Does Marvel have a problem with their villains?

[Mike Murdock]

^ Magneto turns into the villain in the last couple minutes of every movie! OK, more seriously, I didn't have a problem with Sebastian Shaw (I thought his abilities were used excellently), but I did have a problem with the Hellfire Club, which I thought was used poorly.

Stryker is most definitely in my top ten CBM villains list for sure.

[elitist snob] The comics version was so much better [/elitist snob]

Seriously, I love God Loves, Man Kills. The religious aspects were great. I kind of wonder, given the timeline change and Mystique's seeming interference in the Weapon X Project, if they might make Stryker into a religious figure this time around. Maybe that would be too controversial, though.

 

[starscream22]

Yep, both have very good actors portraying them so its stupid to judge so far in my eyes. I am not in love with Apoc's look but looks aren't everything, Malekith looked great and then we saw what happened. Ultron looked dangerous and threatening in the trailers and then wasn't in the movie.

The insecurity is becoming worse by the day it seems. Though I do feel Ronan and TWS are under rated.



Yep, I also thought Sebastian Shaw was great. He was the true villain if FC in every way as without him Eric does not become Magneto. Because Magneto has one scene at the end when he turns into a villain people seem to think he is the villain for the whole movie.

Pfft!
That was Kevin Bacon with mutant powers and a Nazi background.

An actual Sebastian Shaw character done proper would be nice but this is Fox so....

 

[Flint Marko]

George R.R Martin is bored with Marvel's movie villains.

I think this is a good summary of the issue as a whole - Martin spends the entire post praising Ant-man as he has done with most MCU movies in the past, but his complaints about the villains are the only thing that people are paying attention to. Indeed, most of the MCU is widely regarded as good to great, but the villains are the one easy complaint that recieves more of a focus in light of the studios other accomplishments.
I think that as a whole their villains have been lackluster, but that's only a complaint I hear from fanboys on the Internet. Everyone else is to busy talking about how much they love Tony Stark or Captain America.

 

[BH/HHH]

I consider the top bar of villains to be Terrence Stamp's General Zod, Jack Nicholsons Joker and Heath Ledgers Joker. The only Marvel villain I would put in the same bracket is Loki. I'd say they definitely have a problem with their villains, I just hope they don't **** up Thanos like they did Ultron.

 

[Drz]

I just hope they don't **** up Thanos like they did Ultron.

Joss Whedon is gone so we shouldn't worry aboutn Thanos becoming Quipnos.

 

[BH/HHH]

Joss Whedon is gone so we shouldn't worry aboutn Thanos becoming Quipnos.

Have you seen the animated film they did with Ultron, with the young avengers? They absolutely nailed Ultron in that. I just can't get my head around what they did with him in AOU.

Well I hope you're right on Thanos cause if they don't deliver with him it will be massively disappointing. Especially given all the build up.

 

[Drz]

I heard the villain in Ant-Man was a better Ultron than Ultron lol, i'll find out myself tomorrow when I see the movie.

 

[starscream22]

I think this is a good summary of the issue as a whole - Martin spends the entire post praising Ant-man as he has done with most MCU movies in the past, but his complaints about the villains are the only thing that people are paying attention to. Indeed, most of the MCU is widely regarded as good to great, but the villains are the one easy complaint that recieves more of a focus in light of the studios other accomplishments.
I think that as a whole their villains have been lackluster, but that's only a complaint I hear from fanboys on the Internet. Everyone else is to busy talking about how much they love Tony Stark or Captain America.

MCU is winning so Fox fans and DC fans make MCU villains sound worse than they are.

People like you and I can simply agree that it would be great if the MCU stepped their game up with their villains and leave it at that. While avid Fox and DC fans will exaggerate their issues with MCU villains to overshadow the greater issues with Fox, Sony and WB CBMs. This thread shows more proof of that.

But they're not going to win any Fox improvement awards with characters like "Domashev" and Ivan Ooze" in the pipeline.

I have my concerns about the new Joker and Luthor as well but unlike Fox's ongoing crap I'm willing to give WB a chance.

 

[starscream22]

Have you seen the animated film they did with Ultron, with the young avengers? They absolutely nailed Ultron in that. I just can't get my head around what they did with him in AOU.

Well I hope you're right on Thanos cause if they don't deliver with him it will be massively disappointing. Especially given all the build up.

That Animated film was done under Lionsgate. The crappy Marvel cartoons that Disney make currently don't hold a candle.

 

[Greens]

But they're not going to win any Fox improvement awards with characters like "Domashev" and Ivan Ooze" in the pipeline.

I have my concerns about the new Joker and Luthor as well but unlike Fox's ongoing crap I'm willing to give WB a chance.

So you're allowed to call Fox on their crap, but we're not allowed to call the MCU on its crap? Thanks for notifying us.

 

[John Locke]

So you're allowed to call Fox on their crap, but we're not allowed to call the MCU on its crap? Thanks for notifying us.

Well of course. If you call out Fox or WB you're in the right but if you call out the MCU you are a hater.

 

[SuperT]

Seriously. We can have a constructive conversation without dissolving into studio wars, no one in this thread has even really gone there.

Like I said previously, Fox & WB having crap villains doesn't negate the fact that Marvel has them too and vice versa.

 

[YoungBlood]

Sad thing is that some are too blind to see that.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Well of course. If you call out Fox or WB you're in the right but if you call out the MCU you are a hater.

Yes these are rules, surely everyone knows by now?

Seriously. We can have a constructive conversation without dissolving into studio wars, no one in this thread has even really gone there.

Like I said previously, Fox & WB having crap villains doesn't negate the fact that Marvel has them too and vice versa.

Exactamundo, we are not praising Fox or DC villains by listing our complaints with MCU ones . All companies have done bad villains, with Marvel I think poor villains and over use of humour is what is holding them back a little.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Well of course. If you call out Fox or WB you're in the right but if you call out the MCU you are a hater.

It's not like the DC/Fox sections don't have similar zealotry. But I agree that endless bickering accomplishes nothing.

 

[John Locke]

It's not like the DC/Fox sections don't have similar zealotry. But I agree that endless bickering accomplishes nothing.

Yes but Fantastic Four and BvS have threads for skeptics that have great conversations and not just studio wars.

 

[Boom]

MCU is winning so Fox fans and DC fans make MCU villains sound worse than they are.

People like you and I can simply agree that it would be great if the MCU stepped their game up with their villains and leave it at that. While avid Fox and DC fans will exaggerate their issues with MCU villains to overshadow the greater issues with Fox, Sony and WB CBMs. This thread shows more proof of that.

But they're not going to win any Fox improvement awards with characters like "Domashev" and Ivan Ooze" in the pipeline.

I have my concerns about the new Joker and Luthor as well but unlike Fox's ongoing crap I'm willing to give WB a chance.

You sure seem hell-bent on making this thread about Fox's and WB's CBM villains, which is odd considering that this thread is called "Does MARVEL have a problem with their villains?" and it is located in the MARVEL Films Board.

Try and stay on course.

 

[YoungBlood]

You sure seem hell-bent on making this thread about Fox's and WB's CBM villains, which is odd considering that this thread is called "Does MARVEL have a problem with their villains?" and it is located in the MARVEL Films Board.

Try and stay on course.

That is the epitome of brand loyalty for ya, they don't wanna see the flaws in something they like so instead they will go out and attack others.

 

[Shikamaru]

Oh I agree that the A-listers have had good villains. The best of Marvel even manage to do both: Spider-Man and X-Men both have good villains and good internal conflict.

That being said, I do want to push back a little bit. First off, while it doesn't push them to A-listers, some of the B-listers have managed to do as well as they have despite lacking great villains. Daredevil is a perfect example. You have Kingpin, who is compelling. Bullseye is great, but I don't think he works well on his own. Instead, he works best with the backdrop of the internal struggles of the main character.

I would argue Daredevil has Kingpin, Bullseye, The Punisher (he's practically a villain in most DD stories), Elektra & The Hand, The Owl, the Enforcers, and occasionally Mister Fear (whenever he's written distinctly enough from Scarecrow). Daredevil's villain problem is more quantitative than qualitative IMO. He doesn't have as many great villains as, say, Batman or Spider-Man, but the great villains he does have are able to keep up with the best.

Also, why would Bullseye "not working well on his own' be a detriment? Wouldn't that apply to most villains in general? I don't see how that would be an issue. They're meant to be antagonists, not protagonists.

Similarly, I feel other B-listers have had a decent share of great villains. Hulk and Captain America come to mind, as well as Flash and GL (if you consider them B-list).

Second, while I acknowledge they have great villains, the X-Men might be the strongest counter-example. Their surge in popularity was not due to great villains. Their popularity rise was during the run of Chris Claremont. During this time, one of their greatest villains - Magneto - only appeared a handful of times and, as time went on, became less and less of a villain. In his place, they added Deathbird (not so great), the new brotherhood (solid, but even Mystique isn't as compelling as Magneto). Probably the biggest addition was the Hellfire Club. On the other hand, particularly in that story, it's internal conflict that gets the biggest attention. The villain of the piece isn't the bad guys, it's Phoenix, their friend who they want to protect. The story is driven by the desire to protect Jean vs. the need to destroy her. Sebastian Shaw and Jason Wyngarde are good, but they aren't the stars.

I'm not a big X-Men fan and haven't read much of Claremont so I can't comment on this. However, I'll add a great villain doesn't necessarily have to be the star or to outshine the hero in order to be a great villain. As I stated before, my whole point is that these two things almost go hand in hand. I don't see how Sebastian Shaw not being the star of the Phoenix saga ("star" as in the main focus) takes away from him being a great villain and from the conflict he provided.

Finally, I'll point out that the sample size in the movies is smaller. If comics can go dozens of stories without an A-List villain, who is to say movies can't? Maybe they can't go 24 stories (two years worth), but we aren't getting 24 movies of a character.

This is a fair point, but even James Bond's had a couple of memorable villains by now. Can Marvel continue to keep Iron Man at the top all the way to 2040 without giving him a single Loki-esque quality villain? Especially when other characters like Thor, Cap and Daredevil already have at least one far more memorable villain by now? (With Spidey potentially joining that list soon?)

 

[Whiskey Tango]

edit

 

[OcStat]

I think the re-occurrence of snarky business types in the MCU is kind of prevalent, but as far as Tony Stark goes, that's par for course. On the surface level, Ant-Man seems to have more of the same, but really Cross, Killian, Hammer and Stane have different motivations and conflicts with the protagonists to set them apart.

 

[Boom]

I've always thought that Ghost could've been a really cool recurring side villain throughout the Iron Man franchise. Have him be a corporate spy/saboteur for hire.

 

[Destructus86]

I feel that villains in superhero movies...DC OR Marvel are fairly one dimensional partly by design. Zod was one dimensional...most of the villains in the MCU are fairly one-dimensional. Many times they choose to focus more on the heroes simply because they are the ones the audience is going to see. When the GA goes to an Iron Man film they want to see Iron Man and Tony Stark. Or with the Winter Soldier people went to see Captain America and Steve Rogers. Time is spent both on the hero itself and the person "behind the mask" which leaves less time for growth in regards to the villain. Obviously it's working...superhero films do fantastic.

 

[BH/HHH]

I heard the villain in Ant-Man was a better Ultron than Ultron lol, i'll find out myself tomorrow when I see the movie.

I can confirm that t:

That Animated film was done under Lionsgate. The crappy Marvel cartoons that Disney make currently don't hold a candle.

They made a big mistake the

 

[Black Narcissus]

I'm a comicbook movie fan period.

I want all of them to do well, but some on here take this valid criticism personal and make this lame ''us'' vs them type thing. I hate that type of fandom.