Does marvel really have a problem with making their villains cool?

[Rorschach2012]

I thought he sounded fine, myself. But then again I like "out of the box" approaches to these big, bad characters.

He's big, evil, and scary? Give him a deep, throaty, evil voice! It's a cliched and tried concept. Hence, a boring and generic one.

Precisely...

I know you're being sarcastic, but there are always new ways to do the deep throaty evil voice . Josh Brolin was something i got behind initially, but now that I've heard it, i'm not feeling it. It's not that it's too out of the box, it just doesn't fit well. I'm reserving complete judgment until I've heard more but as of now, it doesn't work as well as a "deep, throaty, generic evil voice" would

 

[Boom]

My ranking of the MCU villains:

Great:
The Mandarin (pre-twist)

Good:
The Winter Soldier
Alexander Pierce
Loki

Serviceable:
Obadiah Stane
Ronan
Arnim Zola
Red Skull
Abomination

Bad:
Aldrich Killian
Justin Hammer
Whiplash
Malekith

 

[Johnny-Oh]

I disagree. Zod, Luthor, Scarecrow and Ra's al Ghul were all top notch in my book. Although, it remains true that WBs great villains were still all limited by the fact that WB just hasn't made many movies lately.

I do agree that Malekith was the worst, but not the only bad one. Killian just felt like a joke to the very end and Stane bored the hell out of me. Iron Man is a great movie in spite of stane.

And its really got nothing to do with how they looked. I loved Pierce (and as already mentioned, Lex Luthor and Ra's al Ghul). It's about personality and the effectiveness of their part in the story. I actually rank Vanko and Blonsky around mediocre because I thought they had great promise in the first half of their films - they had fantastic personality - but the climaxes really let them down.

I fail to see how Scarecrow or Ra's Al Ghul are great villains considering their little screen time and overall weight on the film. Zod was just forgettable and never did anything impressive and the only thing about Lex in SR was the performance.

Killian and Stane aren't constantly saying speeches like most villains but they're more focused on their plans and you can't deny that Killian's scheme was brilliant.

 

[Boom]

My breakdown of WB's DC villains since 2000:

Great:
The Joker
Two-Face

Good:
Ra's al Ghul
Bane

Serviceable:
Scarecrow
General Zod
Lex Luthor (SR)
Ozymandias
Carmine Falcone
Salvatore Maroni

Bad:
Talia al Ghul
Krona/Hammond/Parallax/whatever the **** that thing was
Whoever was in Jonah Hex
Whoever was in Catwoman

 

[Johnny-Oh]

There needs to be some effects on Brolin's voice. As is, it is nowhere near threatening enough for Thanos. This is the supreme badass of the MCU, he needs to sound a lot scarier

Lets make him sound like Bane from Batman & Robin YAAAAY

 

[Mike Murdock]

Crimson Dynamo is obviously better in the comics. I don't know why they tried to combine a character nobody ever cared about (Blacklash) with him

Whiplash ... because of the whips. I think they combined them because Whiplash looks cool.

Re: Thanos's voice. I wouldn't mind a bit of a reverb to give it a bit more gravitas, but I thought it was pretty good overall.

 

[Rorschach2012]

I guess my disappointment stems from my expectations. I wanted Thanos to sound more like a monster than man. Josh Brolin's performance wasn't bad, i just expected something very different.

 

[Majik1387]

I too wanted more of Thanos' voice, but Brolin gave what was necessary; I expected a bit more out of the soundmixing crew, the same way they altered Nebula's voice slightly.

 

[TheHeatKitchen]

I think they just spend so much time on the heroes and weaving plot lines that most villains become one-dimensional and more hollow than the should be. The ideas for the villains are there and they have a good basis, they just don't get developed enough in the film.

Now, that doesn't apply to Killian or Whiplash... wow.

 

[TheHeatKitchen]

I fail to see how Scarecrow or Ra's Al Ghul are great villains considering their little screen time and overall weight on the film. Zod was just forgettable and never did anything impressive and the only thing about Lex in SR was the performance.

Killian and Stane aren't constantly saying speeches like most villains but they're more focused on their plans and you can't deny that Killian's scheme was brilliant.

Killians elaborate plans was very smart and well thought out, but he was a boring, tpyical villain (minus the fire breathing).

I agree that Zod was forgettable as a villain, but Michael Shannon's performance was one of the best performances in recent superhero movie memory.

 

[Loki882]

Zod had more depth do him than most of the MCU villains thus far, and Shannon's performance was quite good. Those alone sort of automatically make me like him more. Like I said, I love the MCU overall, but I don't like the fact that when a lot of their villains appear onscreen, I kind of feel like checking my watch. I shouldn't be thinking "could we please get this guy offscreen so that the interesting stuff can come back." They aren't ALL like that, but a lot of them are.

 

[Victarion]

My ranking of the MCU villains:

Great:
The Mandarin (pre-twist)

Good:
The Winter Soldier
Alexander Pierce
Loki

Serviceable:
Obadiah Stane
Ronan
Arnim Zola
Red Skull
Abomination

Bad:
Aldrich Killian
Justin Hammer
Whiplash
Malekith

Killian is the Mandarin?

 

[Loki882]

He was talking about when Sir Ben Kingsley was pretending to be the Mandarin. He was far more intimidating and interesting then than Killian was when he actually WAS the villain.

 

[Mike Murdock]

Like I've said before, The Mandarin from the trailers is awesome. He looked like he was blowing up planes by touching the rings on his fingers. Even pre-twist Mandarin can't beat that guy

 

[Saitou Hajime]

I'm pretty sure Brolin's "no former music video directors" comment was a dig at Zack Snyder.

First of all, Josh Brolin has NO ROOM to talk **** on Zack Snyder.

You wanna know why? Well that's because his voice for Thanos was lame as hell. Not in the least bit threatening or scary. It just sounded like Josh Brolin.

Thanos isn't fricking supposed to sound like some regular American dude. This guy is THE villain of the MCU and he sounds lame as hell IMO. I personally know people that could do a Thanos voice more threatening than Brolin's.

I'm not trying to turn this into a Marvel/DC thing, but Brolin's comment was a definite jab at Snyder. Just wait til Zack Snyder gives us his version of Darkseid. He's going to look AND sound so much more threatening and terrifying than this child friendly Thanos.

I was pumped for Thanos in GOTG. But once again, Marvel proves that they can't make truly threatening villains. The Marvel movies are great, but the villains are lame as hell. Thanos follows this trend. DC excels with scary villains, i can't wait to see their take on Darkseid, he will be as scary and threatening as Thanos should be.

Thanos IMO never seemed to be the type that is overtly threatening. He's more similar to Thrawn from Star Wars in that he has an affable demeanor that disguises the danger that lurks behind it. He's too... refined in his ways to be bad-bossing everyone that gets on his bad side from the get go like Darkseid.

 

[The Overlord]

I think the criticisms on Red Skull are VERY unfair. Captain America wasn't a Saving Private Ryan style WWII epic. It was a throwback to Indiana Jones and The Rocketeer, and for THAT Captain America film, Red Skull was perfect. I am sure if the Red Skull is used in Cap 3 or whatever, he will bear more resemblence to the more modern Red Skull, but that isn't the film they were making. If the Red Skull came off this way in a more serious Captain America WWII based film, I'd agree. But, with the film as constructed, I simply don't. He worked for the movie he was in. That being said, I don't want to see that Red Skull when he appears next. I'd like a scarier version. Once again, that comes back to the Cap franchise is different at this point in time, so Red Skull must change with it.

Mola Ram was in an Indiana Jones movie and I found him to be more scary then Movie Red Skull and the Indiana were not afraid to have real Nazis as the villains.

I think it would be really hard to turn Movie Red Skull into comic book Red Skull, without a major retcon. Comic Book Red Skull is a racist, hate filled psychopath with a grudge against the world, Movie Red Skull is a basic power mad take over the world villain, there is no hint of the malice that drives Comic Book Red Skull, Movie red Skull is just power mad, that is it, end of story. Comic Book Red Skull cares about power, but he wants power to inflict pain on others, power is just a means to that end, whenever he gets power, it is to serve that end. Movie Red Skull, just wants power and that is it, that is just boring in comparison.

I think The Wrecking Crew could be memorable, but if they ever decide to do Kang, and if they do him right, he will be remembered as a great villain.

How would the Wrecking Crew be memorable, in a visual or characterization way? The Wrecking Crew has somewhat interesting visual look, but as characters, they are some of the flattest villains in the MU. They are the most generic goons in the MU and have been for decades, there only purpose is to knock over bank and have the heroes fight them at the beginning of an issue, before the real villain shows up. Unless they got a major personality upgrade in the movies, they would not be memorable in terms of personalities.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Mola Ram was in an Indiana Jones movie and I found him to be more scary then Movie Red Skull and the Indiana were not afraid to have real Nazis as the villains.

I think it would be really hard to turn Movie Red Skull into comic book Red Skull, without a major retcon. Comic Book Red Skull is a racist, hate filled psychopath with a grudge against the world, Movie Red Skull is a basic power mad take over the world villain, there is no hint of the malice that drives Comic Book Red Skull, Movie red Skull is just power mad, that is it, end of story. Comic Book Red Skull cares about power, but he wants power to inflict pain on others, power is just a means to that end, whenever he gets power, it is to serve that end. Movie Red Skull, just wants power and that is it, that is just boring in comparison.

The answer is simple: his experience in the cosmos changed him. Made him truly understand power. Seeing not just the world, but the universe has made him scarier in time. It really isn't hard at all to do. It just takes some imagination.

As for Mola Rom, yeah he was scary. But what about Belloq in Raiders or Vogel in Last Crusade? Both were basic the same type of villain Red Skull was. THAT is closer to what they wanted. It worked. It is also worth noting that for all the scariness of Mola Rom, that Raiders and Last Crusade were better films and most people don't even know Mola Rom's name.

 

[Bayne]

I fail to see how Scarecrow or Ra's Al Ghul are great villains considering their little screen time and overall weight on the film. Zod was just forgettable and never did anything impressive and the only thing about Lex in SR was the performance.

Killian and Stane aren't constantly saying speeches like most villains but they're more focused on their plans and you can't deny that Killian's scheme was brilliant.

Performance is an important part of a villain. Shannon, Spacey, Neeson and Murphy really sold me. Scarecrow's mind stuff was some heavy **** in BB (although he was fairly undercut by the later films) and Spacey was one of the most deliciously insane characters I've ever seen (although he was somewhat undercut by the idiot henchmen/girlfriend). Pearce really, really didn't.

Yes, the specific plan they had him working was really well thought out, but as a character I didn't find him even remotely compelling. His motivation was so irritatingly cliched - yes, I know it wasn't all about getting revenge on Stark but it was basically the former weak nerdy guy taking his revenge on the world that oppressed him now that he's become strong and hunky. Blech. Boring.

Add to that the very problematic fact that the fake villain in the first half of the film felt a million times more scary than the real one in the second half and the fact that they ditched what was looking to be an honestly new and interesting IM villain for the sake of bringing out Yet Another Evil Arms Dealer (seriously, is Iron Man ever allowed to fight anything else?).

Also, Extremis abilities had little to no explanation with the result that they made very little sense and the fx they chose to represent them where seriously unimpressive. That's why, overall, Killian comes off to me as irritating, uninteresting and incoherent.

Stane... well, Stane is better than Killian. Bridges did a good job with what he had to work with, but his plan was fairly basic, his intimate relationship with tony didn't come across very well to begin with, so his betrayal of him didn't really feel very important, and his iron suit, while big and strong, wasn't all that threatening and resulted in a slightly anti-climatic final fight. Sure, he doesn't indulge much in grandstanding, but otherwise he's a fairly by-the-numbers villain who doesn't have an outstanding performance, intriguing backstory or unique personality/abilities to make him stand out.

 

[Oscorp]

you pissed because im not suckling Marvel's teet?

I love the **** out of their movies, but it's generally accepted by fans that their villains are completely lacking. They know how to do their heroes well, but they fail on the villains time and time again.

Some of the hardest core MCU fans will even attest to this.

I totally agree with you about the majority of villains in the Marvel films, but the way you prematurely claim that Darkseid and other future DC villains will be oh so great with no clue how they'll even handle him in the films is what I find hilarious. Your post smelled fanboyism from miles away.

That's not to say I'm completely disappointed with the Marvel villains though. Most of them serve their purpose well, even though I'm still disappointed with Red Skull, Mandarin etc.

 

[The Endless]

Thanos IMO never seemed to be the type that is overtly threatening. He's more similar to Thrawn from Star Wars in that he has an affable demeanor that disguises the danger that lurks behind it. He's too... refined in his ways to be bad-bossing everyone that gets on his bad side from the get go like Darkseid.

Pretty much. People saying Thanos should have a big booming voice probably haven't actually read any Jim Starlin comics featuring the character.

His speech patterns are rather eloquent and snobby. Most of the time he seems more studious and collected, rather than FEAR ME MUWAHAHAHAHAHA!

Before Brolin got cast i was thinking of people like Jeremy Irons or Colin Firth for Thanos. I've always imagined him with a posh, snobby British voice. But Brolin impressed me with his voice inflections. And the dialogue is like something straight from a Starlin comic.

"Your demeanour is that of a pouting child" was spot on. And his delivery of "I will bathe the star-ways in your blood" was suitably sinister but never over the top. Thanos rarely shouts.

 

[chamber-music]

My breakdown of WB's DC villains since 2000:

Great:
The Joker
Two-Face

Good:
Ra's al Ghul
Bane

Serviceable:
Scarecrow
General Zod
Lex Luthor (SR)
Ozymandias
Carmine Falcone
Salvatore Maroni

Bad:
Talia al Ghul
Krona/Hammond/Parallax/whatever the **** that thing was
Whoever was in Jonah Hex
Whoever was in Catwoman

Michael fassbender at least seemed like he was having fun in Jonah hex. John malkovich was in the movie for the paycheck and was sleepwalking through the role.

 

[The Endless]

Yea Fassbender was pretty fun in Hex. Man i remember reading the original draft of that screenplay, it was so much better than what we actually got in the film.

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

I'm pretty sure Brolin's "no former music video directors" comment was a dig at Zack Snyder.

First of all, Josh Brolin has NO ROOM to talk **** on Zack Snyder.

why? he has a point. and a strong one, given Snyders oevre.

and as Brolin admits he didn't fully get the character of Thanos until the SDCC panel, let's just see what he does with him the next time.

also - and others have stated that too - Thanos is not the kind of villain with the deep booming voice sounding threatening, he is a very sophisticated character, laid back. you might have misunderstood the character completely

 

[Oscorp]

Might as well have been a jab at Sony hiring Marc Webb.

 

[3dman27]

I'd prefer the main, titular character to take down the villain in earnest. Since the movie involves his arc and the villain ties very directly into that arc. Instead, he simply weakens him, allowing a secondary character to swoop in and take care of business while RDJ sits there queuing up for another one-liner.

Just a personal preference. Nice of you to jump straight to assumed misogyny, though .

considering that killian1 kidnapped and used her not only as a pawn against tonybut as an UNWILLING test subject /guinnia pig for his extemis tests he was also responsible for the blast that almost killed happy do you blame her for wanting a crack at him?