The Star Trek: Into Darkness thread got me thinking. Does the villain draw audiences to a given film moreso than the hero? Joker and the Into Darkness villain seem to indicate this. So do you think a film with a hero-villain and an antagonist who is worse than the hero-villain could do big numbers at the BO? The best example of a hero-villain I can give you is Elric Sadricsson: A politician in a decadent city poisoned Elric in order to pressgang the Melnibonean into his service. The politician agrees to give Elric the cure so long as Elric enters the Dream Realms to retrieve a McGuffin. To ensure Elric's total cooperation, the politician takes a young street rat hostage. Prior to Elric's capture, the street rat had helped him survive in a desert wasteland. Elric has a soul-drinking runesword. He could've used it to threaten or kill the politician, then just take the potion that would cure the poison. Elric doesn't do that; he goes on a quest and retrieves the McGuffin. Back in the city, Elric drops some hints to the politician's servants--and even the whole of the political council--that they should get out of town or give up their petty, greedy ways and leave a tribe of desert nomads that had befriended Elric alone. In the end, Elric ends up killing everyone in the city, giving their souls to his runeblade, Stormbringer. The above is my definition of hero-villain. Is this the time for such a character in mainstream cinema?