The Villains Problem

[Ivan Drago]

It's actually kind of astounding at how bad the recent DCEU villains have been. Enchantress and her stupid brother are one of the worst villains in the genre. Like worse than Sharon Stone from Catwoman. I was cringing in every one of their scenes.

Eisenberg is insufferable as Lex Luthor. BvS would improve an entire letter grade for me if you took him out of the movie.

Leto's joker is try-hard and a pretty big disappointment, both aesthetically and performance wise.

It really made me appreciate the MCU and their villains more.

 

[DACrowe]

Pierce had a charm, but he didn't get to use it much as he's the third villain in this movie by importance. He's even pretty nice, as he's taking a friendly approach at first so I didn't come to hate him at all. He was just doing his job. I think Eccleston managed to create more presence with his voice alone, but he too got too few scenes, although he did get to accomplish things.

Yes, the villain is more important for TDW as he's needed for the story to work. Logan could play out a lot even without the villains being there. There just wouldn't have been any action. Still Malekith was underused, although that's better than being laughable like someone like Apocalypse. Logan's villains certainly avoid that as well.

We just see things differently here. Not really much of a discussion to go on with I guess.

I will just point out that Pierce chasing refugee kids through the woods and even shooting one of them made him far more hatable and cruel than anything MCU villains or, yes, for that matter Apocalypse did. Because that is a very realistic and tangible act of malevolence in our modern world, the sick authority figure getting his jollies by abusing his power over folks... especially if they're trying to get over a border.

He might be "third" in terms of level of threat to Logan, but he presented a very realistic kind of evil. In that sense, he was quite effective.

It's not that it's a woman in itself, it's that Talia doesn't bring anything to the table in my view. Vader isn't hurt by the Emperor since the latter gives a vague sense of that he's even more powerful, so you escalate the stakes. With Talia it, at least as far as a third act climax goes, I got the feeling that the twist replaced the big bad with a lesser one.

They did have that plot device of will being more important than anything (child Talia being able to jump farther than grown men, Batman suddenly being able to fight Bane despite coming off an extreme injury, etc) so perhaps they could have built up Talia to be something more, but she didn't get that time. Then again, if they dip their toes into the supernatural I think it would probably have been a better twist to go full out and have an immortal Ra's al Ghul come back. He at least already had a lot of character development. Although to keep the tone it's probably easiest to just not have a twist, as the story didn't need it.

That is a fair point, and the best I've seen against the Talia twist. I actually agree she does not live up to being the child who survived given she died so easily. I still think it does not take anything away from Bane, but in a storytelling sense we are supplanting a great villain for a perfunctory one. On one hand I like subversion, but you make a good argument about it hurting the movie. With that said, I love the chase at the end and think it is a great way to wrap that catch the bomb motif up, so I am not sure it would be better or worse if Bane was driving the truck.

 

[Ivan Drago]

^
Or torturing Caliban for that matter.

 

[NHawk19]

Can we agree that DC/WB is doing the worst with villains right now? Zod, Eisen-Luthor, Doomsday, Enchantress, Incubus, and Letoker?

Yup. They're taking what should be compelling multi-arc villians and at best trying to make them one and done. At their worst they're caricatures of their former selves. The anti-heroes in Suicide Squad come the closest to working because they were the "heros".

 

[Mjölnir]

I will just point out that Pierce chasing refugee kids through the woods and even shooting one of them made him far more hatable and cruel than anything MCU villains or, yes, for that matter Apocalypse did. Because that is a very realistic and tangible act of malevolence in our modern world, the sick authority figure getting his jollies by abusing his power over folks... especially if they're trying to get over a border.

He might be "third" in terms of level of threat to Logan, but he presented a very realistic kind of evil. In that sense, he was quite effective.

I found him more cool (at least he was in the beginning) than hatable. That's another thing I don't see as a problem though as I don't tend to hate villains in superhero movies. Mainly because there's often enough cool things about them to not be just despicable. Genoicidal maniacs should be the worst thing you can think of, but super villains, Darth Vader, etc, are just generally characters I like seeing because they get to be cool.

Of course the more gritty tone in Logan could have made that differently, but it didn't turn out like that for me. So, purely from the point of me judging nothing but the character (as I've been clear on that I don't think fleshed out villains are necessary, and sometimes even hinder making the best heroes), he got a little bit lost when being put to be in the initial failure and then being pushed aside when the other villains came in. He would probably have been able to shine more if the Reavers were the only villains, so they would have to be a bit more remarkable and their cybernetics might have been more than just side-show visuals.

So for me I hold him in the kind of villain as I've said in previous posts, but I don't think it's a big problem since it doesn't ruin anything about what the movie actually is about. The Logan story can almost be told without any of the villains. It would be a worse one without any action, but many of the beats could still work just as a drama.

That is a fair point, and the best I've seen against the Talia twist. I actually agree she does not live up to being the child who survived given she died so easily. I still think it does not take anything away from Bane, but in a storytelling sense we are supplanting a great villain for a perfunctory one. On one hand I like subversion, but you make a good argument about it hurting the movie. With that said, I love the chase at the end and think it is a great way to wrap that catch the bomb motif up, so I am not sure it would be better or worse if Bane was driving the truck.

She would perhaps have worked better if she got more time to show why she's special, instead of people just telling us she is.

 

[Another_Fool]

Can we agree that DC/WB is doing the worst with villains right now? Zod, Eisen-Luthor, Doomsday, Enchantress, Incubus, and Letoker?

Word. It's quite astounding too when you consider how good the villains were for the DC movies directly prior to DCEU. Even Kevin Spacey's Lex was good I thought.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Can we agree that DC/WB is doing the worst with villains right now? Zod, Eisen-Luthor, Doomsday, Enchantress, Incubus, and Letoker?

I'd rank Sokovia Joe and Emo Doom as worse.

 

[Flint Marko]

Who is sokovia joe?

Can we agree that DC/WB is doing the worst with villains right now? Zod, Eisen-Luthor, Doomsday, Enchantress, Incubus, and Letoker?

It's almost not even up for debate.

I was thinking the other day how funny it is that we no longer hear a lot of comic book fans criticize the world-building in the MCU, because the last two DCEU films gave us the most egregious examples of that yet. The villain complaint looks to follow that example; now that DC has cranked out the worst villains we've seen in any recent superhero film, we're going to hear less complaining about Marvel's boring villains.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Doom's worse, but that's just one character. Collectively, I'd definitely take the Fox villains over the DC ones. DC might be better than Sony though. Zod wasn't great, but he was easily better than any Sony villain since Doc Ock. That isn't saying much though.

 

[2kt09]

I'd rank Sokovia Joe and Emo Doom as worse.

Who?

Word. It's quite astounding too when you consider how good the villains were for the DC movies directly prior to DCEU. Even Kevin Spacey's Lex was good I thought.

I don't think you remember those DC movies outside of the TDK trilogy the way others do given most of em' repressed said memories.

 

[Ivan Drago]

Doom's worse, but that's just one character. Collectively, I'd definitely take the Fox villains over the DC ones. DC might be better than Sony though. Zod wasn't great, but he was easily better than any Sony villain since Doc Ock. That isn't saying much though.

I would actually argue Enchantress and Incubes are worse than Doom, but Doom is the more iconic character so it hurts more.

 

[Hammer!]

Doubt the DCEU "villain problem" ends this year with giant CG Ares, wooden plank actor Danny Huston, giant CG lackey Steppenwolf, and hordes of faceless Para-Cannonfodder.

 

[Hammer!]

Who?

I wanna say Ultron, but that would be a borderline ridiculous claim.

 

[2kt09]

I wanna say Ultron, but that would be a borderline ridiculous claim.

The only other villains that come to mind in Sokovia are Baron Strucker and Pietro Maximoff. Neither of those make me think "Sokovia Joe"

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I think he means Zemo, but I can't agree with that all.

But there was some backlash over him not being a purple sock wearing Nazi.

 

[2kt09]

Oh! GI Joe...Sokovia Joe, lol

 

[Hammer!]

I think he means Zemo, but I can't agree with that all.

But there was some backlash over him not being a purple sock wearing Nazi.

Cap is my favorite character/comic title so I was bummed. Still liked Zemo, but he better wear the freaking mask if they use him again. Think/hope they will; they're certainly leaving it open given where we left him in Cap 3.

I dig Age of Ultron more and more upon subsequent views, but they totally did waste Strucker. Oddly enough I recall them axing him from the Cap 1 script because they didn't wanna waste him in a supporting role. He's more of a Nick Fury villain, and that movie ain't happening which makes it a little easier to swallow.

 

[DACrowe]

Doom's worse, but that's just one character. Collectively, I'd definitely take the Fox villains over the DC ones. DC might be better than Sony though. Zod wasn't great, but he was easily better than any Sony villain since Doc Ock. That isn't saying much though.

That is because Doc Ock was a Raimi creation. The more hands on the studios become, the more homogeneous the villains seem to appear. With that said Marvel now finally has access to Spidey's rogue gallery. They better start making some good creations out of that. And anything might be better than Lex Eisenberg or Enchantress (although Malekith is just as bad as those for me).

Actually, I have a modest hope that with an actress of Cate Blanchett's caliber that Ragnarok's Hela might be something different. She already is easily the one who most grabs attention on that cover.

 

[Hammer!]

Malekith was just dull. He wasn't intrusively awful or on an island in his own movie like the DCEU villains or Apocalypse. And he's a one and done unlike Letoker and Eisen-Luthor who are our featured villains for the next decade.

 

[DACrowe]

I imagine we will not see Eisenberg's Luthor for a long time. But Malekith is actually worse than him for me, and Apocalypse too. At least they had personalities and feeble motivations.

With that said, Malekith is better than Enchantress. Then again so is the threat of wet paint.

 

[Hammer!]

Malekith is essentially Zod: one dimensional, "I'm doing this for the survival of my people by destroying others" as sole reason for everything. It really does need to stop. Zod did have a personality, but he was over the top, screaming too much, being too unreasonable thanks to the one-dimensional trope, and written poorly. Least interesting roles for both actors, Shannon and Eccelston.

 

[2kt09]

I genuinely can't remember Malekith.
I know what he looks like, but zilch regarding his characterization.
Even MCU's other bland/infamously worse villains I can recall via the archetypes they're playing, the characters they've interacted with, and even motivation...but a big question mark as soon as someone brings up Malekith.

half-elf and ether...is that everything?

 

[Another_Fool]

Who?


I don't think you remember those DC movies outside of the TDK trilogy the way others do given most of em' repressed said memories.

Can't say for sure if I'm following what you're saying but I said "directly prior to DCEU" trying to imply just the TDK trilogy and Superman Returns. I was not including the Donner nor the Burton/Schumacher films.

 

[2kt09]

Can't say for sure if I'm following what you're saying but I said "directly prior to DCEU" trying to imply just the TDK trilogy and Superman Returns. I was not including the Donner nor the Burton/Schumacher films.

Ok.
It's just that there are other 21st century DC films outside of Batman and Superman, so I wasn't sure.

 

[Another_Fool]

Ok.
It's just that there are other 21st century DC films outside of Batman and Superman, so I wasn't sure.

Yeah I wasn't being very clear. I admit I actually forgot about Jonah Hex. V for Vendetta I don't really consider a true DC film, but Creedy was an effective villain. Watchmen practically copied the series so I discount it. And Green Lantern was meant to launch the DCEU, and just because WB tries to pretend it doesn't exist I still consider it a bit of a DCEU film.