brought up by Marvel fans who think there is a problem with their villains.

And to be honest, they are the only company with a villain problem at this time. There are only four superhero franchises, the MCU, the DCEU, X-Men, and Fantastic Four. Any villains from franchises in the companies' past are not part of the equation on if they have a problem today. Fantastic Four has to get their heroes right before they can focus on the villains. Most X-Men fans are fine with their villains albeit most wish Magneto hogging the spotlight. The DCEU has one villain and a couple out of context clips from future villains so DC fans can't decide if there is a villain problem yet. The MCU has had roughly 16 villains and arguably the only one fans thoroughly enjoyed was Loki. Not every complaint or criticism at a franchise, no matter the side, is an attack from the other side.

Fox has a major villain problem. What they have done to Doom (Marvel's greatest villain) and Galactus is unforgiveable and this new Doom looks the worst. Maybe Kebbell's acting will redeem it somewhat but they've already screwed up Victor's backstory beyond recognition.

Let's look at the X-Men. In X2, we thought the X-Men would be fighting against Stryker's forces but surprise! Magneto is in fact the main antagonist. In The Last Stand, we thought we were getting an epic cinematic representation of the Phoenix Saga - one of the greatest X-Men stories of all time. Nope! Again Magneto is the main antagonist. In First Class, we thought it was going to be X-Men vs the Hellfire Club, but no, the final fight is with - you guessed it - Magneto. (Not to mention that Sebastian Shaw was basically Kevin Bacon and January Jones as Emma Frost was beyond wooden.) In DOFP, we thought the X-Men were going to have epic show downs with the sentinels and have Trask as the main big bad, but yet again, Magneto comes in to steal the show. Meanwhile, Peter Dinklage was pretty much wasted in the role.

He's one of the better MCU villains. I was genuinely afraid of his plan of Yellowjackets soldiers. But he was Loki in Obadiah Stane's clothing. What mad him great, other than Stoll's acting, is what made those two villains great.

Interesting take. I'm OK with these common threads. These are the things that bind us after all.

 

[Tony Stark]

No it isn't. This is the Marvel forum frequently visited by Marvel fans. Sure some hardcore DC fans might come in here to stir up trouble but that doesn't take away from the fact that the debate was brought up by Marvel fans who think there is a problem with their villains.

And to be honest, they are the only company with a villain problem at this time. There are only four superhero franchises, the MCU, the DCEU, X-Men, and Fantastic Four. Any villains from franchises in the companies' past are not part of the equation on if they have a problem today. Fantastic Four has to get their heroes right before they can focus on the villains. Most X-Men fans are fine with their villains albeit most wish Magneto hogging the spotlight. The DCEU has one villain and a couple out of context clips from future villains so DC fans can't decide if there is a villain problem yet. The MCU has had roughly 16 villains and arguably the only one fans thoroughly enjoyed was Loki. Not every complaint or criticism at a franchise, no matter the side, is an attack from the other side.

No not every criticism is, and there are legitimate criticisms to be made. I've made as much against Malekith.

There are people who this subject has become hyperbole. I'll give you an example. Robert Redford delivered one of the best performances in any comic book movie, let alone a Marvel one. You know the difference between Alexander Pierce and Loki? Loki is one of the top villains in the comics, and Alexander Pierce is essentially an original creation, since he was never a villain in the comics.

The fact is the majority of this conversation has been grossly unfair, and completely biased. You can't compare Ledger's joker to an Alexander Pierce.

Now there are villains like Red Skull, who I thought were portrayed incredibly but because of problems with the actors they never progressed forward. Loki has the benefit of being in 3 films and has had the biggest character arc, so that gives him a huge advantage.

But people throwing BS out like "I don't want Marvel to get X-men back because I don't want them screwing up Magneto" is just beyond juvenile.

There have only been three villains in the MCU that are on the level of Magneto. Loki, Red Skull and Ultron. I know there are mixed feelings over Red Skull and Ultron, but I've not heard one complaint over the acting of those characters, in fact, the actors did a superb job in both cases. So people automatically assuming that Marvel would do a bad job is beyond ridiculous, and those conversations are started by the usual suspects on this site.

 

[jmc]

This place has, expectedly, turned into a dick measuring contest between Marvel fanboys and DC fanboys. I personally don't see the point in discussing whether or not Bane is a great and memorable villain, when this is about Marvel Studios' villains. Two bads don't make one good anyway, so it doesn't really matter. If other studios lack in memorable villains, it doesn't make Marvel Studios' villains any better, and vice versa.

To me, my biggest disappointment is the wasted potential. I expected more from Red Skull. Ronan is a villain that absolutely not should have been killed. Mandarin in the comics is a walking cliché, but they could make him more interesting in other ways than what they did in Iron Man 3. The villains in Iron Man 2 should have been given better material. Same goes for Malekith. To me, this point stands even though I found Zod in Man of Steel to be boring, or Bane to be slightly overrated.

Don't you think they can learn from what other studios and creative teams have done?

 

[ernesth100]

This place has, expectedly, turned into a dick measuring contest between Marvel fanboys and DC fanboys.

You see the funny thing is I made a thread for that.

 

[SuperSanchez]

Although Darren Cross was underdeveloped he was still very threatening and intimidating which compensated for that.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

I watch non cbm's all the time that have crappy villains. Everybody has this problem, not just Marvel. Good villains are hard to do.

I do think killing them off right away is wasteful and I've been saying that ever since Iron Man killed Obadiah Stane. Not all of them will return but if you kill them all none of them can.

 

[Dasher10]

Good question - I'd say definitely Kang and probably Baron Zemo. Nefaria would be up there as well. Namor would make a great villain some day.

I consider Zemo to be more of a Captain America villain myself.

 

[Dasher10]

You know every villain they killed either has two or more versions and probably has a way to be brought back. Or was so boring no one would care if they were brought back or not. The following can be brought back because they have more than one version.

Iron Monger(there are other versions)
Whiplash(there are other versions)
Red Skull(Hell they could just say the tesseract teleported Red Skull or something I wouldn't mind, or use one of the other versions)




Justin Hammer and Abomination didn't even die, but are being held prisoner. Ultron is technically a articificial intelligence so they could just say he's been hiding in a computer system coming up with the perfect algorithm to defeat the Avengers or something like that.




And

Spoiler

There's another version of Yellowjacket according to the wikipedia page. But then again, Ant-Man survived the Quantum Realm so we don't even know if Yellowjacket is dead or if he survived too.

Ronan and Malekith are definately dead and I could care less if they come back. There are a couple of space villaons like Ronan and a couple of magical elf demons or whatever Malekith was to replace them with. That's one thing Marvel needs to improve on(villains personalities). But they could probably be brought back by some magical means or something if needed.


But there are several villains who haven't seen the light of day just yet so why focus on the dead ones? It's not like they need to come back just yet. We're not getting the Cabal, Masters of Evil or the Squadron Supreme anytime soon. After Infinity War then we can worry about whether or not Marvel has a problem with killing off villains.

I'll agree that we got a better Whiplash on Agents of SHIELD (and the most iconic one at that). I hope he reappears since he's a great second chance for the character.

Obediah Stane was the first Iron Monger but he was never the best. IMO, his son is the best Iron Monger. We need Zeke in the MCU whenever Marvel does some sort of Iron Man sequel.

Red Skull was definitely teleported. There's no way Marvel aren't going to resurrect him somehow considering that he's one of Marvel's biggest villains.

Yes, Scott Lang survived the Quantum Realm which means Yellowjacket may reappear.

Ronan can easily be cloned since Kree society is entirely based around genetic engineering. The Kree without biotech is like tennis without the ball. James Gunn said it's possible that he could return but not in Guardians 2, presumably since Count Abyss, Korvac or Matriarch would presumably be the next threat and Ronan would just hog their screen time.

Ultron as mentioned is an AI. He can easily be rebuilt.

Malekith is the only villain who I feel Marvel dropped the ball on. That was a massive screw up.

 

[JtheDreamer]

I do not think he said he was factually better. Though one could perhaps come to that conclusion of superiority because he factually had an effect on pop culture, which is true. The Bane mask and "costume" is still highly popular among Halloween costumes and cosplayers (so too is Hathaway's Catwoman, though not nearly to the degree of the Ledger Joker look or the Hardy Bane). He is often quoted, even if in parody, often in sitcoms, other movies, SNL, etc. He also had enough cultural impact to cause "Batman: Arkham Origins" to reevaluate the character and make him the main villain of the prequel game, and including several elements unique to the Tom Hardy portrayal of Bane, when in the previous two entries, he was a lumbering gorilla and moron.

All of this factually shows that the Tom Hardy Bane has had an impact on pop culture. When people list Batman villains, Joker is of course number 1, but Bane might be thrown in alongside Catwoman and the Riddler before the Penguin or other ''66 villains are (which is kind of the root image of Batman's rogues gallery).

By comparison, there are no video game reworkings of Red Skull or Mandarin, Malekith nor the Winter Soldier are also pop culture fixtures in parody or homage either.

Now, you can say you prefer the MCU Red Skull (for example) to Hardy's Bane. But one clearly had the bigger pop culture footprint, which tends to indicate one went over better with audiences in terms of memorability.

Wuuttt? Bane is a fixture of pop culture? No way, at least not in a good way. Hardy's character got mocked to all hell because of that voice thing he was doing.

In the pantheon of top shelf villains he is not though. Not even close.

 

[JtheDreamer]

Now I can actually agree that Red Skull was disappointing. He wasn't terrible but he wasn't amazing either, just average. The part wasn't particularly interesting and Weaving didn't seem like he wanted to be there. The opportunity was definitely missed but Marvel may have given themselves an out. We don't truly know that RS perished. He may have survived and one day return. At least I hope so.

I disagree.

I thought Weaving was tremendous for what little he had to work with. While he wasn't "menacing", he still played up for the camera as a comic book baddie. Damn shame that he became expendable in the sprint to get Cap to the Avengers.

I'm hopeful that with Marvel's success Weaving re-thinks his stance and decides to give it another shot.