Why are the villains in the Ultimate Universe so boring?

[hippie_hunter]

Hippie Hunter i don't really see why you got so much againts Thor being a "hippie" >_>

Hello....I am called hippie hunter for crying out loud

 

[GyLocke]

I would take any sympathetic villain over an "extreme" villain like Carnage, any day.

I think there is place for both. I just think the bad guys of the world are mostly not that nuanced.

For example: I live in Hungary, and there's a right wing group murdering gypsies (out largest minority) in increasing numbers in last few weeks. They exterminate whole families, shoot children in the face with shotguns in the middle of the night, stuff like that - not that far from where I actually live. The majority of our police force is working on capturing these animals. These are what BAD GUYS are like. And sure, there must be some misunderstood poor souls among the criminals, but the majority are animals. My roommates brother is sitting in jail right now, for killing a guy who talked trash to him and his friends. If superpowers were real, most supervillains would behave in this fashion. As primitive thugs. Not the sufferrers of some poetic tragedy.

Doc Ock had decades to turn his life around, yet remained a murderer and a villain. When he declares how he just wants to help and how the evil world treats him it comes over as pathetic, fake and tacky. So far removed from a real character, that it ruins my enjoyment. If he was just looking for excuses, sure I can buy that, but I felt I was supposed to feel for him. That's what I really hated in ASM 600. There are only so many "phases" a character can go through, before it becomes ridiculous.

A good Carnage story (like the first one) is not interesting because Carnage himself is interesting. It's interesting to see character's reactions to a brute like that. I'm actually happy they've killed him, because that's the logical conclusion of a character like that. Kill him, before he kills again. It took a decade too long though. Spidey and co letting him live was just as stupid.

I love Magneto, but If every villain was like him, he wouldn't be unique. That doesn't stop most writers from trying to revamp everybody and their mother to be this gray, tragic character. It works for Magneto, it works for Lex Luthor, it doesn't work for The Vulture or Sandman.
I say keep them varied. Have the thugs and have a few characters like Magneto. But the Ultimateverse has the right balance I think. characters like Ultimate Venom, Osborn, The Colonel even the first few appearnances of Doc Ock are interesting enough without coming over as fake comic book ********. That's what I liked in the line.

 

[The Overlord]

I think there is place for both. I just think the bad guys of the world are mostly not that nuanced.

For example: I live in Hungary, and there's a right wing group murdering gypsies (out largest minority) in increasing numbers in last few weeks. They exterminate whole families, shoot children in the face with shotguns in the middle of the night, stuff like that - not that far from where I actually live. The majority of our police force is working on capturing these animals. These are what BAD GUYS are like. And sure, there must be some misunderstood poor souls among the criminals, but the majority are animals. My roommates brother is sitting in jail right now, for killing a guy who talked trash to him and his friends. If superpowers were real, most supervillains would behave in this fashion. As primitive thugs. Not the sufferrers of some poetic tragedy.

Not all criminals are like that, clearly some criminals are, but like I said many criminals are just people who grew up in the wrong circumstances and some are menmtally ill and don't know the difference between right and wrong . Some times things are black and white and some times they aren't, but its good to use to both types of characters. What about child soldiers, are they evil or just victims of the adults that control them?

Plus this fiction I want to read about larger then life characters, I would rather read about Napoleon then your room mate's brother.

Doc Ock had decades to turn his life around, yet remained a murderer and a villain. When he declares how he just wants to help and how the evil world treats him it comes over as pathetic, fake and tacky. So far removed from a real character, that it ruins my enjoyment. If he was just looking for excuses, sure I can buy that, but I felt I was supposed to feel for him. That's what I really hated in ASM 600. There are only so many "phases" a character can go through, before it becomes ridiculous.

Except Dr. Octopus has been getting pet the dog moments since the 80s this hardly new. I think Doc Ock has a personality disorder, which leads to him moral extremes. Ock going from trying to kill Spider-Man to trying to cure AIDs because his girlfriend is interesting, it makes him different then say Gobby.

A good Carnage story (like the first one) is not interesting because Carnage himself is interesting. It's interesting to see character's reactions to a brute like that. I'm actually happy they've killed him, because that's the logical conclusion of a character like that. Kill him, before he kills again. It took a decade too long though. Spidey and co letting him live was just as stupid.

Except that moral siutation is already covered, in a far better way, with Batman and Joker, only Joker is far interesting, so I don't the story concept that great and frankly the character's "extremeness" really annoys me.

Carnage would only have worked as one shot villain, past that, he gets really dull, really fast. I perfer evil villains who are clever or creative or stylish or have different schemes to achieve their goals (ex: Red Skull, Joker, Purple Man, Bullseye) all these characters are evil and more interesting then Carnage, because they can be used for more then one story.

I love Magneto, but If every villain was like him, he wouldn't be unique. That doesn't stop most writers from trying to revamp everybody and their mother to be this gray, tragic character. It works for Magneto, it works for Lex Luthor, it doesn't work for The Vulture or Sandman.

As counter point, I like the Red Skull, but I think it be boring if every villain was evil like the Red Skull, wouldn't you?

Lex isn't a sympathetic, he's a Magnificent Bastard, people like him because he is cool and smooth and clever, not because he is sympathetic.


I would say 616 Vulture is a far deeper he's a far deeper character then Ultiamte Vulture, 616 Vulture has a motive:

"Spider-Man's enemy the Vulture is a good example of the other type of this trope. Many years after his debut he was given a backstory in which an unscrupulous business partner cheated him out of the proceeds from his inventions. He wrecked said partner's business, stole back his money, and discovered that he enjoyed the thrill. Eventually the partner surfaced, and the usually not-murderous Vulture went after him; Spidey stopped the Vulture but taped the partner's confession."

Ultimate Vulture has no motive or personality to speak off, he sucks compared to 616 Vulture. Personality wise what's the difference between Ultimate Sandman, Vulture and Electro?

I say keep them varied. Have the thugs and have a few characters like Magneto. But the Ultimateverse has the right balance I think. characters like Ultimate Venom, Osborn, The Colonel even the first few appearnances of Doc Ock are interesting enough without coming over as fake comic book ********. That's what I liked in the line.

Almost none of those characters were sympathetic, Osborn was a creep who abused his son, he deserved his fate, Venom was misogynistic creep who hit on 15 year olds and Dr. Octopus was creep who was corporate spy and then just became an arrogant jerk. None of those characters are sympathetic, they are all creeps. They all deserve the bad things that happen to them.

The Colonel died before I even got attached to him, so who filled his spot on as a sympathetic villain?

See there is no balance in the UU, all the villains are either thugs or psychopathic masterminds and frankly a lot of them have no personality quirks that make them different. They are mostly one dimensional, there is no contrasts between them, they might as well twirl mustaches and eat puppies, because most of them are as deep as a sat morning cartoon villain from the 80s.

The 616 universe has a way better balance between evil and sympathetic villains, there are villains who are noble and/or sympathetic (Doom, Magneto, Lizard, Gladiator, Typhoid mary, etc) and villains who are really evil (Green Goblin, Bullseye, Purple Man, Red Skull, Mr. Fear, Apocalypse,etc) that makes for more diverse characters and more interesting contrasts, the bunch of one dimnsional villains in the UU.

Hello....I am called hippie hunter for crying out loud

Yes, but not everyone would think hippie=*****e, like you do.

 

[The Overlord]

Anyway I'm going to talk about two villains who thought were vastly inferior in the UU: Dr. Doom and Magneto.

Ultimate Doom is pretty lame, he has goat legs, he was bum in his first appearance, then he became a less impresive clone of 616 Doom, then he went to zombie world and then Thing killed him. That just sucks. Also his origin is lame, its the usual cliched "Daddy beat me, so now I'm bad" stuff you have seen a billion times before, instead of the epic origin 616 Doom. Ultimate Doom is not a Magnificent Bastard, like 616 Doom is. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MagnificentBastard

Ultimate Magneto is another vastly inferior villain, he went from a complex anti Villain to one dimensional mustache twirling monster with no real motive in the UU and contradictary back story. He was lame before, but Ultimatum made him even worse, where he seemed to try to destroy the world for no reason other then he was obessed with the story of Noah's Ark. What, did he get high one night, read the bible and liked the story of Noah's Ark so much that he decided to play it out in the real world? Then he decides he was wrong because Jean Grey reveals mutants were created by humans (which was stupid in the first place.)

All of that is really stupid, it be like Dr. Octopus reading Hansel and Gretel, dressing up like witch and luring children to house made out of candy, so he can cook them in pies.

Magneto and Doom are interesting characters in the 616 universe, but in the UU, they suck.

 

[GyLocke]

Ultimate Magneto is another vastly inferior villain, he went from a complex anti Villain to one dimensional mustache twirling monster with no real motive in the UU and contradictary back story. He was lame before, but Ultimatum made him even worse, where he seemed to try to destroy the world for no reason other then he was obessed with the story of Noah's Ark. What, did he get high one night, read the bible and liked the story of Noah's Ark so much that he decided to play it out in the real world? Then he decides he was wrong because Jean Grey reveals mutants were created by humans (which was stupid in the first place.)

At least he is consistent, no now I'm good, now I'm bad, now I'm good, now I'm bad again nonsense.

I agree about Doom though, pretty bad ultimazation. If it was up to me, I would've went a completely different route with him. Not giving him Latveria in the second Arc. Make him the equal of Richards, who's willing to give the government whatever it wants and eventually take control of it in secret. Or something bettern not thought up on the spot by a drunk forum member
Ultimate Doom is younger, still has time to become the magnificent bastard 616 Doom is. But no, the fanboys whined about the goat legs, so they made him an exact replica in his second appearance. way to stick to your stones Marvel.

 

[The Joker]

I love Ultimate Doc Ock. He's awesome. That scene where he rips Peter's tooth out of his head is one of my favourite comic book moments ever.

 

[kguillou]

Spidey's Ultimate rogues are way more badass than their 616 counterparts (well except carnage i guess). Remember when ultimate Kingpin crushed that guys head with his bare hands? DAMN. Ult. Norman was just scary as hell, and ult. doc ock is a complete psychopath.

 

[The Overlord]

At least he is consistent, no now I'm good, now I'm bad, now I'm good, now I'm bad again nonsense.

Yeah, he consistent, consistently boring, he was about as deep a character as Dick Dastardly, I mean why did he want to destroy the world in Ultimatum?

Personality wise Ultimate Magneto seemed like a very very poor man's Red Skull, only without the motive.

I will take interesting characterization over consistency any day.

Plus there ways to make a villain sympathetic and have it come across as believable: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFDTMW3_ilE

That episode won an Emmy. Frankly I think the DCUA is better at revamping characters then the UU is.

I agree about Doom though, pretty bad ultimazation. If it was up to me, I would've went a completely different route with him. Not giving him Latveria in the second Arc. Make him the equal of Richards, who's willing to give the government whatever it wants and eventually take control of it in secret. Or something bettern not thought up on the spot by a drunk forum member
Ultimate Doom is younger, still has time to become the magnificent bastard 616 Doom is. But no, the fanboys whined about the goat legs, so they made him an exact replica in his second appearance. way to stick to your stones Marvel.

Well its hard to top 616 Doom and the goat legs were stupid, its almost a no win situation, how do you reinvent the wheel.

Now to be positive for a second, I'm to talk about some Ultimate villains I liked because I thought they had really interesting twists: Ultimate Mr. Sinister (less convoluted, more down to earth and just plain creepy), Ultimate Mojo (covers the same themes as 616 Mojo, but again more down to earth), Ultimate Mole Man (he's so cute and funny), Ultimate Psycho Man (He's a villain that actual presents a challenge to the FF's morals, rather then just being another physical threat), Ultimate Mad thinker (again really creepy) and Ultimate Stryfe (less convoluted and really scummy in a believable way). Ultimate Mysterio has potential, but its too early to judge him.

See not all of those characters are sympathetic, but they are at least they are memorable. Ultimate Electro is completely forgettable, you don't like him or hate him or anything, he's just there....taking up space.

Spidey's Ultimate rogues are way more badass than their 616 counterparts (well except carnage i guess). Remember when ultimate Kingpin crushed that guys head with his bare hands? DAMN. Ult. Norman was just scary as hell, and ult. doc ock is a complete psychopath.

616 Kingpin ripped off Sammy Silke's head in DD, so I don't see how that is that much different.

Plus have you read Ellis' run Thunderbolts, after reading that can really say 616 Norman is a lame character? Plus the turning into a goblin thing was lame, IMO.

Doc Ock being a psychopath, that's alright, but considering how psychopath evil geniuses there are in UU, its hard to stand out from the crowd with that CV in the UU.

I like Ultimate Venom, just because he was less convoluted and had a better motive then his 616 counterpart.

Ultimate Carnage sucks, but then again 616 Carnage sucks so I don't blame Bendis for that.

But you haven't answered my other question, how are Ultimate Electro, Sandman and Vulture better then their 616 counterparts, because its seems to me the Ultimate versions of those villains are dull and interchangeable, while the 616 versions of those villains have some characterization and are somewhat different from each other.

Sometimes its better to have a character who has developed personality, rather then just being bad ass.

 

[theunseenmarvel]

I cant speak for all the other UU comics but in the case of Ultimate Spider-Man hes only 15/16 they have to tone down the villains otherwise he would either get his ass handed to him every time or quiet possibly get killed. if we switched his villains with say the ASM villains he would not survive.

 

[The Overlord]

I cant speak for all the other UU comics but in the case of Ultimate Spider-Man hes only 15/16 they have to tone down the villains otherwise he would either get his ass handed to him every time or quiet possibly get killed. if we switched his villains with say the ASM villains he would not survive.

well I'm not complaining about the powers of the USM villains, I'm complaining about the lack of personalities on some of them.

 

[Fantasyartist]

For the most part, most Marvel super-villains ARE pretty boring characters anyway. Those who aren't basically motivated by greed(the vast majority) such as Dr Doom, Magneto are motivated by some aberrant desire for power(admittedly Magneto wants to conquer the world to make it safe for mutantkind) or formerly some other kind of ideological viewpoint( Nazism for The Red Skull, Soviet style Communism for the Titanium Man or Crimson Dynamo).

Terry

PS The Serpent Society ( or at least Diamondback, Black Mamba and The Asp) seem an intriguing variant on this theme. Companionship as well as criminality seems as much an issue to them!

 

[Spade]

I think I've mentioned this before, but: Villainy, to me, is always a little 2D. There are few villains with a back story that justifies their long term viewpoint, and those that do are close-minded to alternative actions besides mass genocide or other violent expressions. But that's what makes them interesting. I always liked Jack Kirby's angle on Doom's scarring; he envisioned it to be the smallest little blemish imaginable, but in Doom's mind to be the justification behind his eternal hatred of Reed. People sometimes forget the most evil men in history were motivated by the dumbest, pettiest reasons you could think of. Vanity has been one, and over the years racism, Manifest Destiny, religion, greed, power plays, and even spurned love have been added to the list. The difference between superhero comics and reality is that said fictional villains are usually smart or strong enough to kick your glutes straight off of your body, whereas in real life similar madmen are usually pathetic in all categories without an army or a gun backing them up.

As for the Ultimate Universe specifically, it's always been concerned with realism. Obviously, the creators love certain aspects of Marvel comics and have to forgo complete realism for the more out-there material (Ex: No matter how you handle Peter Parker obtaining his powers, it still involves pseudoscience). But for the most part, heroes and villains get as gray around the edges as they do outside of the serialized format. But not all of them are base. Take the Liberators, from The Ultimates 2. Can you really say other nations would not be justified if they set up their own response to the Ultimates, given how shady S.H.I.E.L.D. is in that universe? Ultimate Red Skull just got introduced, and I really doubt his history with the US government was peaches and cream until some unjustified villainy on his part later on.

Yeah, it has some bad examples. Venom and Carnage immediately come to mind. Hulk could be another, depending on how you see it. Heck, if you see the whole team as villainous, you could present the Ultimates. As others have mentioned, Millar was trying to make this big political anti-hero statement with them that has been hit-and-miss. But for the most part, I haven't noticed a big difference in the ratio between successful villain portrayal and the failures that crop up between the two universes. For every Geldoff, there's an Ultimate Doc Ock. For every Romulus, a Doctor Doom. They may not be as fantastical as Stan, Jack, and Steve's originals, but Ultimate Universe villains are appealing in their own way.

 

[The Overlord]

For the most part, most Marvel super-villains ARE pretty boring characters anyway. Those who aren't basically motivated by greed(the vast majority) such as Dr Doom, Magneto are motivated by some aberrant desire for power(admittedly Magneto wants to conquer the world to make it safe for mutantkind) or formerly some other kind of ideological viewpoint( Nazism for The Red Skull, Soviet style Communism for the Titanium Man or Crimson Dynamo).

That's just wrong, hero is said to be only as good as their villains, after all there's a few reasons why Batman is more popular then Hawkman and one main reason is Batman has a way better rogues gallery then Batman.

There many types of villains: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Villains

A complete monster and an anti villain are very different from each other.

I think I've mentioned this before, but: Villainy, to me, is always a little 2D. There are few villains with a back story that justifies their long term viewpoint, and those that do are close-minded to alternative actions besides mass genocide or other violent expressions. But that's what makes them interesting. I always liked Jack Kirby's angle on Doom's scarring; he envisioned it to be the smallest little blemish imaginable, but in Doom's mind to be the justification behind his eternal hatred of Reed. People sometimes forget the most evil men in history were motivated by the dumbest, pettiest reasons you could think of. Vanity has been one, and over the years racism, Manifest Destiny, religion, greed, power plays, and even spurned love have been added to the list. The difference between superhero comics and reality is that said fictional villains are usually smart or strong enough to kick your glutes straight off of your body, whereas in real life similar madmen are usually pathetic in all categories without an army or a gun backing them up.

Except in the real world there have been several gray villains through out history, a lot of people can have different views on whether Che Guevara, Josif Tito and Napoleon are good or people.

Again its better to a diversity in the type of villains you have, everything from anti villains to complete monsters and everything in between, if you rely just on type and ignoring the others. It seems like there are almost no anti Villains in the UU, heck considering what a wuss Ultimate Doom is, there is also a lack of Magnificent Bastards in the UU.

I think 616 Magneto is a more interesting character Ultimate Magneto, because 616 Magneto is a morally complex villain and Ultimate Magneto is a one dimensional mustache twirling villain, that's not a good update.

As for the Ultimate Universe specifically, it's always been concerned with realism. Obviously, the creators love certain aspects of Marvel comics and have to forgo complete realism for the more out-there material (Ex: No matter how you handle Peter Parker obtaining his powers, it still involves pseudoscience). But for the most part, heroes and villains get as gray around the edges as they do outside of the serialized format. But not all of them are base. Take the Liberators, from The Ultimates 2. Can you really say other nations would not be justified if they set up their own response to the Ultimates, given how shady S.H.I.E.L.D. is in that universe? Ultimate Red Skull just got introduced, and I really doubt his history with the US government was peaches and cream until some unjustified villainy on his part later on.

Ultimate Abomination and Crimson Dynamo were willing to commit mass murder at the drop of a hat, how is that sympathetic?

How is Ultimate Magneto a gray villain?

Yeah, it has some bad examples. Venom and Carnage immediately come to mind. Hulk could be another, depending on how you see it. Heck, if you see the whole team as villainous, you could present the Ultimates. As others have mentioned, Millar was trying to make this big political anti-hero statement with them that has been hit-and-miss. But for the most part, I haven't noticed a big difference in the ratio between successful villain portrayal and the failures that crop up between the two universes. For every Geldoff, there's an Ultimate Doc Ock. For every Romulus, a Doctor Doom. They may not be as fantastical as Stan, Jack, and Steve's originals, but Ultimate Universe villains are appealing in their own way.

How is Ultimate Electro, Vulture and Sandman updated and retooled in the UU though? It seems like the DCUA is better at revamping characters then the UU is, can really say ultimate Electro is a fraction as deep as BTAS Mr. freeze: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFDTMW3_ilE

 

[Franklin Richards]

I think I've mentioned this before, but: Villainy, to me, is always a little 2D. There are few villains with a back story that justifies their long term viewpoint, and those that do are close-minded to alternative actions besides mass genocide or other violent expressions. But that's what makes them interesting. I always liked Jack Kirby's angle on Doom's scarring; he envisioned it to be the smallest little blemish imaginable, but in Doom's mind to be the justification behind his eternal hatred of Reed. People sometimes forget the most evil men in history were motivated by the dumbest, pettiest reasons you could think of. Vanity has been one, and over the years racism, Manifest Destiny, religion, greed, power plays, and even spurned love have been added to the list. The difference between superhero comics and reality is that said fictional villains are usually smart or strong enough to kick your glutes straight off of your body, whereas in real life similar madmen are usually pathetic in all categories without an army or a gun backing them up.

As for the Ultimate Universe specifically, it's always been concerned with realism. Obviously, the creators love certain aspects of Marvel comics and have to forgo complete realism for the more out-there material (Ex: No matter how you handle Peter Parker obtaining his powers, it still involves pseudoscience). But for the most part, heroes and villains get as gray around the edges as they do outside of the serialized format. But not all of them are base. Take the Liberators, from The Ultimates 2. Can you really say other nations would not be justified if they set up their own response to the Ultimates, given how shady S.H.I.E.L.D. is in that universe? Ultimate Red Skull just got introduced, and I really doubt his history with the US government was peaches and cream until some unjustified villainy on his part later on.

Yeah, it has some bad examples. Venom and Carnage immediately come to mind. Hulk could be another, depending on how you see it. Heck, if you see the whole team as villainous, you could present the Ultimates. As others have mentioned, Millar was trying to make this big political anti-hero statement with them that has been hit-and-miss. But for the most part, I haven't noticed a big difference in the ratio between successful villain portrayal and the failures that crop up between the two universes. For every Geldoff, there's an Ultimate Doc Ock. For every Romulus, a Doctor Doom. They may not be as fantastical as Stan, Jack, and Steve's originals, but Ultimate Universe villains are appealing in their own way.

Good stuff.



But I thought John Byrne fleshed out that tidbit.

 

[Spade]

Ultimate Abomination and Crimson Dynamo were willing to commit mass murder at the drop of a hat, how is that sympathetic?

I was talking about the nations backing the Liberators, not the Liberators themselves. Individually, the only one that didn't come off as an opportunist that stumbled upon superpowers was the Colonel.

How is Ultimate Magneto a gray villain?

He's not, and I do agree on this point along with the rest of your post left unquoted.

Good stuff.

But I thought John Byrne fleshed out that tidbit.

That he did. First there was the scar, and then Doom put that smoldering mask on his face. It was a cool way to show how far gone Doom was, that he thought he was just making a horrible scar a little worse, but I like Kirby's less dramatic approach.

 

[DACMAN]

hahaha nothing personal Dark Victory...

USP was kinda like the Roman Empire. it was good for a while, before it went to hell, clones started running around, and kitty pride (yes kitty. i know she's an x-man. don't ask me) was magically peter parker's girlfriend.

where's ultimate power pack when you need it?

Magically? He was building up to them dating for like 20 or 30 issues.

 

[The Question]

I think I've mentioned this before, but: Villainy, to me, is always a little 2D. There are few villains with a back story that justifies their long term viewpoint, and those that do are close-minded to alternative actions besides mass genocide or other violent expressions. But that's what makes them interesting. I always liked Jack Kirby's angle on Doom's scarring; he envisioned it to be the smallest little blemish imaginable, but in Doom's mind to be the justification behind his eternal hatred of Reed. People sometimes forget the most evil men in history were motivated by the dumbest, pettiest reasons you could think of. Vanity has been one, and over the years racism, Manifest Destiny, religion, greed, power plays, and even spurned love have been added to the list. The difference between superhero comics and reality is that said fictional villains are usually smart or strong enough to kick your glutes straight off of your body, whereas in real life similar madmen are usually pathetic in all categories without an army or a gun backing them up.

As for the Ultimate Universe specifically, it's always been concerned with realism. Obviously, the creators love certain aspects of Marvel comics and have to forgo complete realism for the more out-there material (Ex: No matter how you handle Peter Parker obtaining his powers, it still involves pseudoscience). But for the most part, heroes and villains get as gray around the edges as they do outside of the serialized format. But not all of them are base. Take the Liberators, from The Ultimates 2. Can you really say other nations would not be justified if they set up their own response to the Ultimates, given how shady S.H.I.E.L.D. is in that universe? Ultimate Red Skull just got introduced, and I really doubt his history with the US government was peaches and cream until some unjustified villainy on his part later on.

Yeah, it has some bad examples. Venom and Carnage immediately come to mind. Hulk could be another, depending on how you see it. Heck, if you see the whole team as villainous, you could present the Ultimates. As others have mentioned, Millar was trying to make this big political anti-hero statement with them that has been hit-and-miss. But for the most part, I haven't noticed a big difference in the ratio between successful villain portrayal and the failures that crop up between the two universes. For every Geldoff, there's an Ultimate Doc Ock. For every Romulus, a Doctor Doom. They may not be as fantastical as Stan, Jack, and Steve's originals, but Ultimate Universe villains are appealing in their own way.

I've never really understood this mentality? Why does a character's actions need to be in some way morally justified for them to be three dimensional? That's not what being a three dimensional character means. Being a three dimensional character just means that you are fully realized, well rounded individual with psychological layers that influence both their subtle and unsubtle behaviors. A character can be a completely selfish, remorseless monster, but what would make them a three dimensional character is the level of detail that went into crafting the layers in their psychology and the cause and effect in their lives that led them to that point. Basically, yes, being a 3D character means that the character has reasons for what they do. But it doesn't necessarily mean they have morally justified reasons, simply logical reasons. Not logical reasons in that they had logical reasoning, because also applies to the mentally unstable, but logical as in it makes sense that the person became who they are because of these things.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

I'm pretty sure the moment you try to insert logic (of all things) into a character that's meant to give you an emotional response, you're going to find problems with it anyway.

EDIT - Gonna expand on it due to sheer boredom.

Like Question said, a third dimensional character doesn't necessarily have to mean one that's a tragic hero, or anti-hero. It just means that there's more to it than "villan shows up, smashes stuff, arrested, shows up some other time to smash stuff." While some villans -are- in fact SOB's doesn't mean immediately that they shouldn't have some contributing factor (as most SOB's do). For instance, Sandman of the comics is just some relentless SOB who while wavering to both sides (based on his current addictions or feelings at the time) isn't exactly a tragic character, he's just some guy who has the hardest time kicking habits, or taking sides (though he generally takes the side of the villans). But it's done in a way you can actually enjoy reading the character.

Irredeemable Ant-Man is the same way.

 

[DACMAN]

Hello....I am called hippie hunter for crying out loud

Wow, he set that right up didn't he?

 

[DACMAN]

Why are the villains in the Ultimate Universe so boring? Most of the villains have no interesting motive or back story or personality, most of them are one dimensional characters that twirl mustaches.

Why are there so few sympathetic villains in the ultimate Universe? Ultimate magneto is a one dimensional villain might as well have a mustache to twirl, ultimate doom seems to have none of the nobility 616 Doom has and even ultimate Curt Connors came across as kinda user in the carnage arc.

I mean didn't they do what Bruce Timm did with Mr. freeze and take some B-list villain and make him more sympathetic. I mean how has bendis retooled Electro, Sandman or Vulture in the UU, they are all flat characters, who share the same personality, greedy stupid thugs. They are all inferior to their 616 counterparts. When couldn't Bendis have made one of those sympathetic, instead of another greedy thug.

Harry was sympathetic, as was Venom and even the Scorpion.

But at the same time, I thought people were tired of sympatheic villains and wanted villains that are actually bad people. I know I am in the movies. I want a character that's like the Joker, rotten to the core. The way the Kingpin was in the Ultimate comics. But even then they threw in the whole story of his wife. I want that rotten to the core villain. Norman was the closest.

 

[The Overlord]

Harry was sympathetic, as was Venom and even the Scorpion.

But at the same time, I thought people were tired of sympatheic villains and wanted villains that are actually bad people. I know I am in the movies. I want a character that's like the Joker, rotten to the core. The way the Kingpin was in the Ultimate comics. But even then they threw in the whole story of his wife. I want that rotten to the core villain. Norman was the closest.

Venom was a misogynistic creep who hit on a 15 year old, he deserved a bad fate and Scorpion was throw away character, I don't even care about him. The only one I agree with is Harry Osborn and he's dead, so who has taken his place when it comes to sympathetic Ultimate villains?

Besides shouldn't there be a balance, if every villain is rotten to core, what comes them different from each other in terms of personality? Not much, personality wise how are Ultimate Electro, Vulture and Sandman different from each?

Also does Ultimate Magneto being a complete monster make him better then 616 Magneto? I don't think so, 616 Magneto is a morally complex character, while Ultimate Magneto is a one dimensional mustache twirling villain who eats puppies for no reason. Ultimate Magneto is a dull, one dimensional character.

There's the thing if all your villains are rotten to the core, then they don't have sympathetic villains to be contrasted against and the rotten to core act becomes old hat. You need both types villains in a fictional universe to make things interesting and the UU lacks one type of villains, so really the villains become tried because there is no interesting moral contrasts you can draw with them.

 

[LouFerignoDemon]

Venom was a misogynistic creep who hit on a 15 year old, he deserved a bad fate and Scorpion was throw away character, I don't even care about him. The only one I agree with is Harry Osborn and he's dead, so who has taken his place when it comes to sympathetic Ultimate villains?

Besides shouldn't there be a balance, if every villain is rotten to core, what comes them different from each other in terms of personality? Not much, personality wise how are Ultimate Electro, Vulture and Sandman different from each?

Also does Ultimate Magneto being a complete monster make him better then 616 Magneto? I don't think so, 616 Magneto is a morally complex character, while Ultimate Magneto is a one dimensional mustache twirling villain who eats puppies for no reason. Ultimate Magneto is a dull, one dimensional character.

There's the thing if all your villains are rotten to the core, then they don't have sympathetic villains to be contrasted against and the rotten to core act becomes old hat. You need both types villains in a fictional universe to make things interesting and the UU lacks one type of villains, so really the villains become tried because there is no interesting moral contrasts you can draw with them.

[Corpy] I don't see the problem here. [/Corpy]

 

[Spade]

Villainy, to me, has always been a little 2D...

snipped paragraph

Yes, they can be perfectly 3-dimensional and act amoral. That's a given. That's also why I said "a little."

 

[Aztec]

Have you seen ultimate Red Skull. he's Cap's son, but SHIELD confiscated him? so he's evil and the Red Skull. it probably won't make sense, but Millar's name is on it so it will sell. People complaining about Loeb's Ultimates don't realize Millar's Ultimates(which was much better than Loeb's) only sold because of the names attached.

Nothing can be further from the truth. Millar's run was well written and extremely creative. He took well known characters and completely modernized them. His take was fun, intriguing, thoughtful, and kick-ass.

People who complain about Ultimate Thor surprise me. If a guy came up to you claiming to be from Asgard would you believe him? Especially in a world where mutant lunatics and science experiments gone wrong are showing up left and right? Also Thor was sent to "save the Earth" by his father. Are you really surprised that he's sort of "hippie-esque"? Who do you think he'd want to "save the world" for? The military-industrial complex?

As for villainy in the Ultimate U (which for me is just The Ultimates because I've never been into Spiderman) I liked Loki a lot. I thought he was very slick, slimy, and behind the scenes. Which is how I envision him. I also like the fact that he looked like a regular guy.

 

[random_havoc]

Have you seen ultimate Red Skull. he's Cap's son, but SHIELD confiscated him? so he's evil and the Red Skull. it probably won't make sense, but Millar's name is on it so it will sell. People complaining about Loeb's Ultimates don't realize Millar's Ultimates(which was much better than Loeb's) only sold because of the names attached.

Are you on crack? Ultimates vol 1 and 2 are two of the best comic sets ever made.