The Villains Problem

[Mjölnir]

As I've said in other threads, the *real* "Villain Problem" is the tendency for far too many movies to make the villain the protagonist of the story. They do everything, they make all the important decisions, the plot focuses on them. They are the star of the show.

Marvel has largely just put their villains back in their place, with that place being "To serve the narrative needs of the hero."

That's an interesting point, and I can agree to a large part. When a lot of effort is put into the villain and it clicks, they can easily take over the movie. The Joker did that for me as Ledger had a great performance, and despite that he was written a bit illogically that was by far the most captivating thing in the movie. Especially as I think Batman himself lost a few steps compared to Batman Begins.

It's certainly possible to have both the hero and the villain shine, but when looking at things it's generally one or the other that stands out. In superhero movies I still think that there's only two pairings of characters that really work together and that always elevate each other when they have scenes together. It's Xavier and Magneto (both versions, impressively enough) and Thor and Loki.

 

[The Joker]

Now this is just silly. Can you actually name any supervillain plans in movies that could "work in real life"?

As for Bane himself, He was an excellent villain definitely more memorable and intimidating than the vast majority of MCU canon fodder and all DCEU villains currently.

People are still doing it five years later, that's why. Bane in The Lego Batman Movie sounds like Hardy's Bane. They are kind of making fun of it, but at the same time it is distinctive and memorable, as is his swagger and physicality. Heck, Trump accidentally quoted him in his inauguration and people noticed. Maybe Nolan was ahead of the curve after all in predicting a demagogue villain with a funny voice overthrowing the establishment.

Thumbs up to these posts.

 

[First Avenger]

I loved Bane until his last scene when Talia shows her true self. I especially hated the way he was killed by Selina.

 

[Batmannerism]

I loved Bane until his last scene when Talia shows her true self. I especially hated the way he was killed by Selina.

Yeah, you've kind of touched on something important about movie villains - part of the audience satisfaction comes from seeing them meet a well-deserved end, in a very satisfying way.

I enjoyed Bane's smackdown of Batman (well, total destruction really) because it set up the re-match so well. It seemed kind of graceless for Bane to get completely whupped, then once he's recovered attempt to shoot Batman in the head, something about that didn't really work.

At first I didn't mind Selina blasting a big hole in Bane - he certainly had it coming, and Hathaway delivered the line about guns really well. Still, they could have found a better end for him.

BTW has anyone mentioned Tommy Lee Jones as Wild Willy from Under Siege, a performance that so clearly outshone Steven Seagal (which admittedly isn't a tall order). Now he gets a terrific death - which helps make him such a terrific villain.

What about John Travolta in Face Off, or in Broken Arrow ?

In terms of cbm villains very few of them get a really good death. Having said that I felt Harvey's death in TDK really worked, Batman essentially killed him to save young Gordon, it worked.

Neeson's R'as Al Ghul wasn't bad either.

Recently though I do feel that Marvel's villains haven't died particularly sastisfyingly - although Kaecillius was good, fans of the comic of course realise he got his immortality as he was transformed into a "Mindless One" who live forever as slaves of Dormammu.

Ronan's death was reasonably satisfying.

Malekith's death, like the character, was pretty underwhelming although Kurse's wasn't bad.

Ultron....not bad, not great.

Apocalypse (yes, Fox, not marvel) well, I found the whole character pretty underwhelming. Strange, because there are some pretty massive effects going on around that final fight scene, but for some reason Bryan Singer has never managed to make me care about any of his characters - so it kind of fell flat, for me anyway.

By contrast, Matthew Vaughn is the master of the great villain death:

- Mark Strong in Kick Ass
-Sam L Jackson and Sofia boutella in Kingsman,
and best of all, Kevin Bacon in X-Men First Class ( a really satisfying death).


Anybody mentioned Kelly Hu as Lady Deathstrike ? - the most underused villain - she's the Darth Maul of the X-Men saga, a totally kick ass villain who only appears briefly, looks awesome and then dies. Ugh.

Red Skull....meh.

thank goodness Marvel's had the sense not to kill its two best villains, Loki and Zemo.

Looking forward to Thanos, although I don't like that he smiles, I've always thought of him as a nearly soulless death-worshipper.

And of course fingers crossed that DC don't **** up Darkseid, who has the potential to be the greatest comic book villain ever......or the worst if they do the same thing they did with Lex Luthor, which I guess would mean having him played by Ken Jeong, who interprets the character as a variation on his Chow character from the Hangover movies.

 

[BoredGuy]

Now this is just silly. Can you actually name any supervillain plans in movies that could "work in real life"?

As for Bane himself, He was an excellent villain definitely more memorable and intimidating than the vast majority of MCU canon fodder and all DCEU villains currently.

it's true, most villain plots wouldn't work in real life
but most aren't so patently absurd on the face of it
or, they're based on some magic mcguffin, so we have no way to relate them to real life and thus can excuse them more easily

"when they send the entirety of Gotham's police force blind into a sewer, we will trap them!"
"during the financial upheaval we very visibly create, we will take all of Bruce Wayne's money! Nobody will think we were involved!! bwahahaha"

Bane's plans seemed stupid because they were kinda plausible real world crimes
something even more philosophically-based, like Joker's plans, are easier to excuse when we find holes in the plot

Add in the stupid voice and Tiny Tom Hardy, and that character's a joke imo

 

[DACrowe]

And Marvel Studios' darling The Winter Soldier features a cult of Nazi-esque fascists who have been ruling the Marvel universe's version of the CIA for 70 years, easily recruiting Americans born generations later who've been raised to power in the U.S. military and political systems of devout patriotism, to take over the world on a power coup during one arbitrarily special day in 2014. That's plausible?

No, it is silly. You just choose to ignore that nonsense of that.

 

[Web-Head]

Feige talked about Marvel's villain problem recently, actually.

“In 2008, two superhero movies that came out,” Feige said, referring to Marvel Studios’ first film, Iron Man, and The Dark Knight. “One focused on the villain, one focused on the hero, and we at Marvel looked at them, like ‘Yeah, we focus on the heroes. We don’t mind that. We like that.’”

“Please don’t start a flame war,” he added. “Nobody wants that. We don’t do that. But, again, it really always is what serves the story.”

http://io9.gizmodo.com/marvel-studios-is-perfectly-okay-with-their-villain-pro-1792101084

 

[BoredGuy]

And Marvel Studios' darling The Winter Soldier features a cult of Nazi-esque fascists who have been ruling the Marvel universe's version of the CIA for 70 years, easily recruiting Americans born generations later who've been raised to power in the U.S. military and political systems of devout patriotism, to take over the world on a power coup during one arbitrarily special day in 2014. That's plausible?

No, it is silly. You just choose to ignore that nonsense of that.

I don't ignore it, but again, that was so implausible that you (or myself at least) more easily suspend disbelief. It's a clear "comic book" plot. TDKR has some basis in real world revolutions/coups/civil uprisings that the ways it differs from real life become more noticeable and grating.

I'm sorry if me being insulting to Bane upset you. But that was one of the few 'good' movies where the whole time I just couldn't get into it because I was like "that would never work, its ridiculous". And I'm not usually a Plot-hole Picker. Even Luthor's convoluted plan in BvS, it was silly and over complicated, yes, but because it's not something that happens in real life and thus can't be compared to reality, it didn't take me out of the film. (Eisenberg's acting did that, lol)

 

[DACrowe]

Feige talked about Marvel's villain problem recently, actually.



http://io9.gizmodo.com/marvel-studios-is-perfectly-okay-with-their-villain-pro-1792101084

Hm, interesting. I would disagree with his reading of The Dark Knight. I think it and all of Nolan's movies shows you can have both great heroes and villains. So does Spider-Man 2, and to some extent the better X-Men films (with emphasis on a few heroes and villains, the rest being paper thin and generic).

But it is curious to hear his rationalizations for the issue.

I don't ignore it, but again, that was so implausible that you (or myself at least) more easily suspend disbelief. It's a clear "comic book" plot. TDKR has some basis in real world revolutions/coups/civil uprisings that the ways it differs from real life become more noticeable and grating.

I'm sorry if me being insulting to Bane upset you. But that was one of the few 'good' movies where the whole time I just couldn't get into it because I was like "that would never work, its ridiculous". And I'm not usually a Plot-hole Picker. Even Luthor's convoluted plan in BvS, it was silly and over complicated, yes, but because it's not something that happens in real life and thus can't be compared to reality, it didn't take me out of the film. (Eisenberg's acting did that, lol)

It does not bother me. I just get tired of hearing that argument. I actually agree with you the cops being trapped in the subway tunnels all at once is a bit of lazy writing. I'd also add that Bane keeping them alive with food and water is also fairly convenient. I'd even throw in Batman being able to get back into the city so easily, but they actually concept art'd a pretty cool idea for that and then didn't follow through in at least the final edit for some reason.

Anyway, my point was that, yes, Rises has plot contrivances (I don't really think they're plot holes though), but they are mostly disappointing because TDK was so much tighter. With that said, I think Rises holds together better than most superhero movies, and I distinctly called out TWS, because Marvel fans treat it as a great espionage drama and often put it in the same breath as TDK. I don't see it as good as TDKR, much less TDK. And the truth is it has more plot issues than either, so I was just making the comparison, especially since so many treat it as some sacred achievement in filmmaking.

With that said, enjoy movies as you wish. But I think Rises is showing it is aging quite well. It left an impression. Heck, as I said in an earlier post, we now have a demagogue running this country and slowly pecking away at the rules of society. And he straight up sounds like Bane, unintentionally quoting him, while doing it with a faux-populist message. People have noticed, which again shows the enduring, memorable quality of the film which all of a sudden seems much more timely.

 

[BoredGuy]

yeah but it also shows Bane didn't need the violence
He coulda just run for president and the gullible would elect him
lol

 

[DACrowe]

yeah but it also shows Bane didn't need the violence
He coulda just run for president and the gullible would elect him
lol

Touché.

 

[Awest66]

Personally, I never minded the "send the cops into sewer" scene mainly because they didn't send every cop contrary to popular belief. A sizable portion make up the resistance against Bane's rule.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

We can update this with the lame villains from Logan. They made me long for the days of Francis from last year.

 

[Ivan Drago]

I really liked Donald Pierce. Excellent back in forth dialogue between him and Logan.

[BLACKOUT]X-24 [/BLACKOUT]is more intimidating and eerie than most MCU villians. That scene at the farmhouse.... damn.

While the villains may not be the greatest, I feel like the real tension is designed to come from the heroes. Demons within, regret, cynicism, etc. Ultimately, it's Logan's battle with himself and the fact that while he may be able to dismember enemy combatants, a greater futility has been weighing on him for ages.

 

[jaymes_e06]

^Agreed.

 

[Erzengel]

Add me to the list who wasn't "psyched" about the villains in Logan.

 

[Ivan Drago]

Add me to the list who wasn't "psyched" about the villains in Logan.

It does seem like most comic book movies nowadays from any studio are criticized for their villains.

When's the last time a majority of people liked a cbm villain?

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

It does seem like most comic book movies nowadays from any studio are criticized for their villains.

When's the last time a majority of people liked a cbm villain?

Probably Bane. Or Sam Jackson in Kingsman, if you count him.

 

[Roose Bolton]

Nolan did do villains better than anyone else, before or since.

 

[Ivan Drago]

I will say Donald Pierce has one of the coolest [BLACKOUT]deaths for a villain [/BLACKOUT]in any cbm, so he gets a couple of extra points in my book.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

I think a lot of times people overstate this villain problem. You can have a satisfying conflict with a simplistic villain.

The problem is when you give uninteresting villains too much screen time (opposed to say...Mission Impossible 4, where they keep their simplistic villain's screen time to the bare minimum).

 

[Guard82]

I think a lot of times people overstate this villain problem. You can have a satisfying conflict with a simplistic villain.

Yes, indeed you can. Deadpool is a good example. There's nothing very special about Francis as a villain, and he doesn't come close to matching the film's protagonist in terms of attention-grabbing charisma. But the movie is written and acted well enough that the conflict is still engaging and satisfying, and you're interested in following Deadpool's arc throughout the story.

Same with Guardians of the Galaxy. Ronan isn't a very unique villain either, but he fills his role in the story just fine, and the conflict is still well-crafted because the protagonists are done so well and the script does a good job of making you invested in their journey.

Movies that already have storytelling problems are burdened even more if they have a simplistic or uninteresting villain. A good example of this is Thor: The Dark World. The best scenes in this movie involve the interactions between Thor and Loki. Other parts of the film, unfortunately, tend to suffer from a lack of focus and a lack of compelling character drama. And when you add an uninteresting villain like Malekith to the mix, the film just becomes even more problematic. As a result, the conflict in the film is a lot less interesting than it should be.

The problem is when you give uninteresting villains too much screen time (opposed to say...Mission Impossible 4, where they keep their simplistic villain's screen time to the bare minimum).

Batman vs. Superman is a good example of this. That movie's version of Lex Luthor wasn't well-received by many viewers, and this was made worse by the fact that Lex, an unpopular character, was given too much screentime.

 

[Ivan Drago]

A big problem I had with Ronan is that I didn't understand his motivations. His reasoning for wanting to destroy an entire planet was extremely murky.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

A big problem I had with Ronan is that I didn't understand his motivations. His reasoning for wanting to destroy an entire planet was extremely murky.

His father and grandfather were killed in the war against the Nova Corps, so he was pissed and wanted vengeance.

 

[Ivan Drago]

His father and grandfather were killed in the war against the Nova Corps, so he was pissed and wanted vengeance.

Was this said in the movie? I've seen Guardians like 4 or 5 times and I have no recollection of that.