The Villains Problem

[Batmannerism]

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.

Dude, do you mean this mask......

Well, I respect your opinion, but IMO that mask has always looked like something Elton John would wear if he joined the KKK.

I can understand people feeling attached to the comic book version because he's been around so long but to be honest I've always found him to be a slightly more ridiculous version of the Red Skull or Btaron Strucker's idiot brother.

In Civil War they took this looney toon and turned him into a relatable, understandable human being (with freakishly spot on planning skills) made him so much more than a 2D nazi loon wearing a purple sock on his head.

I still don't think Daniel Bruhl got enough credit for his performance. Watch him closely during his few scenes and you really do believe that his character is possessed by a cold, implacable hatred of the Avengers.

By not having him as a cackling madman (or wearing the sock on his head) the Russos are really saying something about the power of determination and total commitment (remember he wasn't just willing to die, dying was part of his plan) and he was a relatively ordinary person (well okay, he was a spec ops officer, but he's still just a man). That makes him a million times more compelling than DC's Lex Luthor (from B v S) and a much better villain than his comic book counterpart IMO.

 

[metaphysician]

He basically had everything important from Helmut Zemo: the mastery of manipulation, the obsession, the striking at the heart of the heroes, the complicated motivation born of family ties, the connection to a fascist regime. The only important thing he doesn't have is "leadership of supervillains", but honestly, they are kind of setting him up for that, too.

Zemo was easily the strongest villain of 2016, and not by a small margin.

 

[henzINNIT]

Zemo was easily the strongest villain of 2016, and not by a small margin.

Agreed, though that undersells Zemo as a villain cause 2016 was a terrible year in that regard.

Apocalypse was the big dud for me last year. Singer had a pretty good track record casting and utilising villains previously, but Oscar Issac was so wasted.

 

[Lantern Venom]

He basically had everything important from Helmut Zemo: the mastery of manipulation, the obsession, the striking at the heart of the heroes, the complicated motivation born of family ties, the connection to a fascist regime.

He had nothing essential to Helmut Zemo. He wasn't born into a long legacy of "Master Race" ideology, wasn't shown to be an expert with firearms or a sword, he didn't possess the key resentment of Captain America due to disfigurement, and he wasn't shown to be a scientific genius who could invent and wield Adhesive X. The MCU Zemo was an empty cliche' whose simplistic plan could have easily been implemented by Crossbones.

 

[Batmannerism]

He had nothing essential to Helmut Zemo. He wasn't born into a long legacy of "Master Race" ideology, wasn't shown to be an expert with firearms or a sword, he didn't possess the key resentment of Captain America due to disfigurement, and he wasn't shown to be a scientific genius who could invent and wield Adhesive X.

Didn't wear a purple sock over his head,like this:

The MCU Zemo was an empty cliche' whose simplistic plan could have easily been implemented by Crossbones.

Dude, have you not seen the threads and arguments about how ridiculously complicated and reliant on a perfect confluence of luck and circumstances the
Zemo plan was ? Plenty of people have argued that Zemo's plan requires superhuman skill and supernatural timing......MCU Crossbones couldn't even commit suicide properly.

But seriously, you are totally right that MCU Zemo and Comics Zemo have very few similarities.

Personally, I think that's a good thing, as the comic book character is ridiculous - whereas MCU Zemo is much more of an everyman character - at least we can understand his motivations ( rather than " you scarred my face, you must die" it's "you and your friends carelessness killed the only people I ever loved. You took everything I cared about, and now I'm going to take it all from you." )

We can almost sympathize with him, I think he's one of the least cliche villains we've seen yet.

However, I can appreciate that people who like the comic book version may feel aggrieved by the MCU version.

So, agree to disagree in some respects. Cheers.

 

[Roose Bolton]

The Zemo I read in the comics isn't cartoonish at all, or at least he hasn't been in the last 10-11 years of publication. One of the biggest reasons why I liked the MCU Zemo was that they did in fact keep the character's complex morality from the comics.

 

[Flint Marko]

He had nothing essential to Helmut Zemo. He wasn't born into a long legacy of "Master Race" ideology, wasn't shown to be an expert with firearms or a sword, he didn't possess the key resentment of Captain America due to disfigurement, and he wasn't shown to be a scientific genius who could invent and wield Adhesive X. The MCU Zemo was an empty cliche' whose simplistic plan could have easily been implemented by Crossbones.

And he was still easily the best super villain of 2016

 

[Lantern Venom]

And he was still easily the best super villain of 2016

He was either next-to-last or last, with only Lex Luthor as competition. I get that people liked Bruhl's performance, but there's nothing that can be done to save a character when it's that underwritten. ZINO was just an unnecessary plot device, and I say this as someone who has defended every Marvel villain except Mandarin prior to 2016.

 

[Flint Marko]

Just to clarify, you'd put this over Zemo?

 

[R_Hythlodeus]

Just to clarify, you'd put this over Zemo?

Gozer the Gozerian!

 

[Lantern Venom]

Just to clarify, you'd put this over Zemo?

She was instantly recognizable as Enchantress, so yes. I'd even put the somewhat underdeveloped Doomsday over Zemo since he at least had his powers.

 

[Steamteck]

She was instantly recognizable as Enchantress, so yes. I'd even put the somewhat underdeveloped Doomsday over Zemo since he at least had his powers.

I gotta agree underwhelmed by Zemo and to me the overworn cliche of the "normal Man " being the one to defeat our foes. Especially since his plan relied so much on stuff beyond his control or knowledge and an apparent area effect intelligence drain on the Govt ( OK maybe not MCU Govts have already proved to be morons) and our heroes.

The others at least their was satisfaction from their defeat and mythic level opponents.

 

[Steamteck]

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

No we can't and I think you know that. We are a divided fandom filled with fanatic love and maddening hate.

 

[Erzengel]

I have to agree that 2016's CBM villains weren't anywhere near a Joker, Loki or Magneto but Zemo didn't have to be and still thought he was miles over the rest.

 

[Guard82]

I definitely liked Zemo and I thought he was one of the most well-written MCU villains. I generally like the MCU villains even when they aren't what you would call stand-out antagonists like the Joker, Magneto, Loki, Bane, etc. Most of the MCU villains are merely functional antagonists as opposed to thrilling standout villains, but at least they usually work well within the roles they're assigned. The only MCU villain that I was really disappointed with was Malekith because he was just way too boring and colorless for my taste.

 

[AlluAllu]

Well, I think that people don't say that "Loki is the only good MCU villain" as much now as they did before Zemo.

 

[jaymes_e06]

Zemo was immensely boring to me.

 

[CaptainWagner]

I liked Zemo, but he was very much an INO character. Which I feel like Marvel is given a lot of slack for, unlike certain other studios...

 

[Slade W]

I liked Zemo, but he was very much an INO character. Which I feel like Marvel is given a lot of slack for, unlike certain other studios...

If you make changes to a character, and the changes are good, you can get away with it and most comic fans will forgive it. If you make changes to a character, and they are not good, the only way to get away with it is if most other things in the TV show/movie are good, so that most comic fans will get over it. People complained about Batman killing in Batman Returns, but people still like the movie because they found most other things in the movie to be enjoyable.

At the end of the day, I do not think most people watching superhero movies are comic fans, and care as much about accuracy as a lot of comic fans do. I would say that the most important thing is telling a good story with likeable and/or interesting characters, as that is what the vast majority of movie-goers, comic fans or not, go to see. If that is done, I think do not think most people will care about whatever changes are made. Every CBM franchise, be it the MCU, TDKT or Raimi's Spider-Man movies all have people complaining about changes made to characters, despite most of those movies being successful and well-received, so it isn't like you can ever please everyone when to comes to comic accuracy.

Marvel do a very good job with most of their characters and stories, and that is why they are forgiven for most of the changes or mistakes that they make. It would be the same with any other studio if they had done as good a job.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I liked Zemo, but he was very much an INO character. Which I feel like Marvel is given a lot of slack for, unlike certain other studios...

Agreed

 

[CaptainWagner]

If you make changes to a character, and the changes are good, you can get away with it and most comic fans will forgive it. If you make changes to a character, and they are not good, the only way to get away with it is if most other things in the TV show/movie are good, so that most comic fans will get over it. People complained about Batman killing in Batman Returns, but people still like the movie because they found most other things in the movie to be enjoyable.

At the end of the day, I do not think most people watching superhero movies are comic fans, and care as much about accuracy as a lot of comic fans do. I would say that the most important thing is telling a good story with likeable and/or interesting characters, as that is what the vast majority of movie-goers, comic fans or not, go to see. If that is done, I think do not think most people will care about whatever changes are made. Every CBM franchise, be it the MCU, TDKT or Raimi's Spider-Man movies all have people complaining about changes made to characters, despite most of those movies being successful and well-received, so it isn't like you can ever please everyone when to comes to comic accuracy.

Marvel do a very good job with most of their characters and stories, and that is why they are forgiven for most of the changes or mistakes that they make. It would be the same with any other studio if they had done as good a job.

But I don't see how most of the changes are perceived as "good". Ronan was turned into a one-note, expendable villain, Darren Cross' name was placed on a random jerk businessman, Hank Pym was turned into a generic mentor figure with none of his iconic flaws, Hawkeye has a family, for some reason...

None of these things make the characters better. Then you look at WB. If Eisenberg's Lex had been a different character, like Riddler, it would have been phenomenal. So the "it's still good" excuse doesn't really work there.

 

[Slade W]

But I don't see how most of the changes are perceived as "good". Ronan was turned into a one-note, expendable villain, Darren Cross' name was placed on a random jerk businessman, Hank Pym was turned into a generic mentor figure with none of his iconic flaws, Hawkeye has a family, for some reason...

None of these things make the characters better. Then you look at WB. If Eisenberg's Lex had been a different character, like Riddler, it would have been phenomenal. So the "it's still good" excuse doesn't really work there.

I addressed this. I said if there are changes made that are not good, you can get away with it if most other things in the movie are good. Marvel get away with having forgettable villains a lot because they do most other things very well, and they can get away with poor changes to other characters for the same reason.

 

[Erzengel]

Superman and Batman as well as Luthor and Joker will always be held to a higher standard because of previous incarnations and popularity. Fair or unfair.

 

[Ivan Drago]

Personally, my issue I have with Zemo in Civil War is that I feel like he didn't need to be in the movie. The conflict between Tony and Steve was strong enough and could have driven the whole movie. You didn't really need a villain.

Plus, everyone knows the best comicbook movie villain of last year was Francis.

 

[Erzengel]

:snicker: